LAW: THE IDEA THAT THE LAW IS HOLY IS A COSTLY MYTH | nationalsalvation.net
The legal system is just one more bureaucracy. It is dangerous to trust any bureaucracy. But the legal bureaucracy decides life and death issues. To trust THAT bureaucracy is fatal.
We have over two million lawyers in the United States. They produce nothing.
All those lawyers and their employees and their lawsuits and all the paperwork that is required to avoid lawsuits has been estimated to cost the American economy about two trillion dollars a year.
I think that estimate is low.
I hear Shrewd people saying, "America should have a government of Laws, not of Men."
Nobody asks them what the hell they are talking about.
There is no law that is not made by men, enforced by men, and screwed up by men.
The Constitution of the United States is the only authority it rests on:
"We the People of the United States of America."
How can you say that and then turn around and say "We are a government of laws, not of men?"
DUHH!
The Holy Black Dress
Back when the Supreme Court was all male, I used to say, "The United States Supreme Court consists of nine lawyers who had enough political pull to get themselves made judges. They were just nine human lawyers before they went on the court, and they are nine lawyers now."
I would then add, "But because these nine guys now wear black dresses, they are supposed to be The Constitution of the United States. If they wore mascara and high heels, would they be the Bible, too?"
What kind of superstitious peasant could possibly believe that something called the Law is somehow something godlike and superhuman? What kind of retard could believe that a man has the right to be a dictator because he wears a black dress?
Judges today are, in fact, dictators. Here is what I said in the Introduction to my 1982 anthology for St. Martin's press, "The New Right Papers". Several papers in this book deal, in one way or another, with the restoration of popular rule.
Professor William A Stanmeyer's discussion of the imperial judiciary explains, from the point of view of a legal scholar, the steady erosion of the power of elected officials, and the increasing use of the Constitution as an excuse for, rather than as a source of, judicial decisions. Behind such decisions ranges the full power of the United States Government. A situation where one man's personal judgment is law has a name, and it is not democracy.
Where Mythology Rules, Freedom Dies
Freedom is based on a very unromantic idea. It says people should do what they want to.
The easiest way to destroy freedom is to trivialize it. You just say, "We could avoid a lot of accidents if we did this, and the reason for not doing it is because somebody just WANTS to do something else, for no reason at all."
You go straight from there to the Marxist myth of Social Progress, which the term "progressive" is now based on, and from there you go to dictatorship. If we have a Higher Mission, there is no room for Freedom.
Every totalitarian society worships The Law.
When the Supreme Court overrules the will of the American people, it says it is "interpreting the Constitution." If you "interpret" the Constitution, you ARE the Constitution.
Barry Goldwater pointed out in his 1958 book, "The Conscience of a Conservative," that EVERY public official has to interpret the Constitution. He takes an oath to uphold the Constitution against all enemies, including an enemy in a black dress.
Who said the courts were supposed to be the Constitution? Certainly not the Constitution itself, if it meant that, it would have said it.
Who gave the Supreme Court the right to be the Constitution?
The Supreme Court did.
If one branch of government IS the Constitution, then the balance of powers between the different branches of government simply does not exist.
The People Versus the People
The Constitution says that its only source of authority is, "We the People of the United States of America."
So nine lawyers in black dresses overrule the popular will in the name of "We the People of the United States of America."
How far can you go if you say you are "interpreting" the Constitution? O'Reilly says the Founding Fathers demanded interracial high school dances because they called it the UNITED States of America.
He's serious.
Once you start "interpreting" the Constitution, there is no limit to how ridiculous you can get.
And you can kill anybody who gets in your way.