Skip to content

On The Death Of The Rule Of Law, Part II

02 July 2015 @ 10:34

This will be a short series of posts highlighting the observations of people who I admire and respect, along with some accompanying remarks by your Humble Dispatcher. The two posts I published recently that contained excerpts of the Dissents of Justices Scalia and Thomas in the Obamacare case and the ‘Same Sex Marriage’ cases, respectively, should be read in conjunction with this Series.

[NOTE: Part I of this series may be found here.]

The Rule Of Whim

J.R. Nyquist has published a short essay. It is entitled: The Violation Of Language.

While I don’t agree with every conclusion or presupposition of the author, there is much wisdom to be found in it. It is obvious that Mr. Nyquist has a keen mind filled with much insight into the situation we now find ourselves in, so I would highly recommend that you read it all [tip of the fedora to GeoffB].

Here I will focus on one part, one that speaks specifically to the topic of this post.

Using the ‘Same-Sex Marriage’ majority Opinion as his starting point, Mr. Nyquist writes:

All that such rulings or votes can do is eliminate the previous definition of the word “marriage,” which my grandfather’s 1943 Webster’s International Dictionary defines thus: marriage,n.1. State of being married, or being united, to a person or persons of the opposite sex as husband or wife; also, the mutual relation of husband and wife; abstractly, the institution whereby men and women are joined in a special kind of legal dependence, for the purpose of founding and maintaining a family.

As you can see, the Supreme Court has violated the English language; that is, the Court has assumed a power that no government authority may safely assume. It is the most arbitrary power imaginable; for the Supreme Court may now say that “up” is “down,” and “black” is “white.” We cannot tell what such a court will do next; for it is now certain that no property is safe, no contract protected. Anything may happen. We are no longer ruled by laws, for laws are made of words and now, as of this moment, words are made of nothing, having no intrinsic meaning. They are sounds only, with meanings that may be politically assigned or reassigned. For that is what our Supreme Court has done, and in doing so, they have turned all law into gibberish. And this, I maintain, is the most dangerous thing of all. It is not only marriage that has been undermined. It is the state, the Constitution, the English language, and public sanity. This, in fact, is the same practice which shows up in the neutering of our military power and our economic power. It is a symptom of inner dissolution, a collapse of instinct, and a descent into anarchy. What I have been writing these many years has never been primarily about the threat from Russia or China. My writings have been about the progressive falsification of reality, national self-deception and the corruption which attends our social decline. I merely picked the most clearly suicidal elements in our national self-deception as principle themes. The same distorted language we use for referring to enemies as “partners” is here replicated in our use of the term “same-sex marriage.”

On the day of the fateful decision Justice Scalia noted: “What really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch. These Justices know that limiting marriage to one man and one woman is contrary to reason; they know that an institution as old as government itself, and accepted by every nation in history until 15 years ago, cannot possibly be supported by anything other than ignorance or bigotry. And they are willing to say that any citizen who does not agree with that, who adheres to what was, until 15 years ago, the unanimous judgment of all generations and all societies, stands against the Constitution.”

This new knowledge, which attacks the English dictionary, which attacks the foundation of legality itself, signifies the destruction of all law. The U.S. Supreme Court has committed an act of unfounding, of unraveling, of self-elimination. This act does not really speak to the issue of tolerance or intolerance for a particular minority. This act is only nominally about homosexuals. In fact, the gay community has been used as a political pawn to effect a kind of black alchemy. Now, at this point, any violence might be done to anyone. Each of the various “causes” may be activated against the others; for what restraint does the law now have? What reverence? What credibility? It has lost the sense of its own words, descending into madness itself.

There can be no justice when words are used in a perverse sense, when meanings can be inverted and the world turned on its head. No ideology can make a lie into truth. No special pleading will flip the earth on its axis. Universal Law always prevails. The nihilist who denies this law is a harbinger of his own destruction. The society that salutes this nihilist, who elevates him to the Supreme Court, who makes congresses and presidents out of his kind, cannot be saved.

When meaning is untethered to Truth, to Reality, everything is permissible.

However, American Society can be saved – but only if it follows the wise advice of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn:

If the world has not approached its end, it has reached a major watershed in history, equal in importance to the turn from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. It will demand from us a spiritual blaze; we shall have to rise to a new height of vision, to a new level of life, where our physical nature will not be cursed, as in the Middle Ages, but even more importantly, our spiritual being will not be trampled upon, as in the Modern Era. [A World Split Apart, Commencement Address delivered 08 June 1978 at Harvard University]

We must commit to ridding our Society and our own Souls of the Cancer of Ideology, of the ordering of Truth and Reality based on nothing more than Wish Fulfillment. We must ground our thinking in Life As It Is, not in our Fantasies. We must Decontaminate.

When one is governed by pipe dreams and delusions, Chaos of the Soul ensues. When a Society decides to do the be so governed collectively, Arbitrariness and Anarchy result.

This is why The Rule Of Law is so vital to maintaining the Health of a Society. It provides an absolutely necessary Stability to said Society by making, as Jeff Goldstein puts it: ‘sure that intent has been signaled so that the law can be read repeatedly using the same text by people’.

When Anarchy reigns, when Whim governs, such a Chaotic situation is ripe for those determined to seize Power And Control to succeed, the result being the vast majority of the people in the Society are Enslaved. As Samuel Adams wrote: ‘for if the public are bound to yield obedience to the laws, to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them’ [writing as ‘CANDIDUS’, 20 January 1772].

A Society without set and widely understood and collectively accepted Codes Of Conduct is one where Liberty Without License rules and everyone lives subject to all forms of Terrorism.

The Founding Fathers understood this and worked towards providing us with Freedom and Ordered Liberty.

Part of achieving that end was to see that The Rule Of Law reigned over everything and that the people were not subjected to, nor permitted to succeed in imposing easily, a Rule Of Whim.

The Republic they gifted to us, The United States Of America, having endured relentless onslaughts by the Ideologues for over a century has finally been destroyed, the siege has been successful, and we are now Subjects of a United State, where Power And Control lies not in the hands of The Sovereignty [ie: The People], but in the hands of those strong and ruthless enough to have muscled their way in to positions of Power And Control.

…a genuine revolution, whose deepest purpose was not simply reform from within existing traditions, but a basic change in the social, and above all, the power relationships within the nation. It was not a revolution by violence. It was a revolution by bookkeeping and lawmaking. In so far as it was successful, the power of politics had replaced the power of business. This is the basic power shift of all the revolutions of our time. This shift was the revolution. It was only of incidental interest that the revolution was not complete, that it was made not by tanks and machine guns, but by acts of Congress and decisions of the Supreme Court, or that many of the revolutionists did not know what they were or denied it. But revolution is always an affair of force, whatever forms the force disguises itself in. Whether the revolutionists prefer to call themselves Fabians, who seek power by the inevitability of gradualism, or Bolsheviks, who seek power by the dictatorship of the proletariat, the struggle is for power.

—Whittaker Chambers, Witness, Chapter 10

  1. 02 July 2015 @ 11:27 11:27

    Reblogged this on That Mr. G Guy's Blog.


  1. Tumblr is as bad as Robert Stacy McCain has said… | Batshit Crazy News

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: