From The People To Empire; Or, Why We Are Doomed: Part II — Guest Post by Ianto Watt

Ever since Emperor Lincoln ‘gave’ us our equality, we have confused it with our freedom. But let me ask you—do you really feel free? Whether you are black or white, do you really feel free? Conversely, can you see that if none of us is truly free, then that is the true source of our ‘equality’? But only in this regard? Yes, Emperor Lincoln did not fight that war to free the slaves (which he readily admitted). No, he fought it to enslave the rest of us. And that made us all equal, no? Hail Caesar!

I know, this is a hard thought. It flies in the face of all that we have been taught. Taught in the Public Temple. What? The what? The Public Schools, my friend. Where the mythological doctrines of ‘freedom and equality’ are so assiduously taught. Where we are all taught that we can have our cake and eat it too. And since we, alone among all nations, have supposedly achieved this wondrous state of being, we naturally have a duty to extend this divine blessing to all mankind. We must make the world safe for Democracy. Everyone must have a sacred Republic. Ask George Bush. Junior.

Yes, I know that is insane. And yes, I know the distinction between The Republic and The Democracy. But any government document that begins with the words ‘We, the People…’ is a Democracy. Regardless of the Roman toga it dons. But tell me, citizen, who else amongst the public seems to know this difference? Who else can see the conflation of terms that has left us dazed and vulnerable to the siren song of The Empire? The song that says we must defend The Republic by extending it over all the world? The song that says Democracy is the salvation of mankind? Isn’t this just a case of saying ‘the best defense is a good offense’? Well? How else do you explain these maniacal wars fought for over the last 150 years in the name of freedom and equality?

So, am I anti-American? Of course not. I’m simply opposed to The Empire. Both parts, east and west. US and UK. Because the Empire is anti-American. And anti-British. And anti-every-other-nation. And it is totally opposed to the original concept of The Republic. But only those who truly know the history of the Empire will understand this. Emperor Julius had to fight his Civil War in order to transform the original Republic into his own private Kingdom. Emperor Henry had to start his own Civil War against the Church in order to undo the work of the Magna Carta and to inherit The Empire. For his own benefit, of course. And Emperor Lincoln is the one who finally won the English Civil War (Round V, the American Civil War), in order to establish the current residence of the Omnipotent State. In order to grant us our ‘freedom’ of course. Komrade.

Lincoln’s victory laid the groundwork for the eventual re-unification of The Empire, East and West, just in time for WWI. Old York and New, rejoined to conquer the world. Under the name of its Greek religion known as Democracy. The religion that says every man is a god. Don’t believe that? Then look at that sacred Constitution again. Look at the beginning, ‘We, the People…’. It’s not Power to the People. No, it’s Power from the People. That’s the real essence of those obtuse references to The Divinity we see in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Man is divine. Welcome to the Pantheon, citizen. All you have to do is kneel before Caesar.

It’s the perfect elixir to inebriate the little man into thinking that he too will occupy a position in the Pantheon of the Caesars. And all we have to do is die for him. Which is why Uncle Sam wants you. John Bull too. Just sign right here…and tell your folks to buy those war bonds!

Now to understand any of what I have just said, you have to go back to the historic reality of the creation of The Republic. An actual Republic is a state which is intended to deal with those things concerning the public; res publica. Whereas an Empire is intended (solely) to deal with what concerns Caesar. And what is there that doesn’t concern Caesar? Public or private, what is there Caesar cannot meddle with? After all, it seems our ‘private’ lives are shrinking rather rapidly in this terror-plagued world. Isn’t that convenient, for all those in power? On any side?

But let’s not quibble just yet. Let’s get back to the basic model of a republic, and the things it was originally intended to rule. We find these things spelled out in the Constitution. Anything not in this document is, by implication, not a public matter. And so, such private matters should not be matters of public concern. Now look around you at the legal landscape and tell me that there is anything that is not a ‘public matter’ anymore. Are you starting to get the hint? Hail Caesar.

Let’s look at this document itself. Not at its contents, at least not just yet. No, first let’s look at its form. And if form follows function (as any engineer or architect will tell you), we can work backwards from the form to deduce the intended function, right? So then, just what is this form I’m speaking of?

First of all, let’s ask a simple question. Should important things come first in any important document? Doesn’t that make sense? Don’t you lay your foundation before erecting your walls? The roof comes last, correct? As important as a roof is, it’s real purpose is to cover and protect what is under it. So then, just what is it that is under this roof? What is the foundation of this document? Well, just look at it. Article I is about the Legislative branch of these public things.

Now you can bark all you want, but I’m betting there was a very good reason for the Deist Fathers listing the Legislative branch of government first. While they may have believed, after a fashion, in the God of Christianity, the god they really believed in was The People. Yes, they were democracy fans. But in a limited sense. Democracy for the deserving. And who deserved the vote? Well, men of course. White men, actually. And only land-owning men, you understand. Well, isn’t that pretty restrictive? Pretty privileged? Yes. But only if you are looking at it from our viewpoint today. But if you were a member of a monarchical society, then no, it wasn’t restrictive at all. In fact, it was rather liberal, rather expansive, rather inclusive.

You still think these are rather un-democratic norms? Well let me ask you, should the insane get to vote? And children? And non-citizens? What about pets? What about the dead? No, not like in Chicago. I mean what about all those who built what we enjoy? Where do you stop? Or do you? Can we agree, for a moment, that this idea of a representative democracy was intentionally (if imperfectly) drawn by men (yes, men!) who had some clue as to how history had played out since the times of Greece and Rome? All right then, let’s get beyond this petty niggling and get back to the document that was actually drawn and adopted by those Deist Anglish exiles. Because that’s what all the fighting is about every time some Black Robe dies.

Now then, let’s assume order has meaning, And Article I is all about the Legislature and its powers. Let’s look at them. But first, let’s look at the very first sentence of this document’s purpose. ‘All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress…’. Think about that for a minute, especially in light of the modern concept of judicial legislation. With that in mind, let’s get busy and see what powers Congress alone was given.

First of all, this branch has the power of the purse. Money. The engine that drives everything in this world. And nothing can be levied or spent without the majoritarian will of Congress. Nothing. At least, that is what the document says, quite explicitly.

What else can Congress do? Well, it can impeach the President. And the Supreme Court. That ain’t peanuts, my friend. It’s a sword of Damocles hanging over the head of those two other branches of government. At least, in theory. And everything was theory in the beginning. Forget about how things have played out. At least since 1804.

How about the sole power to declare war? And the power to override a Presidential veto? As well as the power to pick the President should the Electoral College be deadlocked? And should a President and Vice President be removed or disabled, to name his successor?

Additionally, Congress alone can suspend the right of Habeas Corpus, under certain conditions of war or insurrection. That’s right, Congress has the power to suspend the basic right of these same People who are the supposed fount of all power in this (late) Republic. That’s something, eh?

That’s quite a powerful list of powers, I should think. But are there any restraints on Congress found in this same document? Yes. The most powerful one is this: Congress must stand for election every two years. In other words, We the People have Congress on the short leash. And why not? They have been given the most power (as we shall see), and since power devolves from us, The People (as the preamble says), why shouldn’t this be so? Since Congress is most closely tied to the will of The People (through direct representation of individual districts), should not the Will of The People be heard as often as possible?

This is not an exhaustive list of Congressional power, but it is certainly inclusive of all of the most important ones. This branch of the Federal Government is overwhelmingly powerful in comparison with the other two branches of The People. Why? Because each of the other branches is farther removed from The People (in terms of electoral accountability). Therefore, they have been given fewer powers.

Let’s get back to the order of documentary construction. Article II concerns the Executive branch, headed by the President. What powers does he have? The most powerful of course is his ability to veto Congressional actions. But this power is not absolute. His veto can be overridden. He also has the power to wage war. But only if Congress funds it. And very importantly, he has the power of spending the monies earmarked by Congress.

The Presidency found in Article II is certainly less powerful than office is today. But none of these new powers accrued by past aggression or default is sanctioned by this document. None of them. Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus illegally. Lincoln sent troops across state lines without the request of any state governor or legislature illegally. Lincoln tried to arrest members of the Supreme Court illegally. Yet each of these actions, because they were unchallenged, resulted in the accrual of illegal power to subsequent presidencies. Why weren’t these power-grabs challenged? Because Caesar had the troops. I don’t care what any document says about who has rightful power. I only watch who has actual power. And how they use it. Cincinnatus has never been elected President. And never will be, not in the Empire.

Let’s re-cap. According to this sacred Constitution, can the President impeach Congress? No. Can the President legally spend without Congressional action preceding that? No. Can the President remove members of the Supreme Court? No. Can the President legally declare war without Congress? No. So, at least on paper, the Presidency has less power than Congress. Much less. His real job is simply to enforce what Congress has made law.

What about the third branch, the Judiciary? What power does Article III confer upon this branch of the Federal Government? Damned little, actually. The Judiciary branch (the Supreme Court) has original jurisdiction in matters between the States, and between the Federal Government and foreign governments. And that’s about it. Seriously. Why should it have any more power than that? After all, it’s members are un-democratically appointed. For life! How much farther can you get from The People than that?

What are the restrictions placed upon this branch of government? Potentially, a whole lot. Everything, in fact. Yes, I know, many of us feel these Nine Black Robes are the actual rulers of the Empire, and in a real sense they are. But that’s because of what happened in 1804. It’s because now, like then, nobody has bothered to read (and enforce) Article III, Section 2, sub-section (2). Nobody but Andrew Jackson, of course. My favorite guy. Hail Andrew!

No, I won’t make you look it up. But you could. We all could. But we never do. Too much work. So here, let me distill things down. This sub-section says that while the Supremes have the original jurisdictions I mentioned above, in all other cases they have only appellate jurisdiction. And, further, that this matter of appellate jurisdiction is subject to any and all restrictions placed on them by Congress! In other words, the Judiciary is the servant of Congress. It’s only real role is to judge whether someone has broken a law passed by Congress, and signed by the President. And if the President wouldn’t sign it, Congress could override his veto. But again, the role of the Judiciary was simply to rule on the violation of that law, not on the validity of that same law. And absolutely nowhere in this document, living or dead, are the words ‘judicial review’ spoken, or even alluded to. Why? Because the will of The People was of utmost importance. Not the un-democratic will of the Black Robes.

What changed these respective roles? What happened to reverse these two branches in their practical application of power? How did the last become first? The magic word, my friend: power. And the magic incantation was pronounced in 1804 in the case known as Marbury vs. Madison. Nobody objected to the switcheroo. So, what was this magic trick? It was so very simple. This thought of ‘judicial review’ was invented out of thin air. Breathtakingly audacious. L’audace, l’audace, tojours l’audace! Everything has been downhill since then. Straight into the ‘arms’ of tyranny. Welcome to the Empire. Hail Caesar!


  1. Wow! That’s two in a row by Ianto that are readable!

    And that make sense.

    So, St. Abe the Emperor has no clothes?

    Preach it, Watt!

    Very few grasp this fundamental fact.

    As we soldier on into our multiple undeclared wars around the globe, it would behoove us to remember the intent of America’s founders–and that intent did not include “spreading Democracy” at the point of a Hellfire missile.

  2. brian (bulaoren)

    Anyone who has tried to free an animal caught in a trap will know how desperately such critters will fight their liberator. That may explain some of the current resistance to president Trump.

  3. Alan McIntire

    I think you’re being overly harsh on Abraham Lincoln. He WAS opposed to slavery, but thought the Federal Government had no constitutional authority to eliminate slavery in states where it already existed. Unlike today’s liberals, he believed in the rule of law. Nowadays, the liberal viewpoint is, “Laws be damned if they get in the way of Progressive policies.”

  4. Gary

    It’s a little more nuanced than just “power.” It’s the will of the various players in the power structure to exercise their appointed powers to keep the original intent of balance (actually, a stalemate). But power corrupts and the players (sytem-selected for their craftiness) have figured out how to abandon the original intent and remake the rules to their particular benefit while making it look like something else.

  5. brian (bulaoren)

    Lincoln, no doubt, would have wanted to be more Solomonic but, by the time he entered office, the baby was already being cut in half. Did he understand that he was replacing the constitution with a metastatic tumor ? I don’t believe that. Was that malignancy his only legacy ? Well… the preserved union is still the greatest nation we humans have ever achieved.

  6. Jim Fedako

    Ianto —

    “And yes, I know the distinction between The Republic and The Democracy. But any government document that begins with the words ‘We, the People…’ is a Democracy.”

    Excellent point.

  7. John B()

    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn’t it?

    That’s what is to be a slave.

    Roy Batty – Blade Runner

    What is it you fear now?

  8. Yawrate

    I love my country. I fear my government.

  9. M E Emberson

    As a non U.S citizen I’m somewhat confused. Aren’t the United States of America a Federation of States? I thought a Democracy would allow each individual citizen in a country, where ever they reside, some say in deciding on a government. In the last election for President did the individual States not have a voice and vote as States rather than allowing votes from individuals
    I wonder what kind of voting system that is called?. )A genuine question.)
    I think not every country in the world wishes to emulate the United States and become a Federation of States with other contiguous States.
    A lot of these countries have been around longer and are able to modify their systems of government and still remain themselves. Most do not wish to become copies of the United States of America. Sorry to disillusion you.

  10. Joy

    Used like the word “populism”.
    Some new Republicans therefore have a lot in common with the old Democrats! They should stick together, they could be persecuted.

    “democracy” took the place of the old way of enforcing, escaping the pushing of Christian values but leaving God out.

    Instead of worrying whether nations are Christians media politicians with the help of arrogant writers found it more PC to say that other countries must be democratic. Instead of minding their own busy body business (as the New World forcing the notion had told the old, with glee and tiresome repetition.)
    Naughty America!

    “You can count on them to do the right thing after they’ve tried everything else.”

    “Democracy is the best system of government apart from all the others.”
    This is not new pasture. Not ‘new sunlit uplands.’
    just tilting at windmills.

    The way a democracy functions is the devil in the detail.
    Parliamentary under a monarch being the most preferable system. Not a monarch who owns the truth, but one who knows they are there by the Grace of God and who is concerned with pursuit of truth without modern day or old style enforcement.

  11. DG

    Thanks Ianto Watt, an interesting view of the history of our government and an interesting view on Lincoln that deserves to be heard. I like reading much of your posts because they tend have a more unique or original perspective on things which is always a plus

  12. Joy

    “Every man is a God”

    How does this sound?

    “Every man is made in the image of God.” Is that true?

    It would be like someone powerful saying something like;

    “You are a sinner! and must repent! bow down before the one!…(not God, the alter) until we have made you sufficiently subservient and self hating that you will believe what we say, do what we say and keep your heads down so we can do what the hell we like.”

    That is a far more egregious abuse of power, to my taste.

    Money talks merit walks. You can’;t change that either, except in your own affairs.

    Captain Leroy saves Sharpe.. Slaves, cotton and molasses …

    Some soldiers believe in honour. Not just the scutcheon.

    Caesar has nothing to do with it.

  13. Joshua Chamberlain

    The Anti-Federalist Papers already recognized before the 1789 Constitution was ratified that the Supreme Court would become a tyranny by virtue of life appointment and judicial review. This was not an unforeseen result. It was foreseen. It’s just that Hamilton and Madison didn’t believe it. They were wrong.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *