The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is far more important politically than most commentators have perceived. It opens the door to an action that could break up the country.
At present, the Court has a four-vote block of hard-line cultural Marxists. When Scalia was alive, that block was balanced by four other Justices who were moderately to very conservative. The Chief Justice mediated between the two blocks, sometimes voting with one, sometimes the other, but almost always voting in favor of moderation.
With Scalia gone, the Left can prevail but the Right cannot. Even if the Chief Justice votes with the conservatives, they fail on a tie. If he votes with the Left, they win.
If Hillary Clinton is the next president, Scalia’s seat will undoubtedly be filled by someone who votes with the Left. The Republican Senate will not have the guts to leave the seat open for four years–four years in which, again, the Left can win but the Right cannot. The same outcome is possible with a Republican in the White House: both Earl Warren and Souter were Republican picks.
Should the Left get a five-vote block, the Supreme Court will become a “Revolutionary Tribunal” which will stop at nothing to force cultural Marxism down the throat of the rest of the country. It is easy to think of issues where that would be disastrous. Outlawing home schooling comes to mind. But there is one issue where a ruling by the Court could destroy the American state itself. That issue is “reparations”.
One of the top causes for American cultural Marxists is paying every American black a large sum of tax money as reparations for slavery. The notion is absurd. Those blacks were first enslaved in Africa, by Arabs or other blacks. Those who were sent to the American South were lucky compared to others who were sold to places like Haiti, where one-third of the black population was worked to death annually. Black Americans today benefit greatly from the fact that their ancestors were sent here rather than remaining in west Africa, which is one of the worst hellholes on Earth.
Life in west Africa, most of it anyway, is so bad I am willing to make a bet. If someone sailed the replica of the Amistad, a slave ship, to almost any west African port and asked for volunteers to go to America, chained up just like their ancestors, and be sold as slaves once they got there, the line to get on board would be miles long. The draw of leaving Africa and getting to America would be so strong people would agree to anything in order to do it.
As I have noted before in my columns, the whole slavery issue is cant. There are very few people on Earth who did not have slaves among their ancestors. In almost all the world throughout almost all of history, if you were captured in war, your alternatives were slavery or death. Most captives presumably preferred slavery.
Before the Civil War, the South had black slave owners as well as white. The 1830 census shows about 1,700 black slave owners, who owned between them about 7,500 other blacks. In Louisiana, you could find black plantation owners who had black overseers over their black slaves. When the war broke out, those black plantation owners equipped a company of Confederate infantry as their contribution to the war effort. A non-trivial number of blacks fought for the Confederacy. Are all those blacks’ descendants to get reparations for slavery?
The whole notion of reparations is so absurd only cultural Marxists could believe in it. But it would not be difficult for someone to craft a case demanding reparations that would wend its way to a hard-Left Supreme Court. How would the rest of the country react to a ruling that said we must double the income tax to pay for, say, $10 trillion in reparations?
If would rebel. That would be the final straw where Americans who are not black would say, “This isn’t my country anymore.” The rebellion would probably start with a Constitutional crisis as Congress refused to vote both the funds and the taxes. If the Court, and, perhaps, a sympathetic White House found a way around Congress, you would see the rise of a serious secession movement. Donald Trump’s poll numbers show a good third of Americans might want out, with solid majorities in some states. Who would go first, South Carolina or Idaho?
The rest of America will not pay reparations to blacks. Are the Chinese to get reparations for laws that tried to keep them out? Are the Irish to get reparations from Britain for the potato famine? Am I to get reparations for the killing of Hannah Dustin‘s baby by the Indians on the Massachusetts frontier in the 1690s (I am a Dustin descendant)? Are dogs to be given reparations for being tied up?
These arguments would count for nothing to a Supreme Court with a five-vote culturally Marxist block. All that matters to ideologues is their ideology. If their actions caused the country to break up, well, what would that be to them? That’s someone else’s problem.
But that is what is at stake in the fight to fill Justice Scalia’s seat on the court. And avoiding hard-Left judicial dictatorship depends on the very weak reed that is the Republican Party. 
Bill Lind said on NET decades ago that while political change was possible, armed resistance/revolution/secession was not justified. Does not the GOP attack on Trump show that political change is no longer possible? Wouldn’t the filling of Scalia’s seat on the bench signal the victory of cultural-marxism and the end of an effective political route to real reform? Where do we stand now?
Reparations would certainly not sit well with Americans. But allowing such a court to “invalidate” the second amendment, paving the way for bans and confiscations … I would think such an effort would make the response of anti-reparations folks look mild and tame in comparison.
There have been countless egregious violations of the Constitution since it was written and no one has done a damn thing. Incrementally rolling back gun right has worked in the Left’s favor and all people do is pay money to the NRA. There’s no reason to think that will change.
I think it shows the limitations of conservatism.
True Americans will not tolerate gun confiscation. The SCOTUS allows Australian style firearm confiscation, it will be instantaneous civil war.
It’s a nice thought, but I don’t believe it for a second.
The limitations of conservatism…or of Conservatism Inc.?
Then you haven’t been paying attention to gun sales. Reparation money for dindus will anger a lot of people. However, it’s gun confiscation is what will trigger civil war.
They would never do an outright confiscation. Incrementalism has worked incredibly well.
All of it. Conservatism has utterly failed and the reason is because all it can do is react to the Left. Conservatives never go on the offensive because they limit themselves with stupid notions of “order” (whatever that means), legislative rules, and decorum. The Right needs to be barbarian again.
Obama and Hillary have called for Australian style gun ban. And a lot of leftist magazines are calling for for a ban. Hubris may get the best of them.
Incrementalism will only go so far. You have 3%ers and Oath Keepers, who are veterans, that have sworn to start 4 Gen warfare, if another Waco happens.
Surely they would do Australia style gun confiscation at State level, not Federal, until they had enough States fully disarmed to go nation-wide.
“Does not the GOP attack on Trump show that political change is no longer possible? ”
Not in itself, no. That just shows the GOP Establishment is as much an enemy of the People as is the Left Establishment with which it is so intimately linked.
What would indicate to most people that political change is not possible? Assassination of Trump (by a ‘disgruntled lone radical’ of course), or the stealing the election through massive fraud, seem like possibilities. I would think if the Left is smart they would avoid either of those and seek to work with/negate President Trump in office; then come back stronger with their Lisa Simpson candidate after his two terms end. But if they get to believing their own Hitler rhetoric then all bets are off.
I have doubts whether those who have guns would actually have the guts or the mind, to find back physically. We saw in Boston, that they could shut the entire city down, without anyone lifting a finger to stop it.
This is what I have been saying: you can’t win if all you do is play defense. I have been saying this in the homeschool groups also. But all Ohioans want to do is “preserve” the current law. We are going to lose it by playing defense. If we were to go on offense, the left would be too busy trying to stop our attack (of gaining more liberty) to try to enforce stricter laws against us.
“They are destined to lose for one unalterable reason: We have the numbers, and they don’t. If only 1% of American gunowners are left to fight for liberty, that would mean 2,400,000 guns in the hands of 750,000 Patriots fighting a guerrilla war on their own territory. Think of it this way: even if the USG were ever 99% successful, it still leaves nearly 21 times the IRA’s per capita numbers that has fought the British empire to a standstill for generations. (I am not championing the IRA or its terrorism. I’m only noting the historical fact that a handful of riflemen can mire whole armies.) So, please, enough whining about future gun confiscation efforts-they cannot succeed!”
Boston T. Party, Boston’s Gun Bible (revised) (Colorado: Javelin Press, 2002), 39/10
States like California and New York, yes. However, there are a lot of gun owner friendly states that won’t. Even leftist Vermont is a gun friendly state. Any real ban will have to be on the federal level.
Your numbers DO NOT have the WILL to break the law. They have been breed into dependency on the “nanny state” and VERY FEW can take care of themselves if they had to, the others will wait for someone (government) to “rescue” them. Few will “WALK THE WALK, WHILE MANY TALK THE TALK”
Yeah, as demonstrated by the states where you can now get a CHL, and even those seven states where you don’t *need* one?
No, incrementalism *was* working incredibly well.
Not so much, any more.
You can expect them to change tactics, if only because of the millions of gins sold every year for the past 7 years.
The numbers are only 1%. I’d say a good portion of those would be veterans, FIGHTING 4 GEN WAR ON THEIR ON LAND. How’s the Afghanistan and Iraq wars going? Those people aren’t known for high IQ and they’re kicking the drag queen, homo loving, Yankee USG army’s arse.
“True Americans” such as Bundy & company? They are being rolled up now, at a point in time where they lost the rest of the moral high ground that they had from 2014. That high ground was considerably reduced by the race question that was planted specifically to trip them up.
Now that they squandered their moral capital on some remote wildlife refuge in Oregon they were easy to round up.
I watched huge lines of people registering their guns after the Sandy Hook laws were passed. That’s what is going to happen again. All those instant background checks have created a list, and people suspect it, fear it, have property and family to lose, and that’s why they’ll roll over.
What do they have to lose? What do we have to lose?
Amen!
The militant-right, in fact.
People who’ve never been to CA may think of it as unfriendly to guns, but you shouldn’t ascribe feelings to the entire state that apply mainly in the legislature and Hollywood.
Confiscation attempts would go about as well out here as they would in Kentucky or Georgia.
We’d just serve bottled water instead of sweet tea or lemonade.
With respect to the article, I think the Left is pining for a final showdown, they just haven’t found the means to trigger it. Yet. But not for lack of effort.
It doesn’t matter if Intolerable Acts come from a distant parliament and sovereign, or from a homegrown rogue SCOTUS and rampant unconstitutional executive orders. The net effect is the same, and sooner or later, they’re either going to quit trying (unlikely, as it’s in Leftist’s nature to want to control your entire life cradle-to-grave, and not for your benefit or amusement) or they’re going to be like the dog that finally caught a car, and didn’t know what to do with it when it backed up onto him.
I say, go ahead on with that. The results will be illuminating, but not in the way they were hoping.
HUGE lines of people? How about the people you didn’t see? http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/connecticut-gun-law-ignored/2014/02/13/id/552558/
Exactly! Also, how is that fight against ISIS going? Every time you turn around ISIS is taking over another city.
What’s missing here is the pressure that would be applied for the Congress to impeach the Justices and remove them from office.