"We The People"

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Mark J. Grant, author of Out of the Box,

“We the People”
Glorious words in many ways. They begin the preamble to the United States Constitution as America threw off the chains of tyranny and became a country. How much has been gained, how must lost, since those times when the citizens were dedicated to a common cause. The road has been long, no end in sight, and I rejoice in the continuation if sometimes not in a moment’s chosen path.
However it must be said that Americans are not the only “We the People” country on the planet. This declaration is to be found in democracies everywhere and should be cherished and praised as citizens of each nation get to make the choices appended to self-determination. The desires of the governed must always rule those who are governing and when the leadership fails in that recognition they should be replaced. When political leaders do not listen to the voice of their citizens they will be voted out if not tossed out. The United States, cast in stone some two hundred and thirty seven years since its founding, was not always such a safe bet. We have erred and lurched and struggled with our principles but still here, still beating the drum, still on our own two feet.
Recently one of the German politicians referenced two of the Italian largest vote getters as “clowns.” I reject the comment and I admonish Peer Steinbrueck for his inadequacy. What higher moral ground does he claim that supersedes the voice of the Italian people and I say, “None sir, and that you should be ashamed of yourself.”
I point all of this out this morning because there is change afoot on the Continent and to not take note of it may well be an expensive mistake. Business of late, business as usual, may not be the business of tomorrow as the citizens of various countries, not in open revolt or not in the streets, are beginning to wave a different banner and it is decidedly nationalistic and a potential new definition of just whom “We the People” are; in fact.
Recently, in poll after poll, the citizens of Germany, Britain and other countries in Europe are gathering around their own flags and seemingly rejecting the imposed commonality. I do not ignore the will of the people and when the politicians of various nations ignore their will then they may be replaced, not by rifles in the streets, but by peaceful votes in elections. The incessant pressures of either paying for the lifestyles of people in other nations or the demands of austerity for accepting foreign capital are driving sharp wedges in the grand scheme of Union in Europe.
I would not underestimate what is happening in Italy. It is a rejection, in my opinion, of not just corrupt practices in their own country but of having others govern them. It is a squared stance, I believe, staring directly at Brussels and Berlin telling them to mind their own business and to stop telling the Italians how to run their own country. I am not without sympathy for this position I assure you.
We have had the Arab Spring and perhaps the Italian Spring will be the wildcard of this year. When people discuss the imposed austerity measures and leave the discussion there they have not gone far enough in their thinking. I would say that the Italians, the Greeks, the Portuguese, the Spaniards do not wish to be German and may be getting tired of being told what to do by them while the British and the Dutch and others are having their patience worn thin by the demands out of Brussels and Berlin for their money. Even in Germany, as demonstrated by a recent poll, the people are getting tired of supporting other nations financially so as to exercise control. The grass grows thin upon the Continent.
The pledge of Mr. Draghi, always conditional upon the support of the European Union, may get diminished further if the nations of that Union do not give him support. Since all of the yields of European sovereign debt rely upon this promise then much could be lost if the promise cannot be kept. Southern Europe and Northern Europe may not be separated by an ocean but they are fathoms apart in tradition and mindset. Rome, whatever her inherent difficulties, has the capacity of leadership and just because there is a power vacuum for the moment in the Vatican and in their Parliament does not mean that they will not both be filled and perhaps with surprising results. The politicians of Europe may be ignoring Italy and the world’s investors are certainly ignoring Italy for the moment but the people of various nations, in my estimation, are not.
“We the People” may be in for a definitional change. The spark of the Italian elections may be the kindling for a much larger fire. I would not ignore the burning smell that is wafting through the air and I would not ignore the consequences of it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mercury's picture

Recently, in poll after poll, the citizens of Germany, Britain and other countries in Europe are gathering around their own flags and seemingly rejecting the imposed commonality.

This isn't supposed to happen. Remember, "multi-culturalism" and "identity" are good but nationalism is bad.
Get with the program people.

Terminus C's picture

The problem is that all of those "isms" become religion and people put blind faith into whichever "ism" they are following without critical thought.  Each and every "movement" is headed by oligarchs or oligarch wannabes who foster this religious zeitgeist surrounding their "ism".

Shizzmoney's picture

TPTB have used these "isms" to control the means of production, currency control, and law for over 2000+ years. 

I think it is slowly ending, because the biggest producer of isms, religion, is dying (because ppl are starting to slowly realize its all bullshit, used to control the masses from thinking critically, to divide people against one anohter over stupid differences).

The only "ism" I acknowledge is "Assholism" - which is what we live under today.

P.S. "We The People" died a long time ago........because the "we" in the Constitution don't include us no more, thats for sure.

GetZeeGold's picture



"We The People" died a long time ago


John McCain did his part on the Senate floor the other day when instead of referring to the Gentleman from Kentucky.....he just referred to that wacko asshole Rand Paul.


kill switch's picture

John McAsshole is irrelevant.

Stoploss's picture

Also a short timer.

The last ride.

Dr. Richard Head's picture

One would hope, but that stodgy little fuck keeps getting back into office.  I assume it's the "asshole you know" syndrom that keeps playing out.  Sherrod "I voted for TARP" Brown here is Ohio gets to enjoy his seat because of the same disease here. 

"Everyone in Congress needs to be replaced, except for my asshole here" is the battle cry of the serfs.

SWRichmond's picture

Praise for "democracy"?  Democracy is two wolves and one sheep "voting" on what to have for dinner.

Mr. Chairman, I am much obliged to the very worthy gentleman for his encomium. I wish I was possessed with talents, or possessed of any thing that might enable me to elucidate this great subject. I am not free from suspicion: I am apt to entertain doubts. I rose yesterday to ask a question which arose in my own mind. When I asked that question, I thought the meaning of my interrogation was obvious. The fate of this question and of America may depend on this. Have they said, We, the states? Have they made a proposal of a compact between states? If they had, this would be a confederation. It is otherwise most clearly a consolidated government. The question turns, sir, on that poor little thing — the expression, We, the people, instead of the states, of America. I need not take much pains to show that the principles of this system are extremely pernicious, impolitic, and dangerous. Here is a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain. It is radical in this transition; our rights and privileges are endangered, and the sovereignty of the states will be relinquished: and cannot we plainly see that this is actually the case?


chumbawamba's picture

I don't think that quote alludes to what you think it does, but indeed, "We the People" is associated with republics, not democracies.


I am Chumbawamba.

SWRichmond's picture

Read the entire body of Henry's speeches at the Virginia Ratification Debates and see if you feel you can make the assertion "I don't think that quote alludes to what you think it does" again.

philipat's picture

And if what is happening in The US is the kind of freedom he spent his life fighting for.....He wasted his life.

GetZeeGold's picture



The dark side of progressive socialism is very seductive. Even more so if you're a Republican....cause they have most of the money.

Cloud9.5's picture

Neither party is the party of the little man both are dominated by super rich.  Both sides write themselves out of the tax code while preying on the middle class.  Projection is a common ploy.

CH1's picture

the biggest producer of isms, religion, is dying

Your first statement, that religion produces isms, is a bit backwards:

Wannabe rulers create isms. Established rulers use religions as tools of legitimacy. So, it should be the one who initiates the crime (the state) who gets more of the blame.

Secondly, religions - or rather, belief - will not go away. There are reasons to believe in a creator.

SafelyGraze's picture

lost me at "We have had the Arab Spring "

petolo's picture

Assholism and Alcoholism .

Dr. Richard Head's picture

Everyone is an asshole when I don't drink.

Blazed's picture

The multi-cult is good for perpetual conflict, antagonism and destruction of heritage and racial/ethnic identity. Let's see how effective and efficient East Asian countries will be if they ever let in a flood of third world populations. Even worse if they destroy their unique group genteic attributes through miscegenation with these other populations groups. Ta-ta.

Stoploss's picture

Funny how morals are always sacrificed at the alter of " multi-culturalism "

Salah's picture

What is happening.....happened during the "Age of Revolution"...Pluto's now moved into Capricorn (last there 1762-63).  Aided and abetted by Uranus now in Aries: i.e. "action! action! action! or war! war! war!"--take your pick and last there 1927, and Neptune in Pisces (1848); i.e. mass propaganda, social communes, woozy new religions (i.e. LDS), "rock-oil" discoveries, and "large-scale sorrows & misery".

The elite, who've been stockpiling weapons, ammo, and the like to keep control during this period, are yet again going to answer that question, "what's killed the most people the last 200 years?"....with the correct answer: government.

digalert's picture

"we don’t want that flag, we don’t want the anthem, we don’t want this political class, we want the whole thing confined to the dustbin of history"

Nigel Farage

rsnoble's picture

And to think our current civilization is unlike the rest in history where there's always been a crazy group of motherfuckers trying to fuck everyone over?  Only difference this time there won't be future generations. Ever.

philipat's picture

I think it's just that Europeans don't want a Ünited States of Europe, want to retainn their National sovereignty and don't want to be told what to do by unelected bureaucrats and technocrats in Brussels and Frankfurt. In fact, it's an awakening of democracy.

Just like Nigel Farage has been telling his "Friends"in Bussels for a long time.

max2205's picture

More like hiding behind their flag.  

New_Meat's picture

"They begin the preamble to the United States Constitution as America threw off the chains of tyranny and became a country."

1789 - 1776 = 23

espirit's picture

"I would not ignore the burning smell that is wafting through the air and I would not ignore the consequences of it."

Sort of the same meme George Washington was aspiring to in his blog on Fukushima.

Endgame near. 

El's picture

What if the will of the people (or rather, of the majority of the people) leans towards socialism? What then, Mr. Grant?

It seems to me that the will of the people is fickle. Give me a good old constitutional republic over the will of the people any day.

Shizzmoney's picture


What if the will of the people (or rather, of the majority of the people) leans towards socialism?

Actually, in Europe, the younger folk are leaning far right:

Under austerity, young Europeans turn to far right in unprecedented numbers:



El's picture

I know :::sighs::: I did it again. I took the author's intent out of context in applying a particular phrase he wrote to America. It seems to me that we got where we are because of the will of the people.

Never mind me...I'm babbling. Carry on...


Azannoth's picture

Far-right in Europe = National Socialism

Far-left in Europe = Multiculti Socialism

Can you spot the difference ?

GeezerGeek's picture

 The linked article states that many (Greece, Hungary) youth are turning toward neo-fascist parties. Despite what the progressive/communist apologists say, fascism entails big government. Big government is not 'right wing'. If it were, we would have international socialism on one end (left) and national socialism on the other (right), leaving nowhere for advocates of small/limited government.

That anyone, anywhere should be leaning toward any form of fascism is frightening. 

Sean7k's picture

The will of the people may be fickle, but the will of the State and those that wield it is not. The will of the State must be re-imagined without the threat of coercion and violence done to the people. Constitutions are no barrier to tyranny. 

Citizen sovereignty must ALWAYS outweigh the demands of the State. Violence is abhorrent in all its' forms, but when practiced against community whose trust was placed for the benefit of all is particularly repugnant. 

While the requirements of a State are few, the ambitions of a State are without limit. We are The People, not The State. Any system that disallows private property, steals labor and wealth, practices law based on status and retains the right to kill its' people without trial is nothing more than systematic slavery. 

Oldwood's picture

people should be allowed to pursue their own self interest and this can only happen with weak government structure. Down with tyranny. A government of and by the people is not compatible with DC, Brussels or any other leviathon. 

Azannoth's picture

Exactly "We The People" just means a tyranny of the majority instead of this empty meaningless phrase I prefer to just say "I"

madcows's picture

"I heartily accept the motto, 'That government is best which governs least'; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe—'That government is best which governs not at all'; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it."

Henry David Thoreau - Civil Disobedience

madcows's picture

Is it really "We the People" if elections are bought or sold by the highest bidder?

In America it's "Us the Rulers".  The People are just the grist for the mill.

Widowmaker's picture

Fascist tyranny is already pervasive, "We the Incorporated."

All the money, all the protections, none of the rules.

Sandy Hook will look like a massage parlor as Fascist-Bernanke keeps stacking the social-dynamite with eyes wide shut.

BobPaulson's picture

Facsism is corporatism. It is an ism invented to seem populist, while maintaining the control by the old families, churches and banks. Even the revolutions of the 18th century were mostly window dressing. The sooner one accepts this and plans accordingly, the quicker you can focus on avoiding its ill effects.

Oldwood's picture


Federal style governments should have no more power to regulate their states than the states should have to regulate what we do in our bedrooms. The EU or DC should only be regulating what happens between states, not within them. All government powers tend to grow and encroach upon the rights of their citizens and require a constant pushback of resistance. We have failed in America just as the Europeans have. It may be too late to reverse this as those dependent on government directed redistribution are overwhelming the willing producers. I fear anyone who stands up and tries to take away their donuts will be destroyed. Likely we will have to wait until all the donuts are gone before reforms can take place. Lots of mayhem is coming up as we face the Great Reconciliation.

Seasmoke's picture

There is a reason the lions and the zebras do not hang out together. Follow Nature.

pods's picture

If people were to ever grasp that We the People are what gave the government authority it would go a long way.

Most see The State as the ultimate authority.  And with the 14th amendment, who the hell really knows.  Information about the People vs citizen argument is very difficult to decipher.

Then you have oxymoronic sayings like "sovereign citizen" to further muddy the waters.

So the easiest way to restore individual liberty is to place that small seed in enough people's heads.

If the government is the highest authority, where did it come from?  The People?  

A long uphill battle though.  And as things get worse, more will look towards The State for security, and liberty will recede further into the recesses of their minds.


Oldwood's picture

For far too many today, the thought of freedom and liberty is almost the same as being naked and pennyless in the street. They have no, zero comprehension of self reliance.

Sean7k's picture

a : one possessing or held to possess supreme political power or sovereignty 

b : one that exercises supreme authority within a limitedsphere

As citizens, what is oxymoronic about this definition? What is the value of any State based on The People, if the people do not retain supreme authority within a limited sphere ( in regards to each other citizen and the State)?


pods's picture

Here is the issue with citizen:

an inhabitant of a city or town; especially : one entitled to the rights and privileges of a freeman

A right is something you are born with.  You ask no one to exercise it.

A privilege is bestowed upon you.  If I can bestow privilege upon you, I am above you.  You are not sovereign.

It is the same issue with needing a permit, or permission to exercise a right.

The line between right and privilege has been erased.

I use this question to illustrate my point, it is simple and works on almost everyone:

Do you have a right to vote?

They always answer yes.  Voting is not a right.  If there was no state, there would be no voting.


Sean7k's picture

Your view of a citizen is self serving. The Constitution defines a citizen as a natural born inhabitant of a State, sovereign in his relationship towards the federal government. As a citizen, I have rights, inalieanable rights that are mine by contract and the laws of nature. The State can tell you it is bestowing a privledge upon you, but until you accept it, there is no quid pro quo. This is basic common law, which governs the Constitution. 

I haven't the "right" to vote, because it is not a right, it is a process that defines the contract between the citizen and the State. Your inability to make this distinction fails to result in the title "sovereign citizen" being oxymoronic. 

pods's picture

No, the oxymoronic aspect is that the term "citizen" has now morphed into something entirely different than before.  With the passing of the 14th amendment, citizen has taken on a new definition, one, if my reading is correct, makes the "citizen" a subject of the state.  Thus removing sovereignty.


falak pema's picture

in any system the citizen has inalienable rights but corresponding responsibilities to nOT contravene laws that protect the same for others; aka he has constraints. In our current complex advance economy systems these responsibilities are increasingly mutliple; social, economic and ecological etc..

The libertarians turn a blind eye to this aspect of society; we dont live in a vacuum like the original pioneers. We have to comply to this. The level of complexity and the need for simplification of bureaucratic systems that organise them, is and stays an ongoing functional problem in society; that is legislated on, executed on and eventually litigated on.

That in essence is what state function is about. And its relevance and scope should be controlled by the people.

Sean7k's picture

You might want to re-examine that concept in light of what the 14th amendment did and whether it applied to natural born citizens of a particular state or was created to resolve the status of slaves, which had been property prior to this amendment. The 14th amendment cannot contravene existing rights guaranteed in the Constitution.