Politics

We Didn’t Start the Flamewar — Part Three

by
We Didn't Start the Flamewar -- Part Three

*dons shades and sits at a table in a kitchen from the 1940s*

Larry Correia, Sarah H., Puppy Sadness, Vox Day
Social Justice, WrongFen Haters, Scalzi’s Twitter Mob

We didn’t start the flamewar
It was always burning
Since the ‘Net’s been churning
We didn’t start the flamewar
No we didn’t light it
But we’ll damned well fight it

Lyrics to be continued

So, this is the first part of the in depth history of the Sad Puppies part of this series (wow, that’s a mouthful). I spent a lot of time yesterday reading up on this. Sad Puppies has been running for three years now and was started by Larry Correia back in January 2013. That means it predates GamerGate by a fair margin (since there have been some accusations that Sad Puppies and GamerGate are the same thing or that GamerGate started the Sad Puppies. The only way that could have happened would have been for the GamerGate movement to have access to 1) a time machine, 2) a DeLorean with a Flux Capacitor and either a Mr. Fusion or Plutonium, or 3) a TARDIS. Since I’m fairly certain none of those three things are true, it’s a safe bet that GamerGate and Sad Puppies are two distinct phenomena which simply have some members in common since people who like video games also tend to enjoy reading and occasionally writing fantasy or sci-fi books).

Like many of us, Larry noticed that there had been a divergence between what was selling well and what was winning the Hugos and had been for some time. He informed his fans that all they had to do in order to nominate a work for the Hugo or the Campbell awards was to purchase a membership to WorldCon. Since the membership for WorldCon is rather small, it doesn’t take many votes to get on the ballot or to win an award. He called his effort to get his own work on the ballot “Sad Puppy” as a tongue-in-cheek commentary against the current tendency to award works that were literary-fic or message-fic instead of works that were selling or well-liked by the entire sci-fi/fantasy audience. It’s not the first time such a gag was used — after all, on various tech forums I hang around, “Think Of The Children” is used in the same sarcastic fashion.

sad-puppy
Won’t someone think of the sad puppies and the children?

In Sad Puppies 1, Larry did suggest his own works because there wasn’t any real organization back then. It was just him on his own. He was soliciting his own fans to nominate him (but he did not buy votes or memberships for anyone) and probably felt it would be a bit strange to ask them to nominate someone else. Additionally, he had a theory about the Hugos that he wanted to test — namely that they were biased, represented the preferences of only one tiny section of the sci-fi/fantasy fandom community, and that authors with the “wrong” political beliefs (meaning politically to the right of Mao and Stalin) who got on the ballot would be attacked, slandered, libeled, made the subject of whisper campaigns, harassed, have Twitter mobs set upon them, have their books given negative reviews, etc etc etc.

Sad Puppies is not about getting Larry himself the Hugo or getting any particular author the award (Sad Puppies 1 actually failed to get Larry nominated at all though it did get some of his preferences listed in other areas). It’s always been about proving that WorldCon is full of crap when they hold themselves out to represent all of fandom, about proving that there is a definite bias that has nothing to do with whether a work is good or not and everything to do with whether or not the author has the right skin color, the right genitalia, and adheres to the proper groupthink. It also has been a test as to whether or not WorldCon is really open to welcoming new members and new writers regardless of their skin’s melanin content, whether their genitals dangle or not, and what their political philosophies are. Based on the current reactions I’d have to say that Correia’s premises have been proven. WorldCon is not open to newbies of any kind who aren’t clones of their current members and the awards are biased to message-fic and it’s pretty clear that the author’s identity is far more important than whether or not their story is well-written and interesting.

So, back in 2013, Larry campaigned on his own behalf throughout January to try to get his own work on the ballot. He was almost successful (missing it by only 17 votes). Overall, there wasn’t much outcry over it and the first effort didn’t have a massive impact. Still, the idea caught on and began to generate buzz which culminated in Sad Puppies 2 which was a Much Bigger Deal and which will be the subject of the next entry in this series so stay tuned!

— G.K.

Sad Puppy image taken from Larry Correia’s site, Monster Hunter Nation

We Didn’t Start the Flamewar — Part Two

by
We Didn't Start the Flamewar -- Part Two

So, some of you might be wondering exactly how this whole thing got started. I posted a brief-ish history earlier. I’m not going to rehash all of that now. Instead, I’m going to focus on the three most recent events in this culture war. I’m not going to pretend to be completely unbiased in this but I am going to try to be fairly accurate. There is a lot of he-said-she-said to some of it so feel free to check out other summaries. Just be aware that everyone has their own agenda so take it all with a grain of salt (including this one).

The first of the three events to take place was GamerGate. Know Your Meme has a pretty thorough coverage of it so if you’ve got no clue what it is and want a play-by-play, I’d suggest checking it out. The long and short of it is that the whole thing started over a game developer (Zoe Quinn) who cheated on her boyfriend. Her boyfriend posted an expose of it showing that she’d supposedly slept around to try to get good reviews of her game. It morphed from a movement to improve ethics in gaming journalism to a big thing about feminism and gaming in general. The anti-GamerGater side (populated by Social Justice Warriors or SJWs) tends to think that gaming is sexist and that the tech sector is sexist. They think that the way women are depicted in games is sexist and that games should tell a more “socially just” message. The pro-GamerGater side thinks that games are fine and that if the antis don’t like them, they’re free to make their own games and see which sell better. The antis have, so far, managed to get some of the pro-GG groups like the HoneyBadgerBridage (a group of female gamers and game developers) thrown out of conventions because they “made the [antis] feel threatened.”

That’s the level of maturity we’re dealing with. The antis can’t actually argue anything rationally and can’t be bothered to make their own games with their own message. They want to force current gaming companies to make the games they think should be made and force the rest of us to play them whether we want to or not. And, when we say that’s stupid, we’re told we’re threatening them and harassing them and that we’re being sexist. We also get lumped in with the PUAs like Roosh (who isn’t actually a bad guy — I’ve talked with him and he’s nice in person) and some of the really crazy MRAs who do hate women which would be like us lumping the antis in with groups who want to raise all children as girls and kill or force all males to undergo sex reassignment surgery *eyeroll*

The next big event was ShirtStorm. Back in November, the European Space Agency landed the Philae lander on a comet for the first time in human history. One of the guys on the team was wearing a shirt that a female friend had made for him — the shirt was a bowling shirt that depicted comic-hero women with laser guns and tight outfits. He was interviewed briefly (he wasn’t the spokesman for the team or the team lead — the team lead was a woman, in fact). Rose Eveleth, a journalist for The Atlantic, managed to miss the big news item (the historic comet landing) and, in a stereotypically womanish manner, focus in on what the guy was wearing instead. She made a big deal about the shirt that caused the historic comet landing to be forgotten as everyone on Twitter got the vapors over the women on this guy’s shirt. She later claimed she was “doxxed” (meaning her personal information was posted and she was getting harassed at home) but there was absolutely no evidence this happened (whereas there was plenty of evidence that this happened with anti-GamerGate people). I personally spent the better part of four days checking the usual doxxing sites AND the deepnet/Tornet for any trace of it and there was nada. The only way I could dig up her info was to hit up a contact I have who can get that kind of stuff and all I asked that person was if they could get it. Unsurprisingly, the answer was “yes” but that does not mean Rose Eveleth was doxxed any more than it means that oh, say, the Governor General of Canada’s direct line (bypasses switchboard, bypasses secretary, no voicemail, rings through even if phone is turned off) was “doxxed.”*

ShirtStorm managed to die down with most of us women realizing that some women were never going to get the whole science thing because they just couldn’t be rational. I wrote my long series on ShirtStorm and Women In Science (Feminism Is Dead, Why Don’t Women Go Into Science?, Why Don’t Women Go Into Science? Part II, Women In Science Part III: Can We Force More Women to Become NTs?, Women In Science: Can We Create More Female NTs?) and things seemed to go back to their uneasy truce where the minority of us wondered just when the majority of slavering crazed fems were going to find something to go batcrap crazy over again.

The third event is HugoGate or PuppyGate or whatever you want to call it. That really deserves its own entry — which it is going to get. However, I’m going to give it a quick rundown here anyway so here goes. This year was the third year that Sad Puppies ran a list of people they thought should get nominated for the Hugos. The last two years Larry Correia ran Sad Puppies — this year it was Brad Torgersen. Larry started it because he believed that worthy folks were being ignored or left off the ballot due to the authors’ political beliefs. He said that if any right-wing author got nominated, the Powers That Be with WorldCon (the group that owns and organizes the Hugos) would throw a fit of epic proportions. Thus far, he’s been proven right. The first two years, Sad Puppies wasn’t very successful but this year it was. There’s some argument as to why that is the case and I’m still reading up on it myself. However, the end result has been that Larry and Brad (who are really nice guys and good writers) have been slandered, libeled, threatened, and harassed. A lot of other good authors have been harassed as well just because they were nominated by Sad Puppies and some even felt they had to withdraw from being nominated. The PuppyKickers are threatening to vote No Award in every category where there are Sad Puppy candidates (I think) which would prove Larry’s point completely and would prove that the Hugos are pretty much worthless. The PuppyKickers claim that the Sad Puppies are all a bunch of white, sexist men who nominated nothing but white, sexist men even though SP3 consists of women, Latinos, blacks, Asians, gays (I think?), and people of all political backgrounds and nominated writers of all colors, genders, and backgrounds. Also now, according to the PuppyKickers, those of us who are sympathetic to SP are neonazis.

So you can see why some of us are finally getting a bit fed up with this whole thing.

In the next part I’ll do a more in-depth history of Sad Puppies so stay tuned!

— G.K.

*No, it’s not the Governor General and I’m not going to reveal whether or not it’s a government agency I could get access to or who my friend is or how I know them or what but, suffice it to say that just because this person can get their hands on the information does not mean it’s in the wild. This person once had a pepperoni pizza (paid for by an anonymous BitCoin account) sent to a friend of theirs who was in Israel and that friend, to this day, still has no idea who sent them the pizza. And no, my posting this won’t give the game away because that friend has no clue who I am or that I know this mutual contact.

We Didn’t Start the Flamewar — Part One

by
We Didn't Start the Flamewar -- Part One

But it has been burning for a while. I’m going to briefly (for me) outline the history a bit before diving into the most recent battle fronts in this long-running war.

Yes, I’m talking about the current online flamewar going on in the sci-fi/fantasy world. The latest salvo has been over the Hugos with Irene Gallo calling anyone who thinks Sad Puppies has a point a neo-Nazi (thanks, hon! By the by, I was born Catholic and my grandfather was part of the D-Day invasion at Omaha Beach so I’m just thrilled to be called that) but it’s been simmering since at least the 1980s when the geeks and nerds decided to start building their own worlds and lives where they could do their thing without having to put up with the overculture’s bullshit. We went our own way, did our own thing, and left the rest of the world well enough alone.

Then, of course, the stuff we were doing started to catch attention and the rest of the world wanted in on it. We’re tolerant and magnanimous so we said “sure, c’mon. Join the Internet.” We kept doing our own thing, hanging out on our usenet groups, playing MUDs, building early websites, and just generally chilling. We avoided the screeching harpies, the Ivory Tower Intellectuals, the fashionistas, the HR drones, and the hippy-dippy crowds and kept playing video games, reading sci-fi and fantasy, writing, and just generally adopting an outlook of “let everyone do their own thing and just leave us alone.”

And that was fine for a while. We got to show off how awesome our little worlds could be with epic movies like Lord of the Ring, The Matrix and books like Harry Potter, The Wheel of Time, Mistborn, and video games like World of Warcraft, Diablo III, Star Wars: The Old Republic, Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, and more. Still, for the most part, we left the rest of the world alone and the rest of the world left us alone. We kept spinning great stories, kept telling them and retelling them, made awesome networks and used the tech that our fore-geeks had built into companies like Amazon to share our culture. We didn’t really care much what the rest of the world was doing because we were too busy wondering who was going to win the X-Prize, building spaceships and space-faring companies, talking about how we could make money mining Near Earth Asteroids, planning out how we’d get to Mars.

After all, the rest of the world had been telling us what we wanted wasn’t important and didn’t matter. We took them at their word and left them do their thing so long as they left us alone to think up things like how to colonize other planets, whether or not you could genetically engineer dragons so they’d be real, and when the Singularity might happen. In our world, we didn’t much care if you were male or female or some variant therein. We didn’t care if you were homo-, hetero-, bi-, or a-sexual. We didn’t care if you wore jeans, Armani suits, had tattoos and piercings, walked around in your pajamas all day, watched porn or thought that Clark was better than Heinlein. All we really cared about was “is your idea cool? Will it work? Can you prove it?”

We weren’t interested in trying to set up elaborate government programs to ensure that every company, game, book, movie, TV show, poem, or military unit was a perfect representation of the rest of the population. We thought that it was a bit silly to try to force people into jobs based on superficial (or superfluous) traits instead of whether or not they were interested, qualified, and could fit in with the rest of their team. We were willing to listen to arguments that perhaps the overculture discouraged certain people from entering our specialized realms (math, science, tech, and engineering). However, we recognized that interest and personality-type were the main drivers and the intelligence played a role in whether or not a person could get into the STEM fields. After all, if you hate math, you’re hardly going to be a great computer scientist. If physics bores you, a career at CERN is probably out. If you’d rather talk about your feelings, you’re probably not destined for the engineering world and if you think video games are for losers, I doubt you’re going to fit in well in a company like Blizzard or BioWare.

So, for the most part, we didn’t care that our subculture had more men than women. The women (like me) who were part of it had absolutely no real place in the overculture. We didn’t face a lot of sexism in the geek realms — the guys are glad to have us and appreciate the way our minds work. True, they can sometimes say something that results in them suffering a brief bit of foot-in-mouth but then, so can we. We know that guys like to look at attractive women (unless they’re gay in which case it’s attractive men).* For the most part, we don’t care. Their desktops and screensavers don’t bother us so long as the women are mostly clothed. After all, they’re not asking us to dress like that. The superficial doesn’t matter much to us — actions do.

At any rate, things were rocking along just fine until three events happened that showed us that no matter how magnanimous and forgiving we were (after all, we’d sighed and gotten over the September That Never Ended, we’d come to grips with the AOLers and Spammers, we’d learned to filter out the overculture and had even — albeit, with difficulty — forgiven them for cancelling Firefly). The first was #GamerGate. The second was #ShirtStorm. And now the last is the HugoSpat.

We didn’t start the flamewar but, bless your overbearing over-culture hearts guys, we think it’s hilarious when you try to flame people who invented fireproof armor, can calculate the burst damage for the best PVP firemage build, and build flamethrowers for fun.

You’re in our world now and here, we make the rules. That is why folks like Irene Gallo and her brethren are going to lose because — at best — we go back to ignoring you and doing our own thing. At worst, we show the rest of the marginalized in the overculture that they don’t have to put up with your shenanigans either. After all, we’ve already showed the RIAA we don’t need them to help us find great music. We showed the big TV companies that we can damned well do without them. The Big Five are learning that we don’t need them to control the book market.

Do you really want to join them on Ye Olde Dustbin of the Dinosaurs?

— G.K.

*Women aren’t as visually-oriented as men but we do like to look at good looking guys (if we’re straight) or gals (if we’re lesbians). However, rarely are we going to plaster the walls and our computers with fine specimens because we’re wired a bit differently when it comes to what we like to look at and display. *shrugs* Men and women are different and that is a Good Thing(TM).

Other posts like this:

No More Tor

by
No More Tor

Update: I am aware that Tom Doherty issued a statement and that Irene Gallo (the one whose comment pushed me over the edge) has made a non-apology apology. Her doing that actually makes me angrier because she’s not sorry at all for what she said. She still thinks people like me (and John C. Wright, Jim Butcher, Sarah Hoyt, Cedar Sanderson, and Kevin Anderson) are neo-Nazis. When she can actually admit that maybe being to the right of Mao does not make you Hitler and can actually write a post that accurately describes the entire Sad Puppy phenomenon, I’ll reconsider my stance. Until then, I’m not going to contribute a wooden nickel towards her salary. Also, if Tor fires her, I will make my avoidance of their books permanent because that’s the only thing that could make me angrier — firing someone for their opinions.

I just want an honest-to-Bob real fucking apology and for her to learn to break out of her little bubble of a universe and make some truly diverse friends instead of the token-diversity she has around now.

I’ve intentionally not said anything about Sad Puppies or Hugogate or whatever it’s being called now because, honestly, I don’t pay much attention to awards these days. The Hugo winners have been books I find tedious and not worth the time for about the past ten years so I generally avoid them. I’ve started treating most “award-winning” books that way in recent years because “award-winning” is so often synonymous with “something a limousine liberal in Manhattan [who’s never come down from their fiftieth floor loft and who thinks they’re progressive because they have an Ecuadorean transgendered nanny and their dogwalker is gay] would find interesting when they try to show how avant-garde they are while drinking chai frappélattéchinos with their lily white (and the token black) quote-unquote with airquotes friends.”

And since most of them can’t read beyond a sixth grade level, what they like is going to be something I’ll find puerile — perhaps juvenile, at best — with tortured language that thinks it’s academic and intellectual when it’s really just pretentious, tendentious, and fucking poor diction and a complete abuse of esoteric terminology.

Still, though, I’m sick and tired of being compared to the guy who caused over 70 million deaths in less than seven years just because I think that openness and diversity is a good thing. I think that anyone who likes science fiction and fantasy should be considered a fan and they shouldn’t have to pass any kind of ideological test. I think that an award that touts itself as “THE sci-fi/fantasy award from all fans” should be more open to those fans participating in the nomination and voting. Otherwise, it’s just another crappy award given by another group of CHORFs. I think that the Sad Puppies have proven their point in that the Hugos are meaningless and controlled by the publishers and not the fans.

If the PuppyKickers want to throw a fit because their picks didn’t win this year, that’s fine. If they want to change the way the Hugos are decided, that’s fine. But they need to act like fucking adults instead of kindergartners. Since they can’t do that, I’m going to do the adult thing and not give them my money.

Hey, I wouldn’t give my kindergarten-aged niece a cookie if she’d spent all day acting out — I’m not going to give a company that has its senior staff call me a Nazi my money, either. However, I don’t want the authors who are locked into a shitty contract to think it’s them or their work that has caused me to make this decision. So, I’ve started contacting all Tor’s authors to let them know that it’s not them — it’s their publisher. I started today with Brandon Sanderson who could easily strike out on his own and publish independently (face it, Tor needs him far more than he needs them). The message I sent to him (or to his assistants, rather), is below.

I just wanted to apologize for this. I’ve been a fan of Mr. Sanderson’s work ever since he started writing the Wheel of Time after Mr. Jordan died. When I heard he was going to be finishing the series, I bought the Mistborn trilogy and soon had every book he’s written. However, I won’t be buying (or borrowing or pirating because that’s wrong) his books published through Tor any longer.

Mr. Sanderson hasn’t done anything wrong — I still love his books and wish I had 1/100000000000000th of his talent. He’s not offended me or anything. I just can’t support a company that thinks that my friends and I are as horrible as the man responsible for upwards of 70 million deaths (Adolph Hitler) just because we think that more than a few dozen people should be allowed to decide who wins the Hugos.

If Mr. Sanderson changes publishers or goes indie, I’ll be happy to grab his books again. I love his work. I’m just not going to keep giving money to Irene Gallo and the Neilsen-Haydens so that they can call me and people I like (such as Sarah Hoyt, Larry Corriea, Cedar Sanderson, and Brad Torgersen among others) Nazis just because we’re not to the left of Mao and Stalin politically and think that it’s more fun to read books with great characters and a good plot instead of polemics that we might agree with but that tell us we can’t agree for $stupidreasons_like_kincolor_gender_religion_beingfromtheSouth.

Thanks (and sorry because I know he’s busy and doesn’t want to get dragged in to crap like this just because his publishing house is run by idiots),

G.K. Masterson

If, like me, you’re tired of the chattering classes calling you a Nazi while taking your money and laughing at you, then feel free to stop giving them your money. If you’re planning to avoid Tor, know that they’re owned by MacMillian who owns the following publishing lines:

  • Farrar, Straus and Giroux
    • Faber & Faber
  • Henry Holt and Company
    • Holt Paperbacks
    • Metropolitan Books
    • Times Books
    • Owl Books
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Picador
  • Roaring Brook Press
    • Neal Porter Books
    • First Second Books
  • St. Martin’s Press
  • Tom Doherty Associates
    • Tor Books
  • Bedford, Freeman and Worth Publishing Group
    • W.H. Freeman
    • Bedford-St. Martin’s
    • Worth Publishers
  • Hayden-McNeil
  • Nature Publishing Group
    • Scientific American, Inc.

Instead, might I suggest Del Ray Books, Wizards of the Coast, Baen, or indie books? Sure, Del Ray and Baen are owned by other members of the Big Six but so far they’ve managed not to have their spokespeople and senior staff insult anyone to the right of Mao and Stalin.

Just a thought.

— G.K.

More on this:

Feminism Is Dead

by
Feminism Is Dead

I’m happy to announce that, as of today, November 14, 2014 Anno Domini, feminism is dead and we can all go about our lives without having to worry about anything other than its raging specter wailing away in the attic. That means that all the anti-GamerGate folks can rest easy and game company owners no longer have to worry about firing 50% of their game designers and stuffing the teams with Uterine-Americans in order to appease the feminists.

Because feminism is dead. The corpse of sexism and misogyny hangs from yon tree like the bloated, putrid thing it is. Or was. Because it’s dead now and no threat to anyone.

I’d really like to thank the woman who had the ovaries to stick a stake in its heart: Rose Eveleth of The Atlantic. I mean, without her there to point out that the most pressing problem women interested in STEM research and careers face is that some guy might wear a shirt that has a buxom blonde in lingerie on it, we’d all still be held hostage to the crazy clutches of feminism. However, thanks to her fearless pontification upon sartorial hygiene among the aerospace engineering crowd, we can safely assume that sexism is over, feminism is no longer necessary, and we no longer need to worry about being judged on what we look like, what kind of attire we’re wearing, what kind of make-up we use, what hairstyle is “in” at the moment, or, you know, shallow things like that instead of our achievements.

Such as landing a #$!?@ probe on a #$!?@ comet going at ridiculous speeds in outer-#$!?@-space.

Which, I’m certain, is not that difficult compared to writing about science on the Internet and then claiming to be getting death threats over the Internet which will, if the same pattern holds as has held for the vast majority of other cases, be traced to a random troll unconnected with critics (like what happened with Anita Sarkeesian) or to allies looking to discredit anyone who says anything critical of the woman who was “brave” enough to say she didn’t like a shirt some guy was wearing — an event, I’m certain, that has never happened before in history and will definitely not happen during the course of any modern, heterosexual marriage.

— G.K.

P.S. — If anyone out there wants to send me death threats, fine. Whatever. I do, however, own a handgun and have access to rifles with precision scopes on them. Most of my neighbors, likewise, own firearms. Normally, we keep them holstered but, should the occasion arise… And no, Rose, I’m not talking to you or any of your vaporish wilting lily lady friends so you can put your smelling salts away now, dears, and go lay on the settee while someone fans you lest you swoon. Maybe some big, strong man will come along and protect you from the meanie heads on the Internet so that you don’t have to learn how to handle an inanimate hunk of metal and protect your damn self.

The Scottish Referendum: As Scotland Goes, So Goes the US?

by
The Scottish Referendum: As Scotland Goes, So Goes the US?

Tomorrow Scotland will hold a referendum to decide if they will remain part of the United Kingdom or if they will sue for independence and become their own sovereign nation once more. I really have no comment one way or the other on this [1] — my ancestors were forced out of Scotland back in the late 1700s after the Battle of Culloden so my descent from them is fairly remote. I wish them and all the people of the island nothing but the best and I hope that, regardless of tomorrow’s decision, the US, UK, and Scotland will always be friends and allies.

 

That said, talk of Scotland possibly going independent after over three hundred years of being united with England and Wales has set some people to thinking that it might spur a secessionist movement in the United States and to speculate as to whether or not we’d fight to preserve the union as we did back in the Civil War. That’s the point I want to address here because it’s important and because I have no real desire to live through another Civil War so I’d like to do whatever I can to nip this in the bud before it blossoms to bear poisonous fruit.

 

The UK and the US have been allies since the end of the War of 1812. We’ve been friends since the beginning of the twentieth century. But we are very different countries for all that we speak the same language, have some cultural traits in common, and even have a shared history. The UK is, and has been since the fall of Rome, a kingdom. It arose and evolved from a tribal nation-state where allegiance was owed to a chieftain and then to an overlord (dux bellorum) to having nobility (a remnant of the tribe/clan system) who rule with a monarch above them (the overlord). Though the modern UK is very egalitarian, there are still structures in its societies that are reliant on the old caste system. One of those things is that the monarch has no equal. The monarch does not share sovereignty. The monarch is the monarch of England and of Wales and of North Ireland and of Scotland. All four countries are her subjects and are governed, chiefly, by her Parliament. Local affairs are governed by local authority but all authority derives from the monarch.

 

The United States, on the other hand, has no caste system. We do have socio-economic classes but you can fall or rise without the government having any say in the matter. And, being rich isn’t a prerequisite to becoming a Senator (though it does help a lot, especially since we changed the Senate from its original mission). You don’t have to be born to a certain family to hold power. You don’t have to attend certain schools to govern. No matter what the Ivy League elitists and the chattering classes who think that they should rule believe — in the United States, your birth has very little say over your destiny — legally and politically speaking.

 

The States, in turn, are not subject to the federal government. The States are fifty different laboratories of democracy and republicanism who can do whatever they want (that isn’t forbidden them by the Constitution) without having to ask Congress, the President, or anyone other than the citizens of that state for permission. Some states have no income tax. Some states have no sales tax. Some states allow people to drive at sixteen. Some states allow first cousins to marry. Some states allow gay marriage. Some states make it easy to carry a concealed weapon. Ideally, under the Constitution, each state can do whatever it wants so long as it agrees to recognize the rights of the other states to do as they please and so long as it does not assume powers for itself that belong properly to the federal government [2]. Our Constitution clearly outlines the process by which a territory can become a state. We have procedures in place to expand our governance to include new regions, peoples, and territories if they choose to become part of us. New states have the same status as every other state. They are equal to all of the other states. None is subject to another.

 

In the UK, on the other hand, Scotland, England, Wales, and North Ireland are not equals in government. Scotland can’t say if a treaty should be signed or not. Wales can’t demand that Parliament leave it alone and let it do things in a Welsh manner. North Ireland can’t set its own tax rates. Everything in the UK goes through the Parliament in London. It has the final say over all policies across the UK. The four constituent countries aren’t laboratories of democracy where each can tinker with things, do their own thing, and not be beholden to the others. No, Wales, North Ireland, and Scotland are conquered nations who have been brought into the fold of the United Kingdom.

 

That’s not necessarily a bad thing, these days. After all, the English are hardly going around oppressing the Scots, the Welsh, or the Irish. The Welsh, Irish, and Scots do get to vote for representation in Parliament and, through that, they do have some say in national policy. Some might argue that the Scots are, if anything, over-represented in Parliament but, again, that’s not my concern here.

 

The US isn’t going to face another secession crisis if Scotland goes free because the US isn’t the UK. Sure, sure, plenty of people have run their mouths over the past twenty years talking about “we should secede if X happens or if Q is elected.” That’s bullshit (sorry, Mom). I’m sure that the chattering classes and the elites would love to break away from the benighted and ignorant backwoods flyover states but those people would very quickly realize that they need those redneck gun-toters to, you know, actually do shit for them that they don’t want to dirty their soft, well-manicured hands doing. And, the super conservative Bible thumpers might want to break away from the immoral and godless heathens in the big cities but they would very quickly learn that they need those people’s creativity to keep their own culture going.

 

And, even if a state seceded, the rest of the United States would fight to end the rebellion. Guys, we settled this already. It cost us over half a million good men on both sides. Once you’re in, you’re in. That’s it. There is no leaving the union because you don’t like the direction things are going or because someone you hate is the President or because a court case wasn’t decided the way you think it should have been. Congress, the President, the Supreme Court — none of them have the authority to ignore a rebellion and none of them have the authority to permit a state to leave the union. Any of them who tried would probably find themselves hanging from the nearest handy tree.

 

The US won’t break up strictly because we’re used to being disunited. We’re used to having very different cultures, people, languages, and religions living close to each other. In the US, if you’re not happy with the people around you, you can pack up and move somewhere with people better suited to you. And, moving won’t mean giving up anything. You’ll have the same rights and powers over the national government in any state you move to.

 

We won’t break up because none of us were forced, kicking and screaming, into a union. No, not even the rebellious Southern states who were Reconstructed back in weren’t forced to join in the first place. Aside from the Civil War, the people of one state have never fought the people of another state and forced them into subjugation. Sure, we’ll grouse about things not being the way we want them to be — especially now that the federal government seems to think that the fifty states should be subject to it instead of the other way around — but we’re not going to break apart. We need each other too much and, besides…

 

…you’d have to be insane to want to fight our Armed Forces on your front lawn.

 

— G.K.

[1]I find it unspeakably rude to voice an opinion on the private issues of a foreign nation. It’s a bit like getting in the middle of a friend’s divorce — it just shouldn’t be done. The most I will say is that I hope that, regardless of the outcome, the Scots people, the English people, the Welsh people, and the Irish people will always be friends to the people of the United States and that our countries will always be allies. Any non-Brit who says more than that is being, in my opinion, rude and uncouth and should be ignored or called out for it even if that person is the President of the United States. The business of the Scottish referendum for independence is none of our concern and we shouldn’t attempt to influence it one way or another unless the Scots suddenly start enslaving non-Scots or launching nukes at us or an ally or something like that.

 

[2]Yes, this is the idealized bit. I realize this isn’t how it plays out in reality but that’s because we Americans have let the federal government assume too much power since the days of FDR.

GamerGate: Art’s Last Stand

by
GamerGate: Art's Last Stand

There have been so many good posts about GamerGate and NotYourShield that have covered just about every aspect of the scandal from the social ranking (geeks and nerds who survive to adulthood rarely give two craps what the in-crowd thinks or says about them) to pointing out how the rabid so-called “social justice warriors” have ruined so much of the entertainment industry already and more. But there are two aspects that I feel have been overlooked: the first — journalism is not some noble, ethical profession filled with intelligent and educated people who want to report the truth to the world. The second is that gaming is the last form of art to stand up and shine a mirror in everyone’s face instead of just the current cultural boogie-man’s.

 

The first point could, frankly, take ages to cover. Suffice it to say: L. Rhodes is wrong because gaming journalists are no different than other journalists who have covered up scandals (such as Walter Duranty covering up and excusing Stalin’s massacres), sold their souls to keep access (such as Eason Jason and CNN covering up Saddam Hussein’s horrors or journalists not reporting on Hamas using hospitals to launch attacks), proven themselves to be completely, willfully, callously, and unfixably ignorant about reality (crack open any article on science and tell me it’s written by someone who has an honest-to-God clue of how to read statistics), and acted unethically, calling in favors of all kinds (such as David Gregory getting his good buddy the DC prosecutor not to haul him off to prison for breaking the same law that has caused veterans and honest travelers to spend time in the lock-up for not knowing DC’s rather insane laws on guns, magazines, clips, and bullets). If someone is a journalist, that’s not something to be proud of. It means that they weren’t skillful, honorable, or intelligent enough to get a better job — such as being the pianist in a whore house. To be a journalist is to be without honor, ethics, and intelligence.

 

As a matter of fact, the only thing lower than a journalist that isn’t a politician would be a social justice warrior.

 

Social justice warriors are modern day Thomas Bowdlers. They are the kind of people who will deface the Sistine Chapel because it offends them. They would rip apart the Pieta because it’s offensive. They have a lot in common with the Taliban and that ilk in that they will destroy something priceless and precious, something that can never be rebuilt, repaired, or replaced, with the same mindless self-righteous zealotry that saw the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan. These are the same kind of people who have destroyed (in order) academia, the arts, the news media, the broadcast industry, the publishing and literary industry, the school system, the movie and television studios, and the music industry.[1] Not satisfied with that, they’re going after the last hold-outs to their Puritanical tyranny — indie writers, comic books, and video games.

 

Social justice warriors cannot stand the thought that someone out there, somewhere, might not be in sync with their groupthink. Some of us out here might honestly believe in marriage equality, a truly colorblind society, legal equality of the sexes (even when it might not work in women’s favor), and still have absolutely no problem with a world where Playboy, World of Warcraft, the Mona Lisa, Shakespeare, Larry Correia, Sarah Hoyt, Robert Heinlein, and A Canticle for Leibowitz exist. Some of us even enjoy almost all of those things while still contentedly working alongside a gay FTM black man, having a lesbian sister, a Southern Baptist mother and a Roman Catholic father, and going to an Eastern Orthodox church every Sunday.

 

I’m not delusional enough to think that my books are high art. They aren’t. They are pretty good reads with interesting characters and a fun plot. They’re not going to be assigned as homework in two hundred years. But, they do sell fairly well considering that I am my own marketing department. I’ve heard plenty of good comments and constructive criticism. I doubt that many of our current games will be remembered in a century and I can guarantee that almost none of our movies or television shows will be remembered because there’s little that is actually memorable about them aside from a handful of shows that ignore social justice warriors and focus on telling a good yarn (Doctor Who, The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones).

 

The long and short of it is that we can’t let these Bowlderites destroy the last vestige of art, storytelling, and original thinking in our culture. We probably won’t let that happen at any rate because we’re geeks and nerds. We’re the people who built the Internet so that it treats censorship as damage and routes around it. We’re the people who invented TOR. We’re the guys and gals who made Amazon popular. We’re the ones who have dragged civilization and culture kicking and screaming into the Digital Age. And, by and large, we’re not sexist. We’re not bigoted. We couldn’t care less what people do in their bedrooms (so long as it’s consensual), whether or not they go to church, or anything like that. Gamers, geeks, and nerds are probably the most open, inclusive, welcoming, and tolerant groups in existence. We’re not going to let the Ministry of Truth wannabes tell us what kind of books we can or cannot read anymore than we let the Roman Catholic church tell us the same. We’re not going to let these groupthink weenies tell us what kind of games we can or cannot play anymore than we let Congress tell us that. We’re not going to let a bunch of pretentious fakes tell us anything — especially when any one of us (on average) knows a hell of a lot more about history, law, tech, art, literature, grammar, and debating than any of those dopes.

 

So, let’s quit letting them push us around. They’ve cowed the popular crowds and the in-groups by threatening to call them names and spread nasty rumors about them if they don’t cave in to peer pressure and wear the right jeans and shirts, use the right words, make fun of the right people, and go to the right parties. Fuck that, mates. We’re the ones who got made fun of, who don’t get to go to those parties and we’re all past the point of caring about that kind of petty crap. We’re going to keep on keeping on and if the SJWs don’t like it…well, we’ll treat them the way we treat Jack Thompson whenever he starts running his mouth. And, if they don’t get the picture after learning that we know that they’re a big joke…we’re the ones who built the Internet, guys. We can always reprogram the damned thing to keep them locked away from us the same way we keep our toddlers from playing with our gadgets.

 

Who knows? Maybe locking them off in a kiddie corral where they can’t hurt themselves or anyone else would be for the best. Maybe once we show that these morons have absolutely no clue what they’re talking about, the rest of the culture will start to wonder just why they were so willing to throw themselves and their priceless pieces of art off a bridge just because a bunch of SJWs told them to.

 

— G.K.

 

[1]Exactly how they’ve managed to destroy all of these things will be the subject of future entries. This one is already clocking in at almost 1.5k words and if I get into this, we could be here until Christmas.

The Bill of Rights and Other Amendments — With Explanations!

by
The Bill of Rights and Other Amendments -- With Explanations!

The first ten amendments to the Constitution are collectively known as “The Bill of Rights.” They were not originally included in the Constitution because the Framers felt that the enumerated and forbidden powers were enough to ensure the liberties of the people of the United States. However, there were factions and states that were uneasy about ratifying the Constitution as it was. So, in order to secure ratification, the Framers agreed to add the Bill of Rights.

 

Almost all of the amendments are what we call “negative rights.” That doesn’t mean that they’re bad things — it means that the assumption is that the people have these rights “endowed by their Creator” already and that the government is explicitly forbidden from infringing upon them. The concept of negative rights is very much a central part of the American psyche and it’s important to understand that if you want to understand Americans and their government and political philosophy. However, a full explanation of negative rights versus positive rights is worth an entry in and of itself so that will come later.

 

 

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances[1].

 

 

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed[2].

 

 

Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law[3].

 

 

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized[4].

 

 

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation[5].

 

 

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence[6].

 

 

Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law[7].

 

 

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted[8].

 

 

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people[9].

 

 

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people[10].

 

 

Amendment XI
Passed by Congress March 4, 1794. Ratified February 7, 1795.

 

Note: Article III, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 11.

 

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State[11].

 

 

Amendment XII
Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.

 

Note: A portion of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th amendment.

 

The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; — the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; — The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. –]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States[12].

 

*Superseded by section 3 of the 20th amendment.

 

 

Amendment XIII
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.

 

Note: A portion of Article IV, section 2, of the Constitution was superseded by the 13th amendment.

 

Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction[13].

 

Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

 

Amendment XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

 

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws[14].

 

Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State[15].

 

Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability[16].

 

Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void[17].

 

Section 5.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

 

*Changed by section 1 of the 26th amendment.

 

 

Amendment XV
Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870.

 

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude[18]—

 

Section 2.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

 

Amendment XVI
Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.

 

Note: Article I, section 9, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 16.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration[19].

 

 

Amendment XVII
Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratified April 8, 1913.

 

Note: Article I, section 3, of the Constitution was modified by the 17th amendment.

 

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures[20].

 

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

 

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

 

 

Amendment XVIII
Passed by Congress December 18, 1917. Ratified January 16, 1919. Repealed by amendment 21.

 

Section 1.
After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited[21].

 

Section 2.
The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

Section 3.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress[22].

 

 

Amendment XIX
Passed by Congress June 4, 1919. Ratified August 18, 1920.

 

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex[23].

 

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

 

Amendment XX
Passed by Congress March 2, 1932. Ratified January 23, 1933.

 

Note: Article I, section 4, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of this amendment. In addition, a portion of the 12th amendment was superseded by section 3.

 

Section 1.
The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

 

Section 2.
The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

 

Section 3.
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified[24].

 

Section 4.
The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

 

Section 5.
Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.

 

Section 6.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

 

 

Amendment XXI
Passed by Congress February 20, 1933. Ratified December 5, 1933.

 

Section 1.
The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

 

Section 2.
The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

 

Section 3.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

 

 

Amendment XXII
Passed by Congress March 21, 1947. Ratified February 27, 1951.

 

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term[25].

 

Section 2.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

 

 

Amendment XXIII
Passed by Congress June 16, 1960. Ratified March 29, 1961.

 

Section 1.
The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

 

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment[26].

 

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

 

Amendment XXIV
Passed by Congress August 27, 1962. Ratified January 23, 1964.

 

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax[27].

 

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

 

Amendment XXV
Passed by Congress July 6, 1965. Ratified February 10, 1967.

 

Note: Article II, section 1, of the Constitution was affected by the 25th amendment.

 

Section 1.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

 

Section 2.
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

 

Section 3.
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

 

Section 4.
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

 

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office[28].

 

 

Amendment XXVI
Passed by Congress March 23, 1971. Ratified July 1, 1971.

 

Note: Amendment 14, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 1 of the 26th amendment.

 

Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age[29].

 

Section 2.
The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

 

Amendment XXVII
Originally proposed Sept. 25, 1789. Ratified May 7, 1992.

 

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened[30].

 

[1]The First Amendment is probably the greatest sentence ever written in all of human history. It forbids Congress (and the States) from establishing an official religion, from prohibiting any other religions (though certain religious practices such as slavery and human sacrifice and the like can be forbidden), from using prior restraint to stop publications that are critical of the government or its officials, from regulating or forbidding people from gathering together to protest, and from forbidding people from suing the government in cases where it is in the wrong.

 

[2]The Second Amendment is the favored whipping boy of the Bill of Rights. A few notes: a “militia” is a group of regular able-bodied men who are not part of an established army and who thus, have to bring their own weapons to fight with. If you bring your own weapons, you’re part of a militia. If you are given your weapons by someone else (like the government), you’re part of an army. That’s why being able to own weapons (not just guns, but weapons of any kind that aren’t an intrinsic danger to others just by nature of their existence and proximity)* is an individual right.

 

The Second Amendment also ensures that the people of the United States will always have the ultimate power to overthrow their government by force of arms if the government becomes tyrannical. Recall that in the Declaration of Independence it is written that:

…Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Well, it would be rather difficult to pull off the whole “altering/abolishing of a government” if the government had all the weapons and the people had nothing but words and rocks, now wouldn’t it? And no, the American people aren’t just going to “trust” that their government won’t screw them over. It’s barely been two and a half centuries since the Founding of the country and already the government has a long history of riding roughshod over liberties — especially in recent years with the “War on Drugs,” the “War on Terrorism,” the complete raping of the Commerce Clause, and the government’s tendency to vote itself exempt from the laws it enforces on everyone else. I’m not saying that the time for violent revolution is now or that it will ever come. I am, however, saying that the government respects the people (and their liberties) a lot more when the people can shoot back.

 

*A gun, a knife, a sword, a tank, a car, a cannon, cannonballs, bullets, slingshots, slings, lances, spears, bows and arrows, rocks, petroleum, wine bottles, beer bottles (this could get rather long) and things like that aren’t intrinsically dangerous. I could put a loaded gun on my desk pointed right at me and it’s not going to shoot me by itself anymore than any of the knives in my kitchen drawer will jump up and stab me or my car will wreck itself and kill me. All of those things require a human agent to set them off. Weapons that are intrinsically dangerous and can, arguably, be restricted from civilian possession are things like: nuclear weapons, fissionable materials, high explosives, poisonous or highly corrosive chemicals, gas and chemical weapons like mustard, Sarin, etc, biological weapons like plagues. Those are all things that, even with the best security and maintenance, could go off or get out of control and endanger people nearby and do not require a human element to set off. See the difference?

 

[3]This was passed largely in response to the Quartering Acts the British had inflicted on the colonies. It’s rarely been violated (it’s probably the only amendment that hasn’t been) but there is a definite argument that the current NSA crap where they load little back-doors and all into software and into the firmware of commercial devices could be construed as violating this. But then, I’m not a lawyer.

 

[4]This amendment stopped the “general warrant” crap by forcing the government to state exactly what it was after and where it thought to find it. A judge had to sign off on the warrant and, at first, the officials enforcing the warrant were supposed to be careful not to damage anything unless absolutely necessary. In recent decades, the police have gotten away with ignoring the Fourth Amendment because of the drug war and the militarization of the police force. Far too many judges just rubber stamp warrants now and prosecutors are rarely held to account for using illegally obtained evidence or the fruit of that poisoned tree.

 

[5]The Fifth Amendment does a lot of things. First of all, the most common usage is when someone “takes the Fifth” or “pleads the Fifth” in court. This means that they are refusing to testify because they may be compelled to testify against themselves. It doesn’t mean they’re guilty. But, you can’t take the Fifth on some questions and not on others. You either take it for everything or nothing (I think).

 

The Fifth Amendment also prevents the government from trying someone over and over again for the same exact crime. If the government can’t win a conviction on their first attempt at trying someone for a specific instance of a crime, then they can’t try again. It’s arguable that the whole recent trend of the Federal government trying someone for a similar crime if the State government acquits them is double jeopardy.

 

Finally, the Fifth Amendment forces the government to actually indict someone (meaning they have to have evidence of a crime and that person’s connection to it) instead of holding them indefinitely. It also forces the government to pay for any property it seizes instead of leaving the owner high and dry.

 

[6]This amendment guarantees the right to a criminal trial by jury and that the jury be composed of impartial members to ensure that the trial is fair. It also forces the government to hold the trial sooner rather than later. The accused also gets to cross examine witnesses who speak against him and to confront his accuser. Arguably, this amendment is being actively violated concerning rape cases at the moment — especially on college campuses where the accused can be punished without ever knowing who filed a claim against him or what the claim actually is (and universities can be considered part of the government since they are established and paid for by the government in many places). It is being passively violated by the lack of judges and juries in many places and the fact that some people are forced to wait for months or years to stand trial because of the backlog.

 

[7]Civil cases concerning more than $20 can be tried by a jury and if they are jury trials, there’s no chance to appeal the jury’s verdict (as I understand it). I’m not sure how this one works, actually, considering that I’ve heard of several patent cases tried by a jury that then had one of the litigants appeal the decision (like Apple v Samsung).

 

[8]The government can’t require that someone pay a billion trillion dollars in bail for possession of marijuana (though it can require a million dollars for something like murder). And, the government can only imprison or execute someone. It can’t torture them or force them to “reform.” Execution isn’t cruel in and of itself so long as the manner in which it is carried out doesn’t involve excessive pain and results in a relatively quick death.

 

[9]This means that just because it’s not in the Bill of Rights doesn’t mean it’s forbidden. The assumption is always that the people have the right to do anything they want that isn’t explicitly forbidden.

 

[10]If the US government isn’t explicitly allowed to do it, then they are forbidden from doing it and the power to do whatever it is resides either within the State governments or within the people themselves. This one gets ignored a lot. 🙁

 

[11]Eleventh Amendment at The Free Dictionary has the best explanation:

The text of the Eleventh Amendment limits the power of federal courts to hear lawsuits against state governments brought by the citizens of another state or the citizens of a foreign country. The Supreme Court has also interpreted the Eleventh Amendment to bar federal courts from hearing lawsuits instituted by citizens of the state being sued and lawsuits initiated by the governments of foreign countries. For example, the state of New York could invoke the Eleventh Amendment to protect itself from being sued in federal court by its own residents, residents of another state, residents of a foreign country, or the government of a foreign country.

 

[12]This amendment resolved the problems with the Electoral College being able to elect the President and the Vice President separately (with the Vice President being the runner-up in the election). It allowed for the Electors to have only one vote (instead of two) and also made it possible for a President to select a Vice President who would work with him instead of against him as had happened when two political opponents were elected President and Vice President (John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in 1796).

 

[13]This amendment was passed after the Civil War and during Reconstruction and abolished the institution of slavery entirely in the United States.

 

[14]This amendment was passed after the Civil War and during Reconstruction. It granted citizenship to the freed slaves and forbade the State governments from revoking citizenship rights and liberties or infringing upon them. It also forbade the States from denying equal protection of law to any group of citizens. The citizenship clause also opened up the on-going argument over “birth tourism” as it redefined citizenship to apply to anyone born within the physical United States whether their parents were citizens or not.

 

[15]This amendment also forms the basis for the “right to privacy” that was invoked in Griswold v Connecticut and Roe v Wade. Further, it undid the Three-Fifths Compromise by including all the freed slaves as whole people for considering representation. The amendment also allowed the right to vote to be withheld on the basis of criminal convictions or rebellion.

 

[16]This part of the amendment was to keep former Confederate officers or loyalists from holding office.

 

[17]This part was intended to spell out that the former Confederates couldn’t sue for the loss of their slaves under the Fifth Amendment and to let England and France know that the money they’d lent to the Confederacy wasn’t going to be paid back by the United States (since the debt wasn’t incurred by the United States). However, recent events have led to speculation that this section might give the president unilateral authority to raise or lower the debt ceiling and to demand revenues to pay off debts.

 

[18]This amendment was intended to keep States from infringing on the voting rights of freed slaves in any manner. However, courts in the late 1800s interpreted this amendment’s power narrowly and ruled that race-neutral infringements were legal (ex: poll taxes, literacy tests, etc) so long as they applied equally to everyone.

 

[19]This is the income tax amendment. Prior to it, revenues were generally raised by tariffs and excise taxes. Direct taxes were levied by the State governments and Congress had to request a specific dollar amount from each state who then collected it in whatever manner they had decided in their own laws.

 

[20]This allows for the direct election of Senators by the people of each State instead of via appointment by the State legislature or governor. It was passed to try to get rid of the corruption whereby state legislatures were induced to elect Senators in return for corporate (or other) favors from the gilded-age companies. However, not only did this amendment fail to do that, it diluted the Senate’s purpose in the federal government and has led to an overreach of power and the loss of many liberties both to the States and to the people. Additionally, as can be seen by then governor of Illinois Rod Blagojevich’s soliciting bribes from candidates for his appointment to the Senate, the Seventeenth amendment has made it so that you only have to corrupt one person to purchase a Senate seat instead of several dozen.

 

[21]Ah. Good ol’ Prohibition. This was the only amendment to be repealed. It also has made Congress (and the States) very leery of “popular cultural” amendments to the Constitution because cultural and social norms do change over time and it’s damned hard to repeal an amendment later down the road even if it’s become extremely unpopular.

 

[22]This is a sunset clause. Earlier amendments didn’t have them so many of them are technically still pending even if there is no hope of them ever being ratified.

 

[23]Technically, this “gave” women the right to vote. What it really did was tell the states who had laws forbidding women to vote (or forbidding them from voting in certain kinds of elections) that they couldn’t do that anymore. There were actually a lot of states that allowed women to vote to varying degrees prior to this amendment. You can check more on that at Wikipedia.

 

[24]This amendment removed much of the “lame duck” term for an out-going Congress and President. With the advances in transportation technology during the latter 1800s, it was no longer necessary to give elected officials four months post-election to make their way to Washington DC. The delay had also caused problems with responding to the Secession Crisis in 1861 and to the Great Depression.

 

[25]This limits the President to only two terms in that office. It was passed in response to Franklin D. Roosevelt being elected four times. He was not the first to seek a third term of office but he was the first to win one. Being President for so long allowed him to do a lot of things that have not worked out for the best for the US — inflating the chairs on the Supreme Court, court-packing, a lot of his economic packages that have devolved into little more than vote-buying or State-buying, and the corruption of the judiciary. Yes, FDR helped to defeat the Nazis in a big way by keeping Great Britain from going under but he still did a lot of damage during his thirteen years (he died shortly after starting his fourth term) as President.

 

[26]This amendment allows citizens living in Washington DC to vote for the President. People in Washington DC don’t have representation in Congress and so didn’t have electors. They also aren’t a state with their own legislature and governor. Instead, DC is generally “governed” by Congress and its local city officials.

 

[27]This amendment closed the loopholes for “race-neutral” means of disenfranchising blacks. No more poll taxes.

 

[28]This amendment clears up the confusion over whether or not the Vice President became President if the President died or was removed from office. Convention held that it did but there was no means of appointing or filling the office of Vice President when that happened. This amendment also clarified the order of President Succession in the event that a nuclear attack killed a lot of the US government officials who would normally have been in line.

 

[29]This amendment lowered the voting age to 18. It was passed in response to the protests of many men who were drafted and sent to fight in Vietnam. The draft age was 18 but voting was, by and large, at 21 in most states (a few did allow voting before 21). “Old enough to fight, old enough to vote,” was the philosophy of this amendment. Also, it had the effect of allowing 18-year-olds to enter into contracts, get married, purchase alcohol, and enjoy other fruits of adulthood.

 

[30]The only surprise is that it took Congress over 200 years to get around to legally protecting their paychecks which is what this amendment does.

The Constitution of the United States — With Explanations!

by
The Constitution of the United States -- With Explanations!

Another extremely important document to understand if you’re going to understand American government and politics is the Constitution. Yes, even now, almost 225 years after its ratification, it is still the cornerstone and chief document of the United States government. As much as many might wish the government to ignore certain portions or provisions, for a government official to do so is itself a violation of the Constitution and possibly grounds for being forced out of office, impeached, or even tried for treason (depending on the violation and its severity, of course). This is rare, though, because, until recent years, knowledge of the Constitution was a requirement for graduating high school and was a source of pride for anyone who wanted to run for office.

 

If you were to write the Constitution by hand (and don’t have super-giant handwriting), the whole thing will fit on four pages of parchment or six pages of standard-sized college-rule notebook paper. So, don’t whine at me that it’s too long or too dense to understand. It’s really not. The average English-reading adult should be able to read through the Constitution of the United States in about fifteen minutes and should be able to understand the language it’s written in. The simple fact that far too many people don’t bother is extremely sad and extremely frustrating.

 

Quick note: I have not included the Bill of Rights in this post. They need their own post which will be next in this “important documents” series.

 

 

Preamble
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare[1], and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

 

Article I[2]
SECTION. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives[3].

 

SECTION. 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

 

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State[4] in which he shall be chosen.

 

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons[5]. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to choose three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

 

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies[6].

 

The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers[7]; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment[8].

 

SECTION. 3. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote[9].

 

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year[10]; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies[11].

 

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

 

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

 

The Senate shall chose their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

 

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments[12]. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present[13].

 

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

 

SECTION. 4. The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.

 

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

 

SECTION. 5. Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

 

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

 

Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

 

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting[14].

 

SECTION. 6. The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place[15].

 

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

 

SECTION. 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills[16].

 

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

 

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be re-passed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

 

SECTION. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States[17];

 

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

 

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States[18], and with the Indian Tribes;

 

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

 

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

 

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

 

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

 

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

 

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

 

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

 

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

 

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

 

To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

 

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

 

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

 

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings;-And

 

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

 

SECTION. 9. The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

 

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it[19].

 

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed[20].

 

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

 

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State[21].

 

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

 

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time[22].

 

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State[23].

 

SECTION. 10. No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

 

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress.

 

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay[24].

 

 

Article II[25]
SECTION. 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

 

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

 

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall choose from them by Ballot the Vice President[26].

 

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

 

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States[27].

 

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

 

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

 

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

 

SECTION. 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

 

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

 

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session[28].

 

SECTION. 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed[29], and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

 

SECTION. 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors[30].

 

 

Article III[31]
SECTION. 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

 

SECTION. 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

 

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

 

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed[32].

 

SECTION. 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

 

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

 

 

Article IV[33]
SECTION. 1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof[34].

 

SECTION. 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

 

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

 

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

 

SECTION. 3. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

 

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

 

SECTION. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence[35].

 

 

Article V[36]
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

 

 

Article VI[37]
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

 

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding[38].

 

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States[39].

 

 

Article VII
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.

 

 

[1]“General Welfare” gets misunderstood a lot these days as meaning that the federal government should provide monetary welfare for the needy. The way it’s used in the Preamble refers only to things that could benefit all citizens of the United States — roads, the Armed Forces, public hospitals, and the like.

 

[2]Article I establishes the legislative branch of the US government — the House of Representatives and the Senate. Since this branch and its two houses are established independently by the Constitution, they can’t be dismissed or ignored by the other branches of the government. Unlike in a more parliamentary system such as is used in the UK or France, the President cannot send Congress home and cannot force new elections. Congressional elections, authority, and existence is independent of the executive who has no real legislative authority.

 

[3]The US Congress is bicameral — consisting of two houses. This was actually a huge debate during the Constitutional Convention. Smaller states (those with less people) wanted a single house where every state got one vote (the New Jersey plan). Larger, more populous states, wanted a single house where representation depended on how many people lived in the state (the Virginia plan). The Convention settled upon a compromise (the Connecticut Compromise) — two houses. Seats in the House of Representatives is based on the number of people in a given state but the Senate is always two Senators from a given state. Both houses have to agree on legislation before it goes to the President for signing or for veto which puts small and large states on an equal footing in the government.

 

[4]Representatives of a state and Senators from a state must be residents of that state. This was to combat the “absentee landlord/representative” problem that was prevalent in Britain at the time where a member of Parliament might hold a seat over a part of the country he’d never visited. If you want to be a Congressperson for a state, you need to go and live in that state and establish residency (each state has different requirements) within that state first.

 

[5]Ah, the good ol’ Three Fifths Compromise. This meant one slave counted as three-fifths of a person for representation. It was pretty much repealed and subverted with the ending of slavery after the Civil War. However, it was necessary to get the Constitution ratified since the slave states would have refused to ratify the Constitution without it but the free states objected to the proposal to count slaves entirely towards population (which would have inflated the representation from the slave states by a fair margin).

 

[6]If a Representative dies, falls too ill to carry out their duties, or is removed from office, the governor of that state must call for a special election within their state immediately. Unlike with a Senator, the governor cannot appoint a temporary replacement to fill out the term of office — the Representative has to be elected by the people of that state because that’s the whole purpose of the House of Representatives — to represent the people of the different states. The states themselves are represented in the Senate.

 

[7]Fun fact: you don’t have to be elected to the House of Representatives to be the Speaker of the House. The majority party could elect any US citizen who is qualified to hold office as their Speaker. Generally, though, the Speaker does come from the House of Representatives.

 

[8]If someone is in need of being impeached in the federal government, the House of Representatives will have to decide that. Now, impeaching someone does not mean they’ll be removed from office. Impeachment is more like an indictment than a conviction. Thus far, Congress has used the power of impeachment only 19 times. Only two presidents have ever been impeached — Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Neither was removed from office. Nixon wasn’t impeached — he resigned before the House could meet to vote on it.

 

[9]The Senate is where the states themselves are supposed to be represented. The Senate’s job is not to represent the interest of the people of a state but rather to represent the interest of the state itself — the people are already represented in the House. This is why the Senate is the place where treaties are ratified and executive appointments are decided — because the Senators are looking after the long-term interest of their state.

 

Senators were originally appointed or elected only by the legislature of the states they were residents of. Direct election of the Senate is a very recent thing and it has definitely upset the balance of power within the federal government and weakened and diluted the power of the Senate itself a great deal.

 

[10]This class thing has nothing to do with rank or importance. It’s strictly about deciding when the Senators from a given state have to be re-elected. Since Senators serve six year terms and the Senate is necessary for a lot of important functions (treaties and the like), it’s not a good idea to have the whole house out for election every sixth year. So, every two years 1/3 of the seats in the Senate are elected within their state.

 

[11]Senators can be appointed by the governor or the legislature of their state (depending on the laws within that state) if the seat is vacant because a Senator died, was removed from office, or is no longer able to function as a Senator.

 

[12]If the House passes the Articles of Impeachment against a federal official, the Senate is the one who votes on whether or not to remove that person from office.

 

[13]To be removed from office, 2/3s of the Senate has to vote for it.

 

[14]This forbids secret meetings or “special government councils” from getting together to make and pass laws in a bid to get around dealing with the rest of the legislative branch.

 

[15]Just because you’re in Congress doesn’t exempt you from being prosecuted for a crime. However, you can’t be arrested if you’re on your way to Congress or if Congress is in session and you are there as an elected official. Now, once Congress is out of session, you’re fair game.

 

[16]If the government needs to raise revenue, only the House of Representatives can start the process to do so. All bills regarding taxation have to originate in the House. This goes back to the whole “no taxation without representation” thing that was what sparked the American revolution. The Senate can’t create a revenue bill because the Senate represents the states — not the people! And yes, this is a Big Fucking Deal and it is part of why the ACA is so controversial.

 

[17]Article I, Section 8 is also called the “enumerated powers” part of the Constitution. This is where all of the things that Congress is allowed to do are spelled out. Anything not in this list is reserved either to another branch of the government or, if it’s not in the Constitution at all, to the state governments or to the people of the states.

 

[18]Welcome to the horribly abused “Commerce Clause.” Congress was originally given the power to regulate interstate trade — things like making certain that one state didn’t impose special taxes on goods from another state or settling commercial disagreements between states or to regulate (uniformly) all trade or industry within the United States. These days, it’s been abused to regulate things that could hardly be called trade (such as fining a farmer for growing wheat on his own land when he never intended to sell it but instead to use it to feed his livestock) or things that could hardly be called “interstate” (such as marijuana growers in Colorado still being subject to federal raids and seizures even when their product never crosses into or out of another state).

 

[19]Habeas corpus is what forces the government to get a court order to continue to detain a person awaiting trial. It’s what keeps the government from just locking someone up and never checking to see if the government has a case against that person or even has the right person locked up. This was put in to keep things like “being held for the Monarch’s pleasure” from happening. Habeas corpus can only be suspended in very narrow circumstances and has happened only twice at the federal level.

 

[20]A bill of attainder was where a legislature (such as Parliament) could vote to declare a person guilty of a crime without that person having a trial. These kind of things are expressly forbidden in the United States. Ex post facto laws are also forbidden — if something wasn’t illegal when the person did it and then it later became illegal (such as selling alcohol), the person couldn’t be arrested and tried for performing acts that were once legal (or, at the very least, not illegal). This also prevents punishments from being increased if the severity of the punishment is later changed by law.

 

[21]States cannot impose taxes on goods coming from other states and Congress can’t impose those taxes for them. Goods moving from one state to another are free and clear.

 

[22]Congress does have to keep a good accounting of their expenditures and keep a budget. This is a big deal and it’s part of why people are upset with the current Congress where the Senate has refused to pass a budget bill in six years. Continuing resolutions are not considered adequate enough to fulfill this obligation.

 

[23]Once you’re an American (whether it’s at birth or later), you can’t become a noble somewhere else unless Congress passes a special act to allow it. Also, if you’re a noble from another country, your title means squat here.

 

[24]This section keeps the states from doing things that are reserved only for Congress.

 

[25]Article II deals with the executive branch of the government. Again, the executive draws power and existence from the Constitution itself and cannot be easily removed or ignored by the other branches.

 

[26]Right, so, two big points to work with here. First, the Electoral College. Remember back in footnote #3 I mentioned something called the Connecticut Compromise and how it was necessary to get the Constitution ratified? Well, the Electoral College is part of that. The small states did not want the executive to only concern himself with the larger states (which is exactly what would happen with direct popular election) and the larger states did not want the executive to ignore them in order to court a bunch of smaller states (which is what would happen if each state had only one vote). So, the executive is elected by the Electoral College where each state gets the same number of votes in it as they would have in the combined House and Senate. This balances the power between the large and small states and forces the executive branch to care about the concerns of all the states, not just a handful.

 

The other fun thing is that this is one of the first things that got changed about the way the executive is elected. Originally, there was no vice president chosen to run with a president. Instead, the vice president was whoever came in second in the presidential election. This worked well with the first president — George Washington. However, when John Adams was elected, Thomas Jefferson (a member of an opposing party) came in second. Realizing the problems inherent in this particular system, future presidents selected their own vice presidents and the Electors voted for both together.

 

[27]This section has cropped up a bit since John McCain was nominated. Only someone who is a native and/or natural born citizen of the United States can become president or vice president. If you immigrated here after birth — even if you were only a day old — you can’t become president or vice president. However, if you were born aboard to at least one American parent (such as if your father was serving in the Armed Forces overseas or your mother was a diplomat assigned to a foreign nation) and you had American citizenship from birth, then you need to have lived inside the United States for fourteen years and then you can run for the presidency. But, if you have never lived in the United States, you cannot run for these offices even if both of your parents are American and you have American citizenship.

 

[28]This one’s caused problems lately. The Senate must be consulted on almost all executive appointments. However, if the Senate is not in session, the president can make a recess appointment (this is supposed to only be used in an emergency). This isn’t supposed to be used as an end run around getting the Senate’s confirmation and it can only be used when the Senate is completely out of session — not when they’ve called for a temporary adjournment of proceedings so they can go home and go to sleep for the night and resume things the next morning.

 

[29]This one is another one that people are beating their heads against lately. The president can’t pick and choose what laws to enforce or upon whom to enforce them. The president can’t decide not to enforce parts of laws he doesn’t like or that are inconvenient to him or to his interests. He has to enforce the laws as they were written and passed by Congress. Failure to do so is a violation of his oath of office and is unconstitutional. He also can’t refuse to enforce the law against his friends or people he likes.

 

[30]If you want to know how to get kicked out of office, here you go.

 

[31]Article III establishes the judiciary. Again, since this branch exists independently of the others, it can’t be ignored.

 

Additionally, since Article III establishes the US Supreme Court as the highest court in the United States, this is why the US government cannot recognize the International Criminal Court. We’d have to amend the Constitution to allow for it and the chances of that happening are slim to none because amending the Constitution is hard.

 

[32]The federal government really isn’t supposed to have any power over crimes within a state or over multiple states. This clause also spells out how jurisdiction is decided in criminal cases.

 

[33]Article IV is concerned with the states and not the federal government.

 

[34]This is the “full faith and credit” clause that gets bandied about a lot. This means that each state has to recognize the rights and privileges of other states — even if those same rights and privileges don’t exist within that state. This is what lets someone from New York drive a car in Oregon without having to get an Oregon driver’s license. This is why a couple married in Texas can move to Florida and not have to get married again. The two current areas of controversy here are gay marriage and gun permits. Gay marriage will probably wind up falling alongside the same lines as cousin marriage (in some states, you can’t marry your first cousin. However, if you married your first cousin in a state that allowed it and then moved to a state that forbade it, the marriage is still valid) and gun permits really should fall in line with driver’s licenses. Seeing Article IV challenges on these will definitely be interesting.

 

[35]Republican here refers strictly to the form of government (representative as opposed to a democracy where everyone meets to vote on everything), not the current Republican party.

 

[36]If you don’t like part of the Constitution and want to change it, Article V lays out the two processes for amending it. Only the Congressional route has ever been done. There are talks about getting an Article V governors’ convention together, though, to deal with some of the abuses coming out of Congress itself.

 

[37]Article VI is a continuation of government section. It basically reassured places we were in debt to that a new government wasn’t going to decide not to pay the old government’s debts.

 

[38]This part establishes the hierarchy of laws at the federal level. However, even though treaties are the “law of the land,” they cannot violate the Constitution and be ratified. The Constitution will always win. This section isn’t a way to do an end run around the amendment process and is another reason there are some treaties we can’t ratify. And yes, it is a big fucking deal. Don’t like it? See Article V.

 

[39]There can be no religious or anti-religious test required to hold office in the US. For a long time, in Britain, only Anglicans could hold office. The US had no desire to follow down that path and exclude people of different (or no) faiths from holding office. However, the current crap over Supreme Court justices and abortion has come dangerously close to being a religious test and could get the entire Senate in trouble for violating this if they don’t start watching it.

The Declaration of Independence — With Explanations!

by
The Declaration of Independence -- With Explanations!

If you’re going to try to make sense of American government and politics, even in the twenty-first century, you’d do well to know and understand what the Declaration of Independence (as well as a few other documents) has to say because the beliefs behind it still influence American thinking and politics to this day and, Cthulhu willing, will continue to influence Americans until the Earth is no more.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America[1],

 

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.[2]

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes[3]; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.[4]

  1. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  2. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
  3. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
  4. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  5. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  6. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  7. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
  8. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
  9. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
  10. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
  11. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
  12. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
  13. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
  14. For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
  15. For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
  16. For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
  17. For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
  18. For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
  19. For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
  20. For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
  21. For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
  22. For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
  23. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
  24. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  25. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  26. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
  27. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.[5]

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.[6]

 

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren.[7] We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

 

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

[1]This text is copied from the National Archives and Records Administration which maintains the document with the older English spellings that were originally penned down onto the parchment by Thomas Jefferson. So, don’t bug me about “typos” or “bad grammar” unless you’ve got a time machine and went back and changed the way they wrote and spoke in the late 1700s.

 

[2]This is the preamble and the introduction that lay out the reason for declaring independence.

 

[3]This is known as the “light and transient causes” clause which gets brought up just about any time some hothead starts talking about rebelling and/or seceding from the current government. Basically, the gist of it is that yes, we have the power and the right to revolt, overthrow the government by force of arms, and institute a new government in its place. But, we shouldn’t do this lightly or for reasons that won’t matter in a few years.

 

This clause and argument are also part of why the Second Amendment is so important to Americans — if only the government has weapons, then it becomes very hard to rebel when the government becomes unjust. The American Revolutionary War kicked off when British troops went to Lexington and Concord to take the rifles, munitions, and other weapons out of the hands of the men who lived there in order to deprive them of the tools needed to defeat the British troops and continue the rebellion.

 

[4]This whole section lays out the argument that the Americans had every right to rebel and that such rights are inborn to all people. It also explains that government’s proper role isn’t one of rulership but rather one of being ruled by the will and consent of the governed. As you can tell, if you’ve read much from that era, the Revolutionaries were very influenced by the Northern Enlightenment (think Locke instead of Rousseau).

 

[5]These are the twenty-seven grievances that the colonies had with the King and with Parliament. This section can generally be divided into four parts: the King’s abuse of his executive power, the King and Parliament conspiring together to deprive the colonists of their rights as Englishmen, the complaints about the cruel and violent method the King had for dealing with the colonies, and the fact that the King ignored the colonists many times in the past when they begged for redress.

 

[6]Yeah, the Revolutionaries were definitely not fans of King George III. And, to be fair, he and Parliament had ignored almost every one of their complaints and had insulted the representatives sent to try to argue the American case before them. Benjamin Franklin was humiliated publicly by the Solicitor-General in front of the Privy Council, for instance.

 

[7]The colonists hadn’t only reached out to the King, they’d reached out to the Parliament and to the people in Britain. No one seemed inclined to listen to the problems the American colonists had or the legitimate complaints they were making. So, the British people themselves came under censure here for failing to help their fellow Brits out and standing by while the King and Parliament acted like tyrants to one group of British subjects.