Updated: Mar 15
I had an old friend contact me the other day, he said he has been watching my videos and is concerned about me being in a dark place. I told him I was happy that he was concerned and because he wanted to know, I was overjoyed to share my thoughts.
Although I was thankful for his thoughts, to be honest, in many parts, as in times we have communicated before, I was rather speechless. What I could also see was his political indifference to mine, but he brought great perspective and because of him and because of the importance of our subject matter, I decided to write this to you. Although I do appreciate our friendship, and the indifference to some degree, the most difficult part of his thoughts to me were considering Patriotism, Sedition and Insurrection and I told him I would try to explain in a post, so here it is broken into three parts. The first…Patriotism.
Patriotism: According to Webster’s 1828 Dictionary (my preferred dictionary because it was verbiage defined during the time of our Constitution,) it is defined as love of country, zealous support and defending its interests. I thought to myself, can Communists and Socialists be patriots? Certainly, they can, if they fall within the definition of the word. This alone made me uncomfortable because I don’t want anything I am doing to be misconstrued to mean that I am anything but for love of freedom and love of country. For these reasons, I don’t call myself a Conservative or a anything else if possible. I don’t even recall calling myself a patriot because the word can easily mis-understood when applying it to me.
Additionally, I am not one for labels so this one and words like words like Christian and Conservative have become arbitrary. Words today mean different things to different people and what’s worse is that today, the government narrative allows for words to be redefined at any time which lawful governments had no lawful authority. Dictionaries were in place so people understood the meanings of words so to change meanings makes dictionaries obsolete. Why update them in the first place?
If patriotism is truly a love for country and desire to defend it, it should mean that it would depend on what country you are a patriot for, right? If you are in Venezuela, and you are a patriot, you adhere to the defense of that country, meanwhile if you are an American, you would support and defend America. The question I ask is to what extreme? What is Venezuela or what is America anyway? Is patriotism the defense of a country that has words, but the meanings change, has laws but laws change, has a foundation but allows for the foundations to be destroyed or would it be to go along with everything and anything that is happening in one’s country until it falls into despotism?
Hardly, but those in control want you to think patriotism is to support and defend the country at all costs while supporting its decline without limits. Why would anyone in their right mind want to do this unless they desire to control others? Control is the one mechanism that will destroy any country, so is the decline of a nation intentional? I believe it is because throughout history, 100% of the time, once government’s gain control, they incrementally abuse it until they gain ultimate control. The sad part is that over time, anyone that opposes where the governments are going even if contrary to such origins and foundations are now the enemy of the state, even if the country was, say, founded as a Christian nation, or based on Biblical principles with a nation formed by free states that now is supporting multiculturalism, Christian persecution, and moving to abolish all separations of power and checks and balances?
Why are there people that accuse others, like me of being subversive? Why is it they say that “if we don’t get our way, we want to start a revolution?” Well, as painful as it was to hear and read, it was a good question.
What defines things like subversion, patriotism, sedition, and insurrection? Well, what defines a nation or sovereignty? What defines a city or country jurisdiction, a human, animal, or private property? What defines political party, laws or justice? Does an entity have the authority to redefine such words? What would that do to a nation or a people? Boundaries and elements declare "what is what!" Not the government! Furthermore, definitions define "what is what," so that people know “what is what,” not to make the people believe “what is what” really isn’t or is only for a short time. This is chaos, not lawful and certainly isn’t peaceful. This, as a matter of fact, supports a totalitarian police-state! Once the Police state is fully in place, they will then, ironically, force people to another certain defined standard, that they define, not you, that will also change over time but never for the better, always for the worse.
Nations, cities, counties, private property, political parties, laws and justice are defined by boundaries. For this reason, anything that is not within such boundaries is not part of that isolated entity. If a nation is not defined by borders, it cannot be defined as a nation. If cities or counties, private property, political party, laws or justice become arbitrary, are the boundaries not destroyed and would that not create chaos if nothing is defined and is continually redefined? What about people, animals or other living things? If a human or animal or food, for that matter, was biologically engineered, how much engineering would need to take place for a human to no longer be human, animal no longer an animal or food no longer a food? Or an animal not to be an animal, or food no longer be food? Should the government define that too?
If all of these arbitrary mechanisms are taking place, should the people just go along with it and anyone that doesn’t is now an enemy of the state? Would the definition of enemy change over time as well? Well, it certainly has when one grows up in a country based on foundational principles and they are incrementally destroyed, where nothing is as it used to be is because everything has been manipulated? At what point is it okay to defend one’s country, when it isn’t a country anymore or should we go along with that too because if we do, we stand for nothing and will fall for anything?
Attorneys and judges allegedly fight to maintain justice, and the integrity of the law. Physicians allegedly depend on the proper information to maintain health, city and county councils allegedly defend what they do because it is what has always been done. Now, we are told that people that want to defend their country from being destroyed can’t because they will be seen as anti-government? What about when the government becomes anti-freedom or what happens when people become so ignorant, they no longer know better, what then? Who defines anti-government anyway? The government? How Ironic!
If I must be considered a patriot, I will conclude and admit, I do and will zealously defend my country but with borders. Although I will and have put up with many abuses, this is because I am hoping for an eventual peaceful return to civility but I do not support the rise of totalitarianism, or the overthrow of our republic by an oligarchical elite or support globalism, even if people accuse me of being anti-American because those that do have no idea what America was or would be or should be or why.
The very idea that we have an established rule of law, laws of nature and physics and so on in this country and borders surrounding everything further shows the dangerous arbitrariness of where we are going if we allow all we know to be true to be skewed at any time by an entity that has, throughout history controlled its people and without lawful authority. I guess ultimately though, patriotism can be defined any way the majority would like to chain the minority but the problem is those chains will eventually enslave us all.
Ultimately though, if words really are supposed to change over time and people find the definition of patriot troubling, should they ask how and when the word was defined and for how long and by whom?
In my view, we are no different than the Tower of Babel. Not only are we trying to become gods unto ourselves, but the government is also trying to be god to rule over us. Additionally, God had decided because of people’s sin that they would all speak different languages. Today it is all the same only the language is the same, but the words have just been redefined to where no one knows what anyone else means or says. This has become part of the new god, even for you agnostics and atheists.
Your government defines when it is okay to fight for freedom or subject yourselves to slavery "in the name of freedom" and unlawfully so! Please doesn’t just think that it effects only people of the Christian faith, it also affects those that claim to have no faith at all. The only problem is that atheists and agnostics do have faith, they have the boundless faith in government rather than the Creator which means they openly support totalitarianism rather than freedom. So much for Separation of Church and State .
Here is today's video on the topic: https://youtu.be/DeEeK6R9-hM