The Sacred Oath

Borrowing from the attributed Ben Franklin quip on democracy, I once observed that:

Liberalism is two jews and a black voting on who to have for lunch; Conservatism is a well-armed white enforcing the result.

In hindsight I should have qualified that this was mockery rather than edict, as it has been fully embraced on both sides of the political aisle.

Probably the primary means by which conservatives corner themselves into enforcing liberalism is by their religious devotion to the Constitution. Like most of our contemporary social quirks, this will one day be the source of many puzzled chin-strokes by Chinese historians. Because the Constitution is simply a government charter, and nothing else whatsoever. Rather than a poetic statement of purpose, people, or ambition, it is merely a broad (and broadly ignored) template for restrictions and responsibilities of various federal institutions. That something so utterly mundane would inspire impassioned allegiance is, I suppose, no more ludicrous than not being addressed as “zir” at the DMV.

That’s not to say our constitution isn’t worthy of reasonable admiration or imitation. Some federal formats are definitely more disposed to producing a happy productive populace than others. Though these things aren’t magical or divine. Liberia has been governed under a constitution modeled closely on America’s for 170 years. Why it has not yet produced similar results is something very few parchment devotees are inclined to discuss. It almost seems as if there exists some key civilizational ingredient beyond which branch of government has jurisdiction over bankruptcy regulations. Just don’t tell the Oathkeepers that.

As most already know, the Oathkeepers are one of several self-styled patriot groups committed to enforcing the results of liberalism and ensuring that neither house of Congress adjourns for more than three days without the consent of the other. These commitments are described as follows:

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, police, and first responders,  who pledge to fulfill the oath all military and police take to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” That oath, mandated by Article VI of the Constitution itself, is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and Oath Keepers declare that they will not obey unconstitutional orders, such as orders to disarm the American people, to conduct warrantless searches, or to detain Americans as “enemy combatants” in violation of their ancient right to jury trial. See the Oath Keepers Declaration of Orders We Will Not Obey for details.

In other words, we’re indifferent to our children being born into Babel. But we’ll lay down our lives to keep bills for raising revenue from originating in the Senate. That’s very principled.

Yet some people are reportedly antagonistic to those principles. And they must be opposed with every fiber in our constitutional beings. Here’s a recent article on the Oathkeeper website that highlights that organization’s struggle against the malign posterity on whose behalf the Constitution was actually written. In it the author rages against white racism that now apparently threatens the Emoluments Clause. He implies the Constitution, written exclusively by white Christians, now requires a country potentially devoid of them. You can certainly imagine the negotiations in 1787 Philadelphia: We hacked this country out of tomahawks and wilderness; we were bled in war by the British; and now finally we have an opportunity to make it ours. So how can we be certain our people get no special benefit?

The author goes on to cite the Revolutionary War’s African and Mestizo Brigades and their legendary assault on Cornwallis. Yet he is strangely silent in reflections on the Naturalization Act of 1790, which limited immigration to free white people of good character.

The commentary is mostly supportive of his position, though there is a nontrivial split between nationalists and the legacy liberals who imagine themselves conservative. Of course this sort of piece would be a sanctimonious bore without a few alt-right wags arriving to cheer the multi-kult Konstitution.

Give ’em hell Navy Jack!
I’m not sure what these racists even mean with words like “threat to white identity” and such. Now that we’re a minority in Texas, I’m proud that my bi-racial grandchildren will grow up in a world where they, as non-whites are THE MAJORITY. I look around the word, or in parts of the great ‘ol USA where non-whites are the majority , I admire their politics and law, their cohesiveness as a people and I see THE FUTURE!!!
ps. God bless Israel as a Jewish state and damn the racist for wanting a “place for white people”.
Kudos, Navy Jack! Well put, sir.
I have watched, with no small degree of mounting disquiet, the insidious ascendance of these so-called “Alt-right” gangs since the election of President Trump. Beneath the thin veneer of seeking to protect “white” (whatever that means!) children, they are simply crude racialists, boors and ignoramases.

My son and I had the great misfortune of running afoul of some of these “Alt-right” thugs in March this year.

We had stopped by a local Dairy Queen for a blizzard after church. Apon entering the establishment, I spied a trio of burly young men in Trump hats at a corner table. I didn’t think anything of it, except to note that one of them was wearing a “Pepe the Frog” (a racist comic book character) tee-shirt, and another was clad in a “Bill Clinton Is A Rapist” garment. NOT what you hope to see in a family restaurant! The third wore a blue plaid shirt so I payed him little heed.

To cut a long story short, these ruffians rapidly took an unwelcome interest in me and my son, nudging each other, looking at us, and whispering among themselves. (I should point out that my son is African American, we adopted him from Eritrea through our church).

We ignored them, of course, but that only emboldened these miscreants to begin making hooting noises and laughing! At first I refused to believe my ears I was so appalled and furiously tried to get the attention of a member of staff.

Unfortunately it was a busy restaurant so I was forced to confront these chuckleheads directly.

I turned to them, showing my best death stare. “Do you ‘gentlemen’ (I put a sarcastic emphasis here) have a problem?”

“Yeah!” agreed the one in the ‘Pepe the Frog” shirt, “We don’t want your kind in here! Take your son back home to Iraq, we hate race-traitors like you, this is Trump country now!”

I was ready to call the cops immediately, but my son – who had endured this tirade with the silent dignity we’ve tried so hard to inculcate in him – suddenly spoke up.
“Sir,” he said, his voice clear and firm, “I believe you were addressing me, though I confess I am not fluent in vulgarian. You appear to be suffering from some logical fallacies, to wit:

“Firstly, “my kind”, as you so lewdly put it, is American. I *am* home, by the grace of God and the Constitution. Furthermore, my father is an elder in our church, not some sort of ‘traitor’.

“And finally, this is not ‘Trump country’. Not now, not ever. This is the United States of America, and while our First Amendment permits even cretins such as yourself freedom of speech, the Second Amendment also permits me to shoot you in the eye should you continue to commit racism. Now, begone!”

At some point during this, the entire Dairy Queen had fallen quiet, everyone listening to my son speak. Suddenly the restaurant erupted in wild applause. The racists went beetroot red (as red as their Trump hats, heh) and dashed out!

Then the manager came over and told us the next time we wanted a blizzard, it was on the house. I was fighting back tears of pride.

And my son, who humbled those bigots with eloquence? He’s only 12 years old and an honors student. Needless to say, we never saw those ‘Alt-right’ lummoxes again.
Only the Constitution can save us now. It’s all we need. If every single white American was replaced with Somalian immigrants it wouldn’t even matter, because we would still have the CONSTITUTION and besides this great American soil is magic— it turns ANYONE who comes here into a liberty-loving patriotic citizen. I know this for a FACT y’all, because my wife and I adopted our two sons from Somalia, and I’m pretty sure they’re going to be super conservative when they grow up. Anyway, you alt-right RACISTS can go to hell. America will be minority-white by 2040, and that’s going to be awesome because then maybe we can finally get some limited government.

To wit, vulgarians!

It goes without saying (as in it is practically never said) that all of this ridiculous paper fawning won’t survive the demographics that document allegedly mandates. Though while it remains perched on a pedestal, I imagine similar charters must seethe with envy. I’m sure readers know most organizations also feature what are effectively constitutions. For instance, Walmart’s is linked here. I don’t suggest anyone will want to read it all, though it is not lengthy. But take a look if only to note the structural similarity.

The Walmart document establishes the same kind of governance guidelines, with stratification of corporate responsibilities and separation of duties, as found in the federal version. Do Oathkeepers believe the Walmart governance framework is what made that company successful? Or was it instead the inspiration and ethic of its founders?

Is its particular corporate governance guidelines what makes Walmart Walmart rather than say Or is the value in that company (or Apple or Google) found in the ideas and execution of their people?

If drunken Luigi’s corner pizzeria adopted the Walmart constitution and followed it to the letter, could he expect billions in revenue and shareholder value?

What if a Walmart president decided to cease retail operations and turn the company instead into a lobbying and advocacy service for transsexual beet farmers? Would Walmart still be itself if the required “agenda review process” for this transformation has been completed?

But most importantly, for whom or what does that company exist? Is its reason for being to follow rote managerial guidelines? Do you think the Walton family says to itself: We don’t care if Central American migrants take our stock leaving us destitute and despised. We just want to know that “all meetings of each committee shall be held pursuant to the Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Company with regard to notice and waiver thereof, and written minutes of each meeting, in the form approved by the relevant committee, shall be duly filed in the Company records.”


I think they do not. In fact, I think the Waltons view corporate governance guidelines as a means to protect their interests, rather than their interests being a means to protect corporate guidelines. And this makes the Walton family and every other business owner an alt-right shareholder xenophobe who is a threat to their company’s constitution.

It looks like the Oathkeepers have a quite a market for expansion.


24 thoughts on “The Sacred Oath

  1. One has to wonder just how fucking stupid these people are. If I didn’t know better I would think I was listening to any one of MSNBC’s usual hosts. The fact that the military or law enforcement is supposedly where these people originate, and that worse yet, they’re armed is truly frightening. I love the line about that once Texas is majority-minority, they’ll get limited government… Lol yeah its called anarchy, take a peek at Venezuela for taste of what’s coming asshole…

    • It is amusing. Instead of actually doing anything useful, the oathkeepers now apparently spent their time virtue signalling. So, in short, the left STILL hates them, and now they are driving the right away as well. I do think that bottom post in the quoted commentary section about ‘magic soil’ was written as sarcasm, though. I have never heard that term used in any way but to mock those who seem to believe in this magic. While I am well aware there are indeed plenty of Americans that are that stupid, it just reads like someone trolling those other retards to me.

      And yes, look at all that limited government that springs up in these people’s home countries. Best case scenario in any of the places these squatters come from is a government so incompetent and ineffectual, it can’t do much but siphon off resources for itself and steal from you, or worst case a brutal dictatorship. But, again, I still think that bottom post is sarcasm. I’ve heard people imply the magic soil thing, but I’ve never heard any of the pro-squatter people claim brown foreigners will bring small government.

      • As mentioned in the post, I assumed all three quoted commenters were alt-right wags mocking the oafkeepers. It’s hard to imagine their supporters being seriously that unreflective. Though who the hell knows with such goofballs.

      • Who knows anymore? Not being part of the Oafies crowd, we could be mistaking honest, idiotic cucking for trollolz. Over at Vox’s thread on the Dairy Queen post, someone named “Black Oathkeeper” dropped this gem:
        First off, I’m an Oathkeeper and a black conservative and if any of y’all said filth like “blacks are inherently violent” to my black face, I’d knock your rotten teeth out.
        Ps: All y’all from Vox Day who spammed our website today, just know we have your IP address and have passed it along to the authorities. Many in law enforcement are VERY interested in racist groups like the Alt-Right.

        Everyone naturally assumed it was a fellow traveler and congratulated him on his fine satire; but it turned out that he was real, he was black, he was an Oafqueefer (a Boardmember!), and that blacks — even the whitewashed ones — really are that painfully, fucking stupid.

    • It’s likely trolling, but the responses apparently were not. These types of people are full fledged members in Mark Levin’s cult of the Constitution. Just utter the incantations in the correct order and everything will be OK.

  2. The Oathkeeper is immunized against all dangers: one may call him an Israel-firster, patriotard, shill, useful idiot, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Cuckold and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

  3. Pingback: The Sacred Oath | Reaction Times

  4. The guy who wrote the restaurant story clearly never left his basement. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so depressing.

    Save us, Constitution! You’re our only hope!

  5. I’m a little surprised at the comments this morning. The examples Porter gave were all obvious trolls, bless ’em. I think I’m gonna start hanging out at the Oathkeepers sight and join in.

  6. “Oath Keepers declare that they will not obey unconstitutional orders, such as orders to disarm the American people”

    Mmm kay, because Muh Constitution. That’s good as far as it goes. But does the Constitution specifically state anywhere that the police or armed forces shall never fire upon the American people? Shall never mow them down in large numbers? I guess you get to keep your rifle while a helicopter gunship blows you to smithereens.

    After all, the Great Leader his-self, Muh Lincoln, is only second to Muh Constitution in terms of wide-eyed adulation, even though Muh Abe used that sacred document as bum-wipe, and HE fired upon the American people in a big way. So it must be ok.

    In a way I feel sorry for these guys. They mean well (ok, some of them do — my basic assumption is that the “leadership” in any such organization has been totally compromised — Tea Party anyone?), but they don’t understand they are propping up a corrupt regime that already has them top of the list on those to exterminate when the time comes.

  7. “God bless Israel as a Jewish state and damn the racist for wanting a “place for white people”
    we adopted him from Eritrea through our church
    the Second Amendment also permits me to shoot you in the eye should you continue to commit racism”

    I’m pretty sure those are cleverly facetious : )

    The Constitution has remained intact–with hideous 14th amendment unchallenged–through the years of blatant American demise.
    Unable to offer any clear answer as to whether or not Ted Cruz can be President, but absolute certainty when it comes to citizenship for invaders.
    And no help at all (as Peterike points out) when America’s revered President waged war on his own country.

    Too bad our Republican majority sits idly by while the clock ticks on their reign.

  8. Pingback: K Blog: The Sacred Oath | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  9. A couple of thoughts from Peterike’s comment above:

    One, I agree with the well meaning of the typical patriot (for lack of another term). I know several of these people, and there’s a deep vein of “do what’s right” in most. Unfortunately they frequently conflate what is permitted with what is just. Since their native and normal yearnings for steadfastness and fidelity can not be expressed for their own people, they substitute the inanimate institutions and artifacts of those people instead. Many are not sufficiently introspective to contemplate this substitution, or why they are socially compelled to make it.

    While this is a subconscious act of submission, it is certainly not one adequate to purchase goodwill from those it is directed toward. Thus patriot groups are practically as despicable to liberals as nationalists despite their conspicuous accommodation to liberalism. The point being those institutions and artifacts have to go too if you want to earn your enemies’ favor.

    Two, as Peter mentioned Lincoln, I’d be curious to know how many Oathkeepers feel sheepish about defending the 14th Amendment. Given that this was “passed” by the Southern states while under occupation of northern juntas one would think it has no more or less moral legitimacy than a bank robbery. Both being results obtained only at gunpoint. It’s a good line to draw in determining whether a person is truly loyal to the Constitution, or to only those elements that don’t produce accusations of ‘isms.

  10. What actions have the Oathkeepers performed to defend our rights? When the Boston Marathon bombing occurred and the police invaded neighborhoods with full battle rattle on top of armored vehicles, I thought that for sure I would see an Oathkeeper pop up. All the while those cops were illegally searching homes without a warrant, to the cheers of some moronic citizens yelling “USA-USA!” at the top of their lungs, where were the Oathkeepers? There’s not one in Massachusetts?

    Has even one Oathkeeper called out a illegal or unconstitutional action committed by a fellow officer in his department? If this occurred, I never heard of it.

  11. There can be no doubt that political anarchy was the natural state of man. But whether anarchy really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.

    No rule or law has ever enforced itself. Never has, never will.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s