(This article was written by someone else. I have his permission to repost this anonymously: he does not want his name released in public as stated in the last sentence. The only cleanup I have done is to format for easier reading. I have not changed one word.)
The NH Supreme court a few years ago took up a case on Article 10 of the NH constitution:
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind. June 2, 1784
The court’s ruling is very instructive in the light of yesterday’s events. Instead of just refusing the right or revolution in the case, they clearly outlined exactly what would give someone the right of revolution. I.E. the situation in which revolution against your government is protected in NH. While obviously yesterday was federal I think that it is remarkably appropriate: (I’m paraphrasing but I think it gets the gist)
The person using Article 10 as a defense must have:
- Exhausted all legal avenues in the courts.
- Proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the government has indeed harmed your constitutional rights.
Now, in the case of Trump supporters it’s obvious that #1 is fulfilled. The supreme court continually refuses to hear the cases and is punting because they don’t want to decide an election. There is no avenue to petition the court remaining AND just as importantly the courts have refused to do their job as evidenced by Justice Robert’s ranting about not deciding an election in the courts again.
The question then becomes #2. But of course the courts either unintentionally or intentionally used a legal definition “beyond a reasonable doubt” that can only be acquired in a court of law creating a circular argument. (the only way this could be fulfilled if the courts agreed but then refused to do anything about it)
Thus the actions yesterday, in so much as the legal definition of the right of revolution in NH, comes down to what you believe out of the information provided.
Sadly, and I’ve seen this with countless friends, some have gone so far down the rabbit hole that it’s absolutely surreal what they now believe to be true which I believe is what provoked the response yesterday, either baited by Antifa or planed and executed as some have claimed.
But where does that leave the rest of the people that aren’t choosing to be willfully ignorant that see that there is obviously something there, there? NH had 7 recounts in the last election. The minimum gain for R was 4 points. The average net gain (+R/-D) was 7 points! If that was applied to all of the federal seats and electoral college, then every seat went Republican not Democrat. But no one in government has even batted an eye. Why? Why isn’t that freaking people out? It should.
And it gets worse in other states.
As of yesterday, Texas will now have a case. The Senate is 50/50 deadlocked and Haris will absolutely be the deciding vote stealing rights and instituting socialism to say nothing of court packing etc.
I believe that the only way that this can be redressed is 3 fold:
1. Replacement of SS card with a chip and pin card administered by the banking system and usable for everything that your current SS card is used for AND as a passport (and not private business that isn’t working with credit). The banks would allow the transactions to go over the standard card networks and would handle 4th amendment warrants etc. for data while the government would order the issue of cards and pins would be automatically generated. The government would provide along with the new cards a USB card reader that would read the chip and establish a secure connection for the transaction. Of course Apple/Google/Microsoft could integrate this into Apple/Google/Microsoft Pay and load your card into your phone. This both virtually eliminates identity theft AND provides an ID that can be used for voting, getting on planes, and more. Eventually it would probably also replace driver’s licenses and any other licensure (which should go away) by government. All US citizens should automatically be issued a card at birth, or naturalization ceremony. No one without this should have access to any government services.
2. Establish a blockchain-based election system where every state and anyone else that wants to holds the blockchain. No transaction can go through without a valid SS chip and pin and that chip and pin is used to encode the vote creating an anonymous hash with each of the votes that are cast that is first verified (without your vote) to be a valid card doing the hashing and the hashing could validate that it was indeed a valid card, but not who’s card). (and obviously this could be done over your phone or computer or go to the library or a voting booth with a machine that did it) This eliminates all election fraud instantly and eliminates all possible rigging except hacking the US government and the blockchain. Of course the blockchain is public and easily monitorable by both the states and the people and thus it would be exposed for all to see.
3. A federal constitutional amendment: All citizens are guaranteed their natural rights be protected and defended from government. As such, the mere threat of existence of unconstitutional laws, edicts, actions or other material decisions or positions of any government or agent of the government constitutes harm by violating the natural rights and causing a change of behavior. As such, all citizens have standing to petition the courts to redress constitutional grievances without proving material harm. This amendment shall apply to all levels of government constitutions.
#1 will freak out privacy people, however, they need to recognize practically that it will actually increase your privacy not decrease it.
#2 Shouldn’t offend anyone and is self-evident in my mind.
#3 Solves the NH supreme court’s condition 1 to the right or revolution that is the fundamental issue from yesterday. The people have not be permitted to petition for redress of grievances in the courts. If they had, it would never have gotten to a question of condition 2. (and question 2 is answered only by winning, not by right and wrong)
If you care about this country and have a better plan, I’m all ears. But if you don’t have a better plan, then help me by getting to the right people that could see this and start taking action. It’s all about who you know. (and keep my name off of this in public please)
#28thAmmendment