Opinion

Rallying around First Amendment could save our nation

By on • ( 1 Comment )

(Editor: This guest commentary has been contributed by a Vermont author who wishes to remain anonymous. Today, an exception is made to Vermont Daily’s policy of requiring the identity of authors of published letters, op-eds and news articles, in part because the essay discusses general principles without criticizing individuals.)

This moment in history can only be understood and discussed as a First Amendment constitutional crisis for ALL the several sides.  When we begin to thoughtfully approach it as such that will be the beginning of wisdom in the streets.  Our Second Amendment is a distraction both sides fail to see beyond for the moment. 

BLM is not a movement as much as a phenomenon; instability and misdirection as a campaign tactic.  Remember terms like “useful idiots” or “agent provocateurs”?  That plus Antifa equals mayhem. The people of the true movement should discipline BLM and Antifa to the larger cause and demand Hope be the paradigm, not destruction. “Burn it down” is not a cause, it is a paradox. History is full of fools and the tyrants who lead them into the streets.  History is also filled with wisdom, mass revolt and reform and reluctant prophets who sustain their hopes for change. We choose at our own peril.

BLM should have been a significant side show to a civil rights struggle that is bona fide by any true reading of human history. But BLM is not interested in anything but control and power. Both Rs and Ds have a reason to reign in police brutality but ALSO decades of prosecutorial misconduct.  The latter misconduct is actually the primary virus along with its political ally the “war on drugs”.  Without lying, bluffing prosecutors the police would have reformed themselves naturally BUT for the war on drugs….  Most cops want to be cops, not henchman.

And prosecutorial misconduct is what led to the “bail to jail to plea bargain pipeline” which results in the mass incarceration of black and brown young men.  It is simply easier for cops to feed that supply chain then investigate and intervene at the community level. 

Change is not likely at this time. Sorry. Streets and cities will burn. Sorry.

Innocents like George Floyd and Aaron J. Danielson will be murdered and it will be televised… both victims of a people without any wisdom of liberty.  Our First Amendment could heal this moment.  But I stress both are equally “victims” of this disease and the First Amendment’s complete restoration is the only cure.  An entire generation in our streets were never immunized to ignorance and persecution tactics by a thorough knowledge of the true meaning of Liberty as expressed in our Declaration of Independence and the compounded Wisdom that led to our First Amendment being first!

IF Facebook et al, responsible voices from the parties, BLM, Antifa, Trump groups like Patriot Prayer and the like came together and agreed to one simple premise we could have peaceful protests and improved, additional police, mental health and social services. 

That premise would be that the shared value for a radical, expansive belief in free speech and press and redress and religious self-determination, AKA the First Amendment.  All sides would have to give.  But most unlikely to concede ground would be the “cancel culture” and “identity” priests of the temple of 1619 Project, etc.  That would mean allowing citizens to demand history and liberty be taught in government schools.  A bridge too far I am afraid.

Citizen #1
Labor Day 2020

Postscript:

There are three types of peoples; slaves, citizens and tyrants. We are Blessed by God to choose which we will be and which we will serve. 
Wm Floyd 1775

Photo: Unsplash.com

Recent News

Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories: Opinion

1 reply »

  1. Just to be clear, when we talk about the First Amendment of the Constitution, are we talking about the part that promises freedom of speech, freedom of the press or the right of people to peaceably assemble or are we talking about the part that says that the government will not prohibit the free exercise of religion? Back when our state went into lockdown, our governor decided that it was not only unwise to open churches for worship, but also unlawful, even if we used masks and stayed 6 feet apart, but shortly after that, there was a BLM protest in Montpelier and the governor decided that their gathering was constitutionally protected and so it was allowed. Maybe the governor didn’t read it carefully enough, but the amendment is all in one sentence, with freedom of religion, the promise not to prohibit the free exercise of that same religion. That part comes BEFORE the right to peaceably assemble (which our church would have done if we had been permitted to do) and the part that says it’s a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Who am I to say, I’m not a lawyer, just somebody who scratches my head trying to figure out why I don’t see the logic in that decision. I’ll be thinking of that on election day, Governor Scott.