On The Abolition of Constitutional Government

Alexander S. Peak

Also available in .txt.

Penned 4 September 2005

Despite the fact that the politician ruling class had, by the early twenty-first century, completely abandoned any bonds to the U.S. Constitution, its members were still chained down and hindered in their strive for power by the need to uphold some semblance of being constitutionally-restrained and accountable to their subjects.  At this time, the United Republic of America was two separate nations, styled the United States of America (from which the U.R.A. inherited a capital city) and Canada.  Canada did not join its companion to the South until after the United States had already been well-reestablished as the United Republic, a transition which occurred through 2031 and 2032.

This new arrangement of governance, which had been erected quite easily on the trends of the prior government in its latter stages, is not a republic as far as the term is to reference that object of which the original founders of the earlier government would have used the term to describe.  In the eighteenth century, it was argued by American revolutionaries that government’s role ought to be limited and favor human liberty over political power.  A republic, in this frame of mind, was established to secure rights, not just for majority factions, but for all.  Of course, this vision was not fully realized at the time, and certain institutions of power, dominance, and political management effectively appropriated and restricted power and privilege to those with political pull or those deemed worthy by societal norms.  This norm excluded women and racial and ethnic minorities.  Still, the United Republic with which we are familiar with today is ideologically exclusive from the one envisioned by the earlier government’s founders, in that it has no goal whatsoever of advancing or even sustaining liberty, and rather preoccupies itself with sustaining dominance over its subjects and spreading its global might through military imperialism.

Military imperialism, which began appearing in the mid-twentieth century, is dissimilar in structure from the forms of imperialism that preceded it, but evinces the same general effect.  Formerly, imperialism was used as a means of directly controlling sovereign peoples or states, often through setting up colonies or “spheres of influence”. The term imperialism was dates back to 1858 according to the Oxford English dictionary, and originally used to depict the policies of Great Britain which often pursued territorial conquests.  The result was often oppression of those in the region.  What differentiates military imperialism from this colonial form of imperialism is the level of evident control.  Rather than installing leaders to instill submission, the object was and is to erect military bases in as many locations around the world as possible, thus enabling the imperial nation to use the threat of war or “military intervention” to enact policies it sees fit to advance its own aims.