“When in the Course of Human Events....
It becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to
assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s
God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which
impel them to the Separation.....”
Today we are going to refer to the United States Declaration of Independence (introductory quote shown above).
This important work was an act of the Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776 as a unanimously voted for
item which set the stage for the American revolution from England.
We can ask ourselves if in fact the revolution was ultimately for nothing. Is King George back? King George as
a new despot, a tyrant with another name and face, but still a tyrant? Did the United States return to a state
of despotism after a period of clarity and liberty, or were the seeds of tyranny always there, just lurking
beneath the surface?
“We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights.....”
One of the opposing arguments to The Declaration of Independence and the original tenets of the Constitution
and Bill of Rights is that people of color and females were excluded - that this was a white male only rebellion.
White male subjects of the new America were battling white male subjects of England, and everyone else was
rather on the fringes of the whole thing, used as needed, spit out when not. Of course, most of the people
working on the revolution documents were more educated and literate than many of those who actually
fought in the war. And being males in the 1700s, they were naturally prone to cultural dispositions that any of
us, given the same circumstances, might have been prone to. Female or a person of color today, we might
have had the same viewpoints toward women, Negros and Native Americans that most of the population had
at that time. Even those who had slaves, as did Thomas Jefferson, seemed to have complex associations with
slavery. To refer to 18th century white males is to suggest that we know something about what was going on
and how they were, but we never always have the whole situation nailed. What we can say is that a primarily
white male society demanded for itself equality from a parent society that was mostly run by white males,
claiming that that this equality came in the form of eternally intractable rights. This does not discount the
power of their passion and sincerity in coming to terms with something many people at some point or another
must do: Who am I really in the middle of all this, and where do I stand? And in identifying where I stand, will I be
so firm in my convictions in this matter that I will die for it?
For now, why don’t we explore the feeling quality of The Declaration - it’s intuitive and humanistic nature - and
replace the word ‘Men’ with ‘Persons.’ Let us imagine that we are feeling a connection with some unifying
quality that touches upon the broader needs and drives of all humankind. If we are Americans who have felt
betrayed by a country’s duplicity in topics of freedom and equality, let’s give the writers of The Declaration the
benefit of the doubt that they were in fact tapping into some form of universal pulse reminding people that at
birth humans are all equal and that a higher power of some kind, here termed a Creator, does not distinguish
among them as higher or lower, better or worse. And in the final analysis, that equality as connected to a
higher power can be thought of as Rights, inseparable, inalienable Rights, and that they are like permanently
attached fixtures to a house.
The concept here seems to include the notion that a being active in the long-ranging as well as daily details of
personhood has applied a characteristic - that of Rights - and that they are not detachable. They come with the
person - and all persons have these with them at all times. The Rights might be on the surface denied,
supplanted, stepped on or revoked, but all of this is an illusion in contrast to the idea that no matter what goes
on externally, intrinsically those rights were and always will be attached to the original person who had them
in the first place. These Rights exist in a pre-form world, a priori, and no matter what happens to them in the
world of forms (the material), they will always be there and will always really belong to their rightful owner.
We might wake up tomorrow not able to find our body, but we still be able to find our rights. You might break
my bones with sticks and stones, but you will not be able to destroy by eternal rights.
This goes hand in hand with the idea of birth rights which were an issue historically in the sense the oldest son
usually received the benefits of land and inheritance, while later children usually missed out. By reminding
people of the true intentions of a being of equality, The Declaration is saying that no matter where we stand on
the ladder of hierarchies, whether first born, rich, poor, good looking or ugly, famous or little known, we all
have basic eternal rights which do not fall away at the first signs of trouble or because someone has applied
another system of ordered tiers to the situation. Our charge is to remind ourselves of our rights and to
reclaim them in the face of others who would force their will upon us or otherwise suggest we are lesser
persons by some standard they have created for themselves.
Equality might be thought of as the feeling you have when living alone naked in nature with no one there to
tell you which side of the line to stand on or whether you are good enough. You simply sink into beingness and
go about your business of basic raw survival. You feel so equal with the natural world at large you don’t even
think twice about it; it is a non-issue. Of course you are equal! Equal with the plants and trees, animals and
roaring streams, glittering stars and heaving ocean waters. You become part of it all and the question of
equality and rights is only found when humans come together and start identifying differences and parting
out privileges. Something about animal behavior in packs as it is replicated in humans creates pecking orders
and competition which might ultimately be counter-evolutionary and self-defeating. Large numbers of people
competing for increasingly reduced supplies might escalate the winner takes all mentality past our carrying
capacity. By going to America, the now-defected British had found a way out of the packed world of
competition and hierarchies back home; they discovered boundless nature and a taste of entry level freedom.
It was a return to their birth state. Once they had gotten a whiff of true freedom, they were loathe to give it
The language of The Declaration reflects both idealism and romanticism. It is referring to a world of ideals that
is knowable through the intuition or senses. We must make the assumption from its choice of language that
this knowable world is self-evident because something inside the human being can feel it. There is a ring to the
language which seems to have men calling out while also being called to as if demonstrating a dialectic
between Man dealing with the travails of the Earth and something beyond which is eternal, profound and
beautiful speaking to the hearts of Man. This is probably one reason The Declaration of Independence has
appealed to people of many generations and often inspires feelings which seem to take people to another
level of their knowing/feeling nature. The language seems to draw us into a salutary space which evokes the
best in people, reminding us of our true value and worth beyond the measures of man and society at any given
moment in history. It reminds us there is a place to go and a space to be in the world of equality no matter the
onslaughts to our dignity and personal power.
“That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent
of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the
People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and
organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.....”
This is the Government clause, bringing in the why’s of government and the operating motivation behind
replacing a parent government with a new one. In short, according to this declaration, government needs to
be there to empower humanity by greasing its inner works and maintaining a protective shield. It’s there to
make things safer and easier, designed to not detract from the flow of natural humanity. The idea of consent
is big here; the people have a power, and the power is about consent. As a consenting power, life is breathed
into the government from that consent. With non-consent, air goes out of the government, the balloon
shrinks. We have to acknowledge that The Declaration is reminding humanity that ultimately people have a
choice and when the government becomes larger than the power of choice, “it is the right of the people to
alter or abolish it.” This clause reminds us of a mathematical if-then contigency: If the government is for us
and acts in our best interests, then it should be permitted to exist. If it is against us and does not work for our
interests, then it must be changed or dismantled. The power must come from the people.
This is vital to our experience and understanding today because many people have forgotten that the United
States was originally set up to create a government leaning on the powerful consent of the people, and when
that government “becomes destructive of these ends”, our integral beginning lays claim to an ongoing
heritage that says when enough is enough, King George must go!
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient
Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are
sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.
This is perhaps the most important part of the document. This is a call for a modern day Burn Bash of all
technology being used against the people, as well as the systems eating away at the guts of our rights and
liberties. Considering the concept that people will maintain at increasingly lowered standards of
governmental behavior toward them is key to understanding why they do not revolt sooner and why
resistance can be hard to conjure up. Citizens grow increasingly accustomed to poor treatment by the power
games going on around them, usually at the hands of the government which is in turn connected to people
with money. Sometimes it is the actual King with the money; sometimes it is the businesses around the
puppet leadership, but in either case, what dominates is the money, and people already with money are set up
to obtain even more money. Governments might “not be changed for light and transient causes” once long
established, but we can find ourselves in a take-over whereby the external name of a country or business
remains the same but new leaders are actually running the show. King George ultimately might be a titular
head run by a business conglomerate bent on taking over the world, but people still pay deference to King
George out of habit or from some kind of directly visible or hidden internal force. It could be the perpetrators
of the take-over are waiting for the final day of denouement. They are letting things build up until the
moment they finally let everything out of the hat. By then it will be too late for the general population to do
anything. Every escape potential will have been removed or blocked.
This particular phrase is the wake-up stance for today’s United States because the privileges of citizenry have
increasingly been destroyed by a quiet and malicious take-over that very few people are truly able to identify
or grapple with even after all of the publicity and whistleblowers. The people taking away our freedoms are
not Red Coats plainly visible with weaponry showing up on our doorsteps, but quietly hired people we never
see or hear. Because we cannot see them directly, most people go around hoping they are not one of the ones
on their hit list. Many people still wonder if these strange spies reputed to be reaching out into every corner
of our lives even exist or if things are really that bad. People make guesses about who is being watched and
who is not, and many assume there are certain types more likely to draw heavy levels of negative attention
than others. This is likely a grave misconception. While we try to guess at who is likely a target of excessive
monitoring and Psy Ops abuses, the list of victims probably keeps growing and the depths of the violations
even more staggeringly negative.
Many people today are still immune to acting upon the truth and finding the drive for true resistance.
Resistance begins with a thought. If we cannot even consider what resistance might feel like, we have a
problem. It is fueled by intention. It is brought into form through action. The Declaration of Independence is an
excellent reminder of what resistance looks and feels like; it brings us home to ourselves in the face of tyranny.
It is of value no matter whether we are Americans, British, Chinese, German, French, Indian, or any other
nationality on the planet. This is a human issue, not just an American one.
We still buy the cell phones and use them, use email and perform most of our activities through the internet in
one way or another. These things leave us all open to abuse and we truly have not yet gotten a handle on this
issue. We are all exposed and vulnerable because The Watchers are still watching - guaranteed. We “are more
disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable” than to correct the situation by doing something apparently
extremist or radical - like destroying the cell phones and internet. Becoming accustomed to not finding the
energy to fight back might be promoted by a variety of programs designed to keep people flattened out.
Destroying the will through a variety of planned processes is not beyond a take-over system bent on monetary
domination of the planet. The United States is likely seen as one of the countries to be toppled even if it was
originally a primary platform for the descent into global totalitarianism. People don’t realize how truly serious
this whole thing is and keep assuming discussions about it only come from radicals. It seems some people are
well read enough, but manage to intellectualize themselves out of doing anything meaningful about the
problems. Please keep an image of Nazi troops taking over Berlin with lightning speed once Hitler came into
power, and realize the take-over had been planned and piling up for years before that. We are likely in a pre-
Berlin fall state in the United States while the people with the plan keep taking over every last way that we
have to communicate with each other. As part of this, people are taught, why does anyone with nothing to
hide need privacy? That is one of the most destructive elements of Liberty there is, that one approach alone.
The idea is if you have nothing to hide, why get in a dither about surveillance? After all, the good guys are the
ones watching the show, and it is for your own good.
Freedom Day (A New Day of Revolution) might be the day all people in cities and towns everywhere in the
United States designate several Burn Bashes (although since plastics when burned usually give off poisonous
fumes, the actual manner of destroying the objects properly should be considered; perhaps the materials can
be recycled or reconstituted into other materials) to get rid of the endless streams of gadgetry designed to
erode our privacy and rights. True resistance might not be the institution of laws demanding protection from
illegal search and surveillance tactics, but the actual destruction of the means of surveillance and the removal
of all such objects from the public domain until such time as the perpetrators have truly been backed off and
put through the criminal justice system. This includes running down politicians who have voted for the
policies which eroded our rights, one by one, even if it means going back many years in time. These people
should be held accountable.
How likely is such a form of resistance to occur? Has King George, then, finally found his day?
But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce
them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new
Guards for their future Security.
It is important to note that the wording clearly indicates that after a repeated of violations to human freedom,
people have not only a right but a duty to counter the negative power behavior. They also have a need to put
up protection. One interpretation of this is that people need to treat their countries as extensions of their
bodies, minds and souls , and as such, as sacred turf. We owe it to ourselves to keep the grounds hallowed and
free of negative forces. We have a duty to respect ourselves enough to not permit heavy hands on our natural
rights and liberties.
Wording of The Declaration Of Independence in this article: The Constitution of the United States and The
Declaration of Independence. Pocket Version, 23rd ed. 110th Congress, 1st Session/House Document 110-51. July
25, 2007. Printed Under the Direction of the Joint Committee on Printing.
updates 06/25/2017; 05/30//2016
The Declaration of Independence
Resources and Input
Policing, Borders, Drugs, Cartels
and System Corruption