In an earlier post, I explained the legal procedure for changing or replacing our current form of government. As the Constitution is actually law, any person, group of persons or organizations which attempt to change, alter or get around the Constitution without going through the described process for changing it are guilty of committing the act of subversion. Subversion is an attack on the Social Contract and, therefore, an attack on the States as well as the People of the United States. Should anyone or any organization commit subversion, the People would be well within their rights to demand that the Federal government take the necessary steps to end what is — essentially — an act of treason. How do I get to this conclusion? By using simple logic. I read the Constitution and then apply the plain meaning of words to the actions of those persons and/or organizations seeking to alter or replace our system of government government. If you have a few minutes, I will demonstrate how easily this can be done.
We start with the section of the Constitution that sets forth the methods by which the Constitution can be Amended or replaced:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
[NOTE: I explain the process by which the Constitution can be replaced in my previous post.]
The Constitution is law: the supreme law of the land. It does not provide for any other legal means by which the People or the States can alter or change it. Therefore, by definition, any attempt to alter or change the Constitution without using the authorized process is illegal! All that remains is to determine what we call this illegal act, and making that determination is very simple. Start by asking yourself this question:
Q: What is being done?
A: Someone or some group is trying to change or replace the Constitution (i.e. our system of government) without using the Amendment process.
Q: Do we have a word that describes such an act?
OK, fine. So trying to change or replace the Constitution without going through the Amendment process is subversion, but that still does not get us to treason. How do I make that leap in logic? Simple. Once again, let’s start by ask yourself the following:
Q: Is the guilty party a citizen of the United States?
A: Let’s say yes.
Q: Does a citizen owe allegiance to their State and/or country?
A: If they expect any privilege or protection from that State/country, yes.
Q: Is there a word that describes the act of trying to illegally change or replace the government by a person who owes allegiance to that government?
1 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family
But you say, “Wait! Subversion does not mean the same thing as overthrowing.” To which I ask you to ask yourself this question:
Q: If you try to illegally change or replace a government, are you not trying bring about the downfall of the old government? To bring it down or defeat it?
A: Unless you are being irrational, the answer is YES!
Q: So, is there a word for the act of deliberately bringing down a government?
This is why words are so important, and why their meanings must not be allowed to change. Because, when we know the meaning of a word or words at the time they were applied to a given subject, it is usually very easy to determine any and all questions related to that subject by applying the meaning of those words — as we have just done here.
Because Natural Law demands that the original intent of a law be held fixed until such time as the law is legally altered or abolished (and the U.S. Constitution is such a law), the words describing the original intentions of that law are fixed according to their meaning at the time the law was enacted. To assume otherwise is to destroy the very concept of a law (by definition). Therefore, because the Constitution describes several methods by which it can be legally changed or replaced, any attempt to change or replace it outside of that described process is — by definition — an illegal act known as subversion, which, if committed by a citizen of any State, is also defined as treason.
That is how I get to the point where I can factually call Americans who try to change or replace the Constitution without using the proscribed Amendment process, TRAITORS! I call them that because that is what they are — and they are traitors by definition (which means, unless one can show a clear fallacy in my logic, this conclusion cannot be broken!).