How do you persuade a populace to embrace totalitarianism, that goose-stepping form of tyranny in which the government has all of the power and “we the people” has none?
You persuade the people that the menace they face, imaginary or not, is so sinister, so overwhelming, so fearsome that the only way to surmount the danger is by empowering the government to take all necessary steps to quash it, even if that means allowing government jackboots to trample all over the U.S. Constitution.
It is how you use the politics of fear to persuade a freedom-loving people to shackle themselves to a dictatorship.
It works the same way every time.
The government’s overblown, extended wars on terrorism, drugs, violence, and illegal immigration have been convenient ruses used to terrorized the populace into relinquishing more of their freedoms in exchange for elusive promises of security.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Case in point: June 17, the same day president Donald Trump announced the government would make mass arrests in order to round up and forcibly remove millions of illegal immigrants, including families and children, from the country, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a ruling in Gamble v. United States that placed the sovereignty (i.e., the supreme power or authority) of federal and state governments over that of the citizenry, specifically as it relates to the government’s ability to disregard the Constitution’s double jeopardy clause.
At first glance, the two incidents, one relating to illegal immigration and the other to the government’s prosecutorial powers, don’t have much to do with each other, and yet there is a common thread that binds them together.
That common thread speaks to the nature of the government beast we have been saddled with and how it views the rights and sovereignty of “we the people.”
Now you don’t hear a lot about sovereignty anymore.
Sovereignty is a dusty, antiquated term that harkens back to an age when kings and emperors ruled with absolute power over a populace that had no rights. Americans turned the idea of sovereignty on its head when they declared their independence from Great Britain and rejected the absolute authority of King George III. In doing so, Americans claimed for themselves the right to self-government and established themselves as the ultimate authority and power.
In other words, in America, “we the people,” sovereign citizens, call the shots.
So when the government acts, it is supposed to do so at our bidding and on our behalf, because we are the rulers.
That’s not exactly how it turned out, though, is it?
In the 200-plus years since we boldly embarked on this experiment in self-government, we have been steadily losing ground to the government’s brazen power grabs, foisted upon us in the so-called name of national security.
The government has knocked us off our rightful throne. It has usurped our rightful authority. It has staged the ultimate coup. Its agents no longer even pretend that they answer to “we the people.”
We are fast approaching a moment of reckoning where we will be forced to choose between the vision of what America was intended to be (a model for self-governance where power is vested in the people) and the reality of what she has become (a police state where power is vested in the government).
These mass arrests of anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant may well be the shot across the bow.
You see, it’s a short hop, skip, and a jump from allowing government agents to lock large swaths of the population up in detention centers unless or until they can prove that they are not only legally in the country to empowering government agents to subject anyone, citizen and noncitizen alike, to similar treatment unless or until they can prove that they are in compliance with every statute and regulation on the books, and not guilty of having committed some crime or other.
It’s no longer a matter of if, but when.
You may be innocent of wrongdoing now, but when the standard for innocence is set by the government, no one is safe. Everyone is a suspect, and anyone can be a criminal when it’s the government determining what is a crime.
Remember, the police state does not discriminate.
Whatever dangerous practices you allow the government to carry out now, whether it’s in the name of national security, or protecting America’s borders, or making America great again, rest assured, these same practices can and will be used against you when the government decides to set its sights on you.
Finally, if anyone suggests that the government’s mass immigration roundups and arrests are just the government’s doing its job to fight illegal immigration, don’t buy it.
It is not about illegal immigration. It’s about power and control.
It’s about testing the waters to see how far the American people will allow the government to go in re-shaping the country in the image of a totalitarian police state.
It’s about the rise of an emergency state that justifies all manner of government misconduct and power grabs in the so-called name of national security.
It’s about how far we will allow the government to go in its efforts to distract and divide us and turn us into a fearful, easily-controlled populace.
Ultimately, it’s about whether we believe, as the Founders did, that our freedoms are inherently ours and that the government’s appointed purpose is not to threaten or undermine our freedoms, but to safeguard them.
We must get back to this way of thinking if we are to ever stand our ground in the face of threats to those freedoms.
I make clear in my book, “Battlefield America: The War on the American People,” it’s time to draw that line in the sand.
The treatment being meted out to anyone who looks like an illegal immigrant is only the beginning. Eventually we will all be in the government’s crosshairs for one reason or another.
It is the start of the slippery slope.
Martin Niemöller understood it. A Lutheran minister who was imprisoned and executed for opposing Hitler’s regime, Niemoller warned:
“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”
—The Rutheford Institute