MAGA MUST END THE RADICAL LEFT'S WAR ON CITIZENSHIP

 

MAGA MUST END THE RADICAL LEFT'S WAR ON CITIZENSHIP

E pluribus unum. Out of many, one. The Smithsonian Libraries and Archives teaches, "This is the literal translation for the motto of the United States of America. It was a motto suggested by a committee on July 4, 1776. Does that date sound familiar? It was the day our country’s Declaration of Independence was signed! While it took many years for a seal of the United States to be finalized, this motto stuck and became the words scribed on the scroll in the beak of a bald eagle. The motto has important meaning for the United States of America. Our country began as land belonging to Great Britain. As we continued to grow, we became 13 colonies. When deciding to fight for our freedom, the colonists decided that they would be more powerful if all of the colonies fought together. Out of 13 colonies came one nation. Out of our 50 states comes one nation. The motto describes our history and our belief that we are a nation that should work together as one!" 

The Radical Left has convinced America to believe that "e pluribus unum" is about ''a divisive diversity and a single, imposed national identity, or that it ignores the historical oppression of minority groups that makes true unity difficult." Alan Seale of the Center for Transformational Presence writes, "As time went on, it also came to refer to the “melting pot” nature of our country – a place where people could come from anywhere in the world to find freedom, sanctuary, a new beginning, and open space. People came from all over seeking a land where anything could be possible – where dreams could be realized." 

Father Benjamin J. Urmston, S.J., PhD. of Xavier University in his syllabus for his course, ''E Pluribus Unum "Out of Many, One", writes, "'The value of diversity has many answers. Each individual and each ethic group and most religions have strengths as well as weaknesses. We always want to emphasize strengths rather than weaknesses. We gain when we embrace strengths from many different groups. Different strengths can contribute to the common good. We gain when we cooperate with different groups, indeed, when we cooperate as one human family on major issues such as war and peace, basic human rights, the global economy, the sustainability of our earth."

News Flash: MAGA Must End The Radical Left's War On Citizenship!

"The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant." - Maximilien de Robespierre, the leader of the Jacobin political movement established in 1779, one of the most radical political groups involved in the French Revolution, and was a principle figure in the Revolution and the following Reign of Terror.

"Keeping people ignorant docile" reflects a widely circulated idea, often attributed to historical figures like Robespierre and Thomas Jefferson, that maintaining public ignorance is a key tool for consolidating and exercising tyrannical power and control. The Democrat apparatus subscribe to this theory and seek only the demise of the Constitutional Federated Republic and those that subscribe to its establishment.

Israel Zangwill, a prominent Anglo-Jewish writer, was the first leader of the Jewish Territorialist movement, which sought a Jewish homeland outside of Palestine. Although not a socialist himself, Zangwill was sympathetic to socialist ideals and was a founding member of organizations like the Men's and Jewish League for Women's Suffrage, and the United Suffragists. Some of the Territorialist movement's goals, such as self-sufficiency, have been compared to aspects of "racialized socialism" found in some early Zionist communities, which prioritized Jewish labor over international class solidarity, Zangwill, in 1919, gave a speech entitled "Hands Off Russia" . He produced an 8 page pamphlet of the Workers' Socialist Federation, a London group headed by Sylvia Pankhurst which would later become one of the founding components of the Communist Party of Great Britain. Zangwill, a prominent Anglo-Jewish writer, was associated with the socialist-leaning Jewish Territorialist movement before leaving in 1905. His 1908 play, The Melting Pot, popularized the idea of America as a "crucible" for immigrants but is distinct from his later association with socialism. The play's themes explore assimilation and the creation of a new American identity from diverse European cultures, a concept later critiqued by socialist thinkers who saw the state as an instrument of power and a socialist as one who seeks to "power" that state. 

Mary Hurd, in "Melting pot theory", writes,"...as societal attitudes evolved, the melting pot theory faced criticism, especially after the Civil Rights Movement and changes in immigration laws in the 1960s. These changes encouraged a more multicultural approach, leading to the rise of alternative theories like cultural pluralism and the salad bowl concept, which advocate for the coexistence of distinct cultural identities within a larger society. Today, despite ongoing debates about immigration and assimilation, the U.S. has seen a notable increase in multiracial populations and a growing recognition of diverse cultural contributions, reflecting a complex and dynamic national identity." Hurd also writes, "The melting pot theory is a concept that suggests immigrants to the United States would assimilate into a single, cohesive culture, symbolizing the blending of various ethnicities and nationalities. Originating from the early 20th-century play "The Melting-Pot" by Israel Zangwill, the theory idealized the idea of cultural integration, where immigrants would shed their previous identities to adopt an American identity. During this time, U.S. immigration policies reflected these assimilation pressures, often favoring those from Northern and Western Europe while restricting immigrants from other regions deemed less likely to fit into the melting pot."

Zangwill was inspired to write 'The Melting Pot" by a project he was working on at the time, to help 10,000 Russian Jews escape to Texas. The ‘Galveston Movement’, as it was called, was an offshoot of Zionism, founded when it became clear that the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine would be many years away. ‘If we cannot get the Holy Land, we can make another land holy,’ Zangwill said in a 1906 speech, and promoted ‘The Great American West’ as a temporary refuge. 

Rachell Cockerell in "Israel Zangwill, forgotten creator of the Melting Pot", wites, "For seven years, immigrants disembarked at Galveston after a month-long journey across the Atlantic, wrote postcards home in Yiddish, had a hot bath, and got on the next train to some town or city in the American West where they began a new life. Zangwill felt conflicted about the dispersal of his co-religionists across a vast continent, knowing they would inevitably begin to lose their Jewish characteristics and melt into the Melting Pot. Even he had doubts about the idea he had espoused so enthusiastically in his world-famous play." Cockerell prefaced her remarks by writing, "Once one of the most famous Jewish figures in the Western world, the novelist Israel Zangwill, chronicler of London's East End, went onto play a leading role in the early history of the Zionist movement. His contribution to the American immigrant mythology is yet another point of intrigue in a vivid and tumultuous life."

Joseph "Jake" Klein in "How A Century-Old Play Refuted Identity Politics: “The Melting-Pot” by Israel Zangwill", writes, "Especially in today’s era of identity politics and victimhood culture, Zangwill’s vision is being bitterly resisted. The sins of one’s ancestors manifesting into bitterness towards their descendants is omnipresent even for crimes drastically less severe and generations less immediate than David’s connection to Kishineff. For example, an article in The Occidental, Occidental College’s student newspaper, goes as far as to call the Melting-Pot concept “creepy” and “along the lines of eugenics and racial engineering” (The Black Sheep founder Salomé Sibonex has pushed back on the culture at Occidental by speaking at an event there). Writer Maisha Z. Johnson argued for Everyday Feminism that “we must resist getting dumped into the pot,” that we should maintain separate spaces for “people of color” from those racialized as white, and that “When we ‘share’ our cultures without considering the impact on marginalized people, it’s usually white people who benefit the most, while other people suffer.” Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion consultants are now teaching these ideas to corporate America too, with Cheryl Ingram of Diverse City Group claiming people need to “stop saying America is a Melting-Pot” as the idea implies “oppression” and the “normalcy of whiteness.” The deficits of identity politics include fostering division, distracting from shared universal issues like class and economics, potentially weakening democracy by eroding trust and compromise, and promoting blind loyalty to one's own group. Professor Victoria W. Wolcott, in "False Choices: Identity Politics and Lessons from the Left", writes, "This history reveals that resistance movements are strongest when activists do not make false choices between class and race, or other forms of identity. And electoral politics are most progressive when liberals listen and learn from their radical allies."

MAGA must end the Radical Left's War on Citizenship.

We must identify with and proclaim the theories of Founding Father Samuel Adams, there are two types of people in America: citizens and foreigners. Let us deal with a conundrum with Adams and his time and slavery and the modern view through the prism of identity politics. Samuel Adams had complex views on slavery; he opposed the institution of slavery and advocated for ending the international slave trade, even arranging for the freedom of the enslaved woman, Surry, who came to him as a wedding gift. He was vocal about the inconsistency of fighting for liberty while owning slaves, though he and his wife legally held title to Surry for a time before she was freed. Identity politics views slavery as a system of oppression based on the identities of race and status, which created social roles like "master" and "slave" and justified the subjugation of one group by another.  Identity politics and its contemporary analysis show how the need to justify slavery led to the development of racial categories and racism, creating a hierarchy where enslaved people were seen as inferior, according to the Marxist Left Review. Identity politics aims to understand how slavery's legacy continues to shape modern social and political identities, particularly in understanding the ongoing effects of systemic racism and inequality, says Broadstreet. 

Adams said, "Those people who will not be ruled by God will be ruled by tyrants." Let's make it plain,  slavery is morally wrong as an economic system. The chattel slavery permitted in the Bible was begrudgingly permitted and regulated by God.  Angela Velasquez Thornton in "What Does the Bible Teach Regarding Slavery?" writes, "Chattel slavery as we see in the Transatlantic slave trade is vastly different from what was practiced in the Ancient Near East (ANE). (The same holds true for the lesser-known Trans-Saharan slave trade of blacks by Arabs). The traffic of Africans to the Americas was based on kidnapping, which is punishable by death in the Mosaic Law (Ex 21:16). Involuntary slavery was forbidden.

Some may say that God should have abolished slavery. Yet given how common a practice it was in the ANE, I see great wisdom in the way in which the Mosaic law created safeguards to protect the welfare and dignity of those who served. The Law thus transformed the institution of slavery by regulating the relationship between master and slave in ways intended to eliminate abuse." Biblical slavery was a choice.

Thornton writes, "Among the people of Israel, servitude was voluntary. People hired themselves into the service of others, usually because they were poor. That was the best way to meet their needs. So, a better word for this kind of worker is servant, apprentice, hired hand, or indentured labourer."

For the pompous erudites from the Hill College, better known as the race troop, various Africans and African polities (kingdoms, states, and ethnic groups) sold people into slavery, both within the continent's indigenous systems and to foreign traders involved in the trans-Saharan, Indian Ocean, and Atlantic slave trades. This participation was complex and driven by a variety of factors, including pre-existing local systems of servitude, economic incentives, warfare, and political dynamics. Yes, Alex Haley's depiction in his book and the original TV mini-series Roots, where white men venture into the African interior ("jungle") to capture Kunta Kinte, is historically inaccurate for the period it depicts (the late 18th century). The scene in Roots was a fabrication, as European slave traders generally did not go inland to capture slaves themselves. H.C. Felder, D.Min. in "Alex Haley’s Roots of Deception" writes, "More importantly, every black person identified with the show; they saw it as their story. In fact, the show evoked rage among many blacks, and some were beating up white people without provocation, all for the retribution of their ancestors. Roots was a lightning rod for hatred towards whites, a hatred that never really went away."

Felder continues, "However, journalist Philip Nobile, who studied Haley’s private papers, revealed that the deception went much deeper. According to Nobile, “Virtually every genealogical claim in Haley’s story was false." Nobile further states that none of Haley’s early writings reference his alleged ancestor, “the African” named Kunte Kinte. Thanks to Nobile’s work, Roots has now been widely exposed as a hoax. "

Some African leaders and people have apologized for their ancestors' roles in the Atlantic slave trade. For example, Benin's President Mathieu Kérékou publicly apologized in 1999, and Nigerian activists have called for traditional rulers to apologize. These apologies express remorse for the involvement of some African communities and leaders in the trade and seek reconciliation with the descendants of those enslaved.  

"The policy of American government is to leave its citizens free, neither restraining them nor aiding them in their pursuits." Adams made it clear, we are citizens and foreigners. Not divisible into blocks by race, color, creed and religion. We are not identity politics. We are Americans! Adams defined a citizen as a person with inherent rights, including those of "subjects born in Great Britain," which are "natural, essential, inherent, and inseparable". He believed citizens were entitled to all the liberties and privileges of the British common law and should have the freedom to choose their own representatives in government through free elections. His definition emphasized that citizens possess fundamental rights that cannot be taken away by any government or other body. Adams in "The Rights of the Colonists:The Report of the Committee of Correspondence to the Boston Town Meeting, Nov. 20, 1772" wrote, "Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature." And you thought it was a Thomas Jefferson exclusive.

He futhers, "In regard to religion, mutual toleration in the different professions thereof is what all good and candid minds in all ages have ever practised, and, both by precept and example, inculcated on mankind. And it is now generally agreed among Christians that this spirit of toleration, in the fullest extent consistent with the being of civil society, is the chief characteristical mark of the Church. Insomuch that Mr. Locke has asserted and proved, beyond the possibility of contradiction on any solid ground, that such toleration ought to be extended to all whose doctrines are not subversive of society. The only sects which he thinks ought to be, and which by all wise laws are excluded from such toleration, are those who teach doctrines subversive of the civil government under which they live. The Roman Catholics or Papists are excluded by reason of such doctrines as these, that princes excommunicated may be deposed, and those that they call heretics may be destroyed without mercy; besides their recognizing the Pope in so absolute a manner, in subversion of government, by introducing, as far as possible into the states under whose protection they enjoy life, liberty, and property, that solecism in politics, imperium in imperio, leading directly to the worst anarchy and confusion, civil discord, war, and bloodshed." There is no room for anti-semitism but, there is room for anti-Muhammadism, Islam or cults. 

He further favors the term "consent" for citizens granting authority of the state over their substance. He writes, "Now what liberty can there be where property is taken away without consent? Can it be said with any color of truth and justice, that this continent of three thousand miles in length, and of a breadth as yet unexplored, in which, however, it is supposed there are five millions of people, has the least voice, vote, or influence in the British Parliament? Have they all together any more weight or power to return a single member to that House of Commons who have not inadvertently, but deliberately, assumed a power to dispose of their lives, liberties, and properties, than to choose an Emperor of China?' 

 Consent (n.) is c. 1300, "approval, voluntary acceptance of what is done or proposed," also "agreement in sentiment, unity in opinion," from Old French consente, from consentir "agree; comply," from Latin consentire "agree, accord," literally "feel together," from assimilated form of com "with, together" (see con-) + sentire "to feel" (see sense (n.) ). In Middle English sometimes in a negative sense, "yielding (to sinful desire); connivance." Age of consent, at which one's consent to certain acts is legally valid, is attested from 1650s.

Consent to govern. Consent to tax and spend. Consent to do justice. Consent to represent by vote in free elections. We are a "nation of citizens" not a "nation of immigrants". MAGA must end the Radical Left's grip on the neck of our natural rights. MAGA must end the Radical Left's War on Citizenship.