Rule of Law: Why It Is Important

If one were to narrow down in a few words the division in America today and the fight against subversion in America, it would be simply: Rule of Law.
It is a fight against a combination of foes of liberty and We the People, by those prevaricators and usurpers who persist in changing our form of government as it was created and carefully put in place.
Those who advocate pure democracy, the majority ruling and yet paying for the minority that soon, after time becomes the majority and then everyone will pay; disregarding or circumventing the established rules in the articles and amendments of the Constitution of the United States.

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nineThomas Jefferson

It is not just a question of rights of one over another citizen; it is the rule of law, the law of the land – the Constitution of the United States.
We the People have complacently allowed others to chip away at constitutional law, thinking it is better for the general welfare of the people. But the Left has not drawn a line as to how far they should go; letting slip the principles that made America great, and after the taste of power not allowed by government they only yearn for more.
It took a great economic depression to change how Americans looked at government and forgetting its principles established, a people who looked to government to govern their lives, to make it better, or so they were told. And so, as another economic crisis has approached, the parasites within government are preaching the same sermon; but this time the grassroot American speaks out against further encroachment upon We the People and demand that the road to the Marxist nanny state be blocked and that Americans take a detour back to its origins.

The colonial Minutemen are part of history, the American pioneer has no more free land to cultivate and homestead, the cowboy has disappeared in the sunset; but that doesn’t mean that the spirit of freedom, liberty and self sufficiency need to fade into history. For if it does, so goes what made America great from its beginning and throughout its history.

The Constitution and the American representative republic is in danger today from many fronts: Islamic fascism, Hispanic Reconquista movements, Leftist political organizations like the (New) Democratic Party; parasitic politicians who pretend to be conservative [RINOs], but are not constitutionalists as they are sworn to be when they take political office.
Statesmanship has been traded off and bureaucrats have taken their place, capitulating in the name of compromise and selling out their souls and the People’s rights for power and personal gain; building a vote base of illegal aliens and citizens who look to the government like some sort of lottery prize; neither caring or unaware that government is not paying for it, but instead their fellow American citizens. Society itself has been corrupted in thinking that honor and dignity are a thing of the past and all those who are wealthy in the society are evil and greedy. They too are parasites, killing the host that feeds them. Look up the word conservative in the Webster or Oxford or Wikipedia dictionaries.
There are still constitutionalists in America, now coming to the forefront of America’s view, demanding that once more to stand by principles set forth by the constitutional framers, return the attitude that honor, principle and integrity are once more hallmarks of human endeavors, and return into the hands of the People. The government has socially engineered the people and convinced America’s youth that anything beyond the Left’s agenda and policy is evil and undermining; yet undermine the principles and rule of law that created such a great nation composed of states united under the rule of law and the law of the land. Mark Alexander, Patriot Post writes about those principles in his essay, First Principles.
The concept of Rule of Law is nothing new, it was considered even during the period of monarchy around 1250 AD. …

The King is under the Law for it is the Law that maketh him a King. [1]

In 1885, A.V. Dicey wrote[2]:

It means, in the first place, the absolute supremacy or predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power, and excludes the use of arbitrariness, of prerogative, or even wide discretionary authority on the part of the government. Englishmen are ruled by law, and by law alone; a man may with us be punished for a breach of law, but he can be punished for nothing else.

The political Left has established hate crime laws, a law that is added on to crimes of violence if it can be proven that a crime was committed in the context of hate, racial or otherwise. It is a law that stands moot, and is in danger of allowing the political Left to take it even further, as some European countries have adopted: hate speech laws. All in the name of justice and promotion of good will and equality; but the Constitution already addresses that and defamation laws [3] – the original intent may be of good faith, but it counters against the rule of law, the law of the land, the Constitution of the United States; specifically the First Amendment. hate-crime/hate-speech laws are nothing but manipulative tools for the benefit of the Leftist elite.

A.V. Dicey also stated in his Law of the Constitution:

The ‘rule of law’ lastly, may be used as a formula for expressing the fact that with us the law of the constitution, the rules which in foreign countries naturally form part of a constitutional code, are not the source but the consequence of the rights of individuals, as defined and enforced by the Courts; that, in short, the principles of private law have with us been by the action of the Courts and Parliament so extended as to determine the position of the Crown and of its servants; thus the constitution is the result of the ordinary law of the land.

In The Road to Serfdom, [4] a recommended read, Friedrich A. Hayek wrote:

Stripped of all technicalities, [the rule of law] means that government in all its actions is bound by rules fixed and announced beforehand – rules which make it possible to foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers in given circumstances and to plan one’s individual affairs on the basis of knowledge. Though this ideal can never be perfectly achieved … the essential point, that the discretion left to the executive organs wielding coercive power should be reduced as much as possible, is clear enough.

Hayek also wrote The Constitution of Liberty [5]:

Mankind has learned from long and painful experience that the law of liberty must possess certain attributes. … The first point that must be stressed is that, because the rule of law means that government must never coerce an individual except in the enforcement of a known rule, it constitutes a limitation on the powers of all government, including the powers of the legislature. It is a doctrine concerning what the law ought to be, concerning the general attributes that particular law should possess. … The second chief attribute which must be required of true laws is that they be known and certain. … The third requirement of true law is equality.

In recent times, certain institutions are not equal in the eyes of government law. Affirmative Action goes beyond the common sense laws and reasoning of its conception concerning civil rights; and instead of promoting equality, has instilled division and unqualified citizens obtaining employment or accepted into an educational institution despite not meeting the standards. The common practice of the political Left is to lower the standards to meet the individual criteria; however, by so doing the nation is not for the better nor does the policy enact that which it was designed for.
Hate crime laws are in place to protect homosexuals and minority races; yet it is not reciprocating; which means that if the law is transgressed by a Negro or dark-skinned individual(s), Hispanic or homosexual, it does not apply. Rights and liberties are for all – not just a select group.
So, when a constitutionalist, grassroot conservative, gets into debate with a liberal-progressive-Marxist, the debate should be established on the gist of the Rule of Law. The liberal will usually intently listen and often be polite, for they are those that believe they must be loyal to the Democratic Party remembering how its platform once was For the People and not a Change of the type of government in America; or the false Hope provided by the political elite.
The liberal or person who still thinks of their liberalism in the traditional sense today still conceives that their political club still holds their ideology that the original intent of liberalism stood for. They do not seem to realize or ignore the fact that the political Left made up of Marxists, socialists and anarchists have taken over the once liberal Democratic Party.
As Mark Alexander put it:

Liberals speak of unity, but they incessantly foment disunity, appealing to the worst in human nature by dividing Americans into constituent dependencies. They speak of freedom of thought — except when your thought doesn’t comport with theirs. They assert First Amendment rights — except when it comes to religion or speech that doesn’t agree with theirs. They promote tolerance — except while practicing intolerance and seeking to silence dissenters. Liberals deride moral clarity because they can’t survive its scrutiny. They protest for the preservation of natural order while advocating homosexuality. They denounce capital punishment for the most heinous of criminals while ardently supporting the killing of the most helpless and innocent among us — the unborn, the infirm and the aged. Liberals loathe individual responsibility and advocate statism. They eschew private initiative and enterprise while promoting all manner of government control and regulation.

As Ronald Reagan, a former member of the Democratic Party put it:

The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.

The so-called Progressive is a once liberal person who knows full well that the original concept and political platform of liberalism no longer exists, and that it is okay to sprinkle constitutional law with exceptions that meet their avocations and policies. Socialism American style and diluted from its European counterpart is okay; in fact, they use the European socialism as the base of their agenda.
The Marxist is the person who takes the previous two incremental elements to the next and final level towards a nanny socialist-communist state. Often they delude themselves and others by denying their Marxist policies and ideology; keeping it hidden and enveloped on the pretense of democracy. But pure democracy is mob rule, not rule of law, and therefore fall in step to the agenda of the Progressive-Marxist’s plan.
The RINO, a member of the Republican Party, but not following the principles of conservatism and constitutionality, are either delusional, compromising wimps, or parasitic in their policies and actions. They conform to the times and the whim of the political Left, all in the name of partisanship and unification; all the while not realizing or ignoring that the political Left has no desire to promote partisanship in their political actions, and use the tactic of divide and conquer in order to step up its power within the government.
Liberal-Progressives have put in one basket what their perceived views of conservative and constitutional ideology is – an anti-government, racist, warmongering and religious fanatic. It is true that those who claim to be conservative deny that among those within the Republican Party is not what they publicly announce they are. There are manipulators, bureaucrats and other non-constitutional individuals that are part of the problem.
Once upon a time in America, Congress was made up of two political parties that complemented each other in legislation and government actions and policies – all for the welfare of the people and our country. Politicking no longer remains for political campaigns and runs for office, the game is played in Washington and state governments and disregard why they were elected in the first place.
The basic element of We the People is the voter. Voters have become ingrained in thoughts of party loyalty, instead of whether the political entity is following the rule of law or making it up as they go through the appearance of being statesmen and stateswomen. Voters choose candidates because of political ads, party loyalty, and misinformation instead of what the candidate stands for and stands up to when it comes to the rule of law. The voter makes their choice on the basis of the candidate’s popularity – not their qualifications, sincerity, voting and public record, or their individual character.
Therefore, reformation must begin at its lowest point and work its way up the ladder toward the final goal, starting with the voter.
The media (mainstream media) has been corrupted and no longer, in most cases, fulfill their tradition of being the eyes, ears and voice of the People. Instead they have become the mouthpiece of politicians and useful idiots of the Leftist movement, as well, at times, actually aiding and abetting enemies of free nations, rights and liberties. The first entities to cry foul when it comes to the Constitution is the media, for they are supposed to be servants of the people and not the government, just as those in Congress and the Supreme Court, who are part of the administration of the White House.
The Cycle of Democracy follows a sequence of periods and developments in the principles and study of political science and cycle of government and society in the history of civilization, attributed by Frasier Tytler:

From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.

It is the perfect description of the United States of America that began with the rule of law and ended up living under the rule of men. It is a cycle that must be broken in order for freedom and liberty to remain the hallmark of our nation, a country that consists of 50 separate states all united in the concept of the rule of law and that law is the Constitution of the United States and its amendments.

In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itselfAlexander Hamilton

A government must strong in its purpose and ideology and it must also be limited in order to be effective and continue to operate in the best interest of its people and the nation as a whole unit, yet still respect the states that keep it unified.
This is a representative republic and not a democracy.

It’s not tyranny we desire; it’s a just, limited, federal governmentAlexander Hamilton

The ancient Greeks, who invented and utilized democracy and later the Romans tried to implement it as a republic, can easily provide the model of those aspects of the cycle of democracy.
The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it states so within its text:

This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

So, why have We the People tolerated state governments to ignore the rights and liberties of the citizens of the United States in countering sections of the Constitution of the United States, like the Second Amendment?
And what kind of judicial system would allow it?
The Federal government has taken over the banking system in the form of the Federal Reserve, an entity that is not audited or provided a committee in Congress that effectively oversees its actions and constitutionality; as well as justices of the Supreme Court of the United States shirking their duty as non-partisan elements designed to oversee the actions and policies of government.

When the federal government spends more each year than it collects in tax revenues, it has three choices: It can raise taxes, print money, or borrow money. While these actions may benefit politicians, all three options are bad for average AmericansRon Paul, member of US Congress

Free market capitalism is what has made this nation great and separated from socialist, communist and tyrannical governments of history of civilization. The movement to dispel this individuality has increased under the last two administrations, with an acceleration of trangressions against the constitution and free market regulatory activity now under the thumb of Barack H. Obama, 44th President of the United States and his cadre of Progressive czars.

Government does best when it remains within its constitutional role, so then America prospersMark Alexander

Alexis de Tocqueville came to America from France to do a study of prisons, but also examined America through the eyes of a foreigner whose government had moved toward socialism under a centralized government. He admired much of what he saw, but also saw a threat that could take place in the future. The threat stemmed from those who had been and have sworn to uphold the rule of law – those in the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial branches of the government of the United States and who did not apply those oaths or take them in earnest.
It is time for Americans to let those elected know that reformation has been long overdue and their transgressions against the citizens of the United States and the Constitution of the United States, written on behalf of We the People can no longer be ignored. If there are Americans that do not believe in those principles, do not cherish honor and the rule of law, then let them go in peace somewhere that fits their delusional ideology and propaganda ingrained agenda; and may the fruits of their delusion not be too harsh upon them.

If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymenSamuel Adams

And to those who wish to remain and still pollute the minds of our youth and follow those who believe in something other than a representative republic, a Jeffersonian republic; let the words of Benjamin Franklin ring in your ears:

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Those that prefer to live under the control of government and at the expense of their fellow citizens, rather than live self-sufficient and receive the fruits of honest labor, let them live in another land under another government – for that is not the government designed or established as the government of the United States.
Those that prefer a society where immorality, selfishness and lack of character, integrity and honesty is the norm; than expect to suffer the consequences.

Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious peopleJohn Adams

To American Patriots: I plead to them to stand up and be counted and vote by conscious and knowledge of the candidate – not by popularity and peer consensus or political party. If you want change, you have to change how you vote and who you vote for and why. The time to speak up is now, the time to make votes count is always. Don’t let others decide how you should live your life or how your government is to be operated.
The Founders, Framers and great men of history have long ago passed on – but it doesn’t mean their legacy and spirit should nor does it mean that great men and women cannot rise from the ranks among us.
Suggested Reading:
The Rule of Law by Lawrence Solum … Legal Theory Lexicon, July 5th, 2009.
Laying Down the Law by Paul Johnson … The Wall Street Journal, March 10th, 1999.

[1] Translated to English by C.S. Lewis, English Literature in the Sixteenth Century, 1954, p. 48.
[3] Laws that are in place to protect citizens from unsubstantiated and false statements or accusations against another citizen.
[4] The Road to Serfdom, (1945)chapter 6, also on p. 49 of Reader’s Digest, April 1945.
[5] The Constitution of Liberty, 1960, chapter 14.