Category: Republic - Bryan William Brickner

2020: Part 1 of Hannah Arendt, American Greatness and Constitutio Libertatis

6/9/2019

American Greatness

Hannah Arendt said she wasn’t German.

The Germans didn’t want her anymore, ‘cuz, you know, they went nuts.

Why’d they go nuts?

One reason for sure is that American greatness was ignored.

Ask yourself, “How did Hitler come to power?” And the answer has to include the constitution Woodrow Wilson offered to Germany at the end of World War I.

Why didn’t Wilson offer the Germans a constitution like ours, like the one George Washington and the founders made?

Where’s the thirty Thousand?

Where’s the Enumeration?

Not in Wilson’s constitutional offering, so how could it be great? This is no small matter, given what happened to Hannah Arendt and millions of others.

When Arendt got to America she wrote about revolution. One commentator noted something new about her thoughts: “The new paradigmatic political actors are the American Founders, whose debates and deliberations concerning the drafting and adoption of the Constitution are presented by Arendt as every bit as exemplary as anything in Homer or Thucydides.”

As exemplary as anything in Homer or Thucydides: in other words, American greatness is not found in the boom-boom of rebellion and the 4th of July; American greatness is found in the law of revolution, the US Constitution, and 17 September.

*Next Up: A celebration of the 7th Amendment on 7/20 with Part 2 of Hannah Arendt, American Greatness and Constitutio Libertatis.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

2020: We the People and the Actual (Cat) Enumeration, not Census or Questioning

5/9/2019

Cat Enumeration

There is one cat in the picture.

That is the actual (cat) enumeration.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution details the purpose for taking the “actual Enumeration,” the formal count of the people of the several states, and it doesn’t mention a census or the logic for asking the people questions. It simply states:

“The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every …”

Congress does the count, the enumeration, by law.

Then Congress is to divide by thirty Thousand, by law and as Washington taught in the first veto, for a state’s federal representation.

That aggregate creates the House of Representatives for We the People.

No questions asked.

We the People represented according to numbers is constitutional fact, just like there’s one cat in the picture.

One people.

One constitution.

One cat.

2020.

*Next Up: 9 June and a 2020 update focusing on Hannah Arendt, American Greatness and Constitutio Libertatis.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

We the People and Usurpation Day 2019

4/9/2019

George Washington's Textbook

Today is Usurpation Day, which first happened on 9 April 1792, when the US House of Representatives broke their word and usurped a power not granted by law.

What created that usurpation moment was President Washington’s first veto, which was also the first veto ever under our Constitution.

President Washington, being a surveyor and Freemason, knew numbers; he also knew the Constitution, which he helped write, and which clearly states: “shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand” (Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3).

What shall not exceed thirty Thousand? That would be the number of Representatives due a state for its enumeration.

In the first attempt to use the enumeration, Congress sent President Washington a bill that dropped the fraction; if a state had thirty Thousand and one, they were due, according to the phrase “shall not exceed,” another Representative. Instead, Congress dropped the fraction and did not give certain states another Representative.

Washington vetoed the bill.

The House of Representatives, unable to override President Washington’s veto, passed a new bill for representation on 9 April 1792, the first usurpation law, and used a divisor of “thirty-three” Thousand for representation instead.

President Washington also knew of the Bill of Rights and its Article the first, the one about moving said representation ratio to forty and then fifty Thousand. Washington either let the new representation bill become law without signing it, or signed it knowing he had made his point and believing this issue would be resolved with the passage of Article the first: this has yet to happen.

Washington was a creator of We the People and the idea of representing ourselves according to numbers. Twenty-twenty is the next enumeration. Why not now ‘Merica? Why not you? Time we did it, time to count the people, divide by thirty Thousand like George taught, and see what We the People really look like … according to numbers.

*Next Up: 9 May and a 2020 We the People update.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner
~.~
“Those who toy with life never attain mastery. Self-discipline and courageous contemplation are necessary steps to understanding. However, do not become overzealous and drill yourself into the ground.”

From Brian Browne Walker’s The I Ching or Book of Changes: A Guide to Life’s Turning Points (1992)

Johnny Reb and Gus Yank On Our Way: Mount Horeb

3/22/2019

Johnny Reb and Gus Yank OOW: Mount Horeb

Part XIII of XIII

“… How’s this?”
“Feels like home.”
“Welcome home Gus.”
“Welcome home Johnny.”
“There wasn’t a horse before.”
“No?”
“It was people conveying the man.”
“Was there a child?”
“Yes.”
“Slave?”
“Represented.”
“Slavery, it means both: slaves and slavers.”
“Yup.”
“You bring the flag Reb?”
“I thought you did.”
“Not me.”
“Well then.”
“Well then what?”
“Let’s rally ‘round it.”
“Mount Horeb style.”
“Worked before.”
“Did.”

Thanks All!

*Next Up: Usurpation Day 2019.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

Johnny Reb and Gus Yank Somewhere On Our Way: Bertha

12/21/2018

Johnny Reb and Gus Yank: Bertha

Part I of XIII

“Reb?”
“Yeah Gus.”
“Who’s Bertha?”
“You hearing that too?”
“And why don’t they want her coming around anymore?”
“It’s a metaphor.”
“For what?”
“Bertha I suppose.”
“That doesn’t help Johnny.”
“Maybe for us?”
“How?”
“Round and round we go.”
“Like the usurpation.”
“Right Yank.”
“And we’ll just try to see what’s going down.”
“The representation usurpation is going down.”
“I like the bended knees part too Johnny.”
“Noble.”
“Taking a knee for the Constitution.”
“Taking a knee for something greater than yourself.”
“Let’s visit Captain Downs again Reb.”
“Let’s Yank.”

Next Up: 4 January 2019 and part II of the winter series Johnny Reb and Gus Yank Somewhere On Our Way: Up.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

2020 Update: Representational Absence and Presence in Locke, Madison and Dahl (and Amar)

10/10/2018

Absenting creates a presence: presenting creates an absence.

This creates a political problem, meaning one of value.

John Locke, James Madison and Robert Dahl were political theorists who worked on this problem, the problem of a presence creating an absence (and vice versa).

Locke’s work presented liberalism and a way for particular groups to make absent other groups; this has worked against the likes of tribes, nation-states and monarchies.

Madison’s work presented the US Constitution and a way for a particular group (We the People) to make present and absent other groups (representation); this is done via the decennial census and the ratio of “one Representative for every thirty Thousand.” Madison’s presence is law, yet absented by the usurpation.

Dahl is simple, so to speak: he absented Madison’s presence by ignoring the “thirty Thousand” found in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3. This makes Yale’s Professor Dahl the 20th century political theory front man for the representation usurpation; the 21st century Yale front man for the usurpation is Sterling Professor of Law Akhil Reed Amar. Amar is simple too, so to speak: he just argues / presents by absenting one of the two shalls in the aforementioned Article.

Viewed from the past, the constitutional concept “We the People” has been an absent presence; viewed from today, it looks like a presenting presence; viewed from the future, that would be a constitutional We the People and an end to the representation usurpation, or simply, 2020.

*Next Up: 14 November and a new pamphlet release, A Dissenting Opinion from Johnny Reb and Gus Yank about George Thomas.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

Constitution Day 2018: Webs and Ways and Knowing

9/17/2018

Webs and Ways and Knowing

On 17 September 1787, everyone in the room knew the meaning of Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3: “The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative.”

Alexander Hamilton knew.

Dude named Benjamin Franklin knew.

James Madison, he knew.

George Washington knew, as the “thirty” was a wish of his.

The founders, all 39 of them, knew what they were signing on that September day.

Three dissenters knew too, as they withheld their signatures because of what they didn’t want to sign.

The Constitution was then sent to and ratified by all 13 independent states, so they all knew.

What did they know?

They knew that “We the People” was a constitutionally created way, one recreated every ten years.

They also knew that along that way there would be webs.

Webs are things that snare.

To avoid webs, stay on the way, the We the People way.

Happy Constitution Day All!

*Next Up: A 2020 political theory update on 10 October, Locke, Madison and Dahl.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

New Pamphlet: A Dissenting Opinion from Johnny Reb and Gus Yank about Ambrose Burnside

9/1/2018

Set and setting

While waiting for the sun to move again, the spirits Johnny Reb and Gus Yank (Kotka) are sitting at the New York monument on the Antietam battlefield. The two are discussing a dissenting opinion about Union General Ambrose Burnside; Johnny and Gus say Burnside was working with (not against) Confederate General Robert E. Lee.

A Dissenting Opinion from Johnny Reb and Gus Yank about Ambrose Burnside.

Next Up: Constitution Day.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

Gus Yank and Johnny Reb Somewhere On Our Way: Republic

8/11/2018

Republic

13 of 13

“… It looks like Kyd ‘lost’ the orders so they could be found.”
“Reb … that would have been treason against the Confederacy.”
“And for the Republic, what word would you use?”
“I don’t know.”
“Me either Gus.”
“The special orders Johnny, they told the disposition of Confederate forces.”
“The Union knew Lee had divided his army.”
“Lee divided in order to capture Harpers Ferry.”
“Right.”
“Advantage Union.”
“Lee thought the garrison at Harpers Ferry would run.”
“They didn’t.”
“They were ordered not to surrender, and, haphazardly, reinforced.”
“How Johnny?”
“The way time can. Lee could have marched on Harpers Ferry and made them run when he was at Leesburg on 4 September; at that time, we was only about 20 miles from the Ferry and then we could have turned north to Frederick.”
“Reinforcements?”
“The Yanks in Winchester and Martinsburg didn’t run for safety like Lee predicted: instead, they ended up at Harpers Ferry.”
“Total?”
“The delay in not taking the Ferry allowed you Yanks to double the size of the garrison, from say about 6,000 to 12,000.”
“Lot more Yanks Reb.”
“Sure was.”
“That’s why Lee divided his army at Frederick.”
“Those Yanks were a threat to our flank.”
“Because of the Shenandoah Valley.”
“Right.”
“Motive Reb?”
“Why’d Kyd do it Gus?”
“If it was Kyd, what was his reasoning?”
“Maybe save the likes of you.”
“How?”
“Stop the war before you got in it.”
“By ‘losing’ the special orders.”
“The victory strings Yank.”
“What about them?”
“Some victories had strings attached to them; they came at the expense of what you referred to as treason.”
“Treason against the Republic?”
“Which would be support for the Anti-Republic.”
“You’re saying that’s what Kyd knew.”
“He knew.”
“Who did the treasonous acts Johnny?”
“Because of Kyd Gus, I won’t show you just one example, I’ll tell you about two generals that were Anti-Republic Yanks.”
“Generals Johnny?”
“Generals.”
“Will I know them?”
“Their first names are ‘Ambrose’ and ‘George.’”
“Reb … you mean …”

*Next Up: Saturday, 1 September and a new pamphlet release, A Dissenting Opinion from Johnny Reb and Gus Yank about Ambrose Burnside.

Thank you! Posted by Bryan W. Brickner

Gus Kotka and Johnny Reb Somewhere On Our Way: Equals

8/1/2018

Equals

10 of 13

“… See?”
“I see New York Yanks Johnny – and officers at that.”
“Before, when it looked like the cannon was firing on the monument.”
“The cannon fired on these men.”
“These ‘Mericans Gus.”
“I see that Johnny.”
“These men, these NY Yanks, they can’t communicate with me Gus: you can.”
“Why?”
“Why the Valkyrie?”
“Just a story you said.”
“Your story.”
“I’m to fight again, with you?”
“Not against with, together with this time.”
“So we defend the Constitution, together, instead of attacking each other, over the Constitution, like we did before.”
“As equals.”
“Equals?”
“There’s a missing counter-balance in my story, a ‘Gus Yank’ so to speak.”
“You ain’t really asking or telling me, are you Reb?”
“Explanation I thought … could also be a volunteer moment.”
“‘Captain Downs’ … the privates had fun with that one.”
“What if he had been promoted?”
“Major Downs, big fun.”
“How about ‘Gustuv’ and ‘Hugo’?”
“Not so much, strong names, you know, like Jonathan.”
“And Augustus.”
“Let’s take a seat Reb.”
“Let’s …”

Next Up: Part 11 on 7 August of the summer series Gus Yank and Johnny Reb Somewhere On Our Way: Strings.

Posted by Bryan W. Brickner