From the experience of Rome, the right of American citizens to bear arms is crucial to defending the Constitution


I just watched a video that mentioned Trump and a bill to ban bump stocks. Firstly, during his tenure, Trump introduced a bill to ban bump stocks to address the issue of gun abuse in a particular city. However, recently Trump has stated that he supports the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which means he supports citizens' right to bear arms. This prompted a response from the current Biden administration, with Vice President Kamala Harris emphasizing the importance of respecting the bill Trump previously introduced, reminding him not to forget his original intent. The issue of gun rights appears to be very significant. Why is Trump opposing his previous stance? They believe that banning bump stocks might violate the Second Amendment and fear it could lead to a complete ban on citizens' right to bear arms in the future.

Conservatives believe that the right to bear arms is extremely important and should not be easily taken away. This raises a question: Should American citizens have the right to own guns? In the current social environment, is it better to have guns or not? This is indeed a question worth pondering.

From a political system perspective, the United States has a separation of powers: the executive power belongs to the president, the judicial power to the Supreme Court, and the legislative power to the two houses of Congress. This separation of powers is the foundation of American democratic constitutionalism. This principle is not only present in the federal government but also in state governments and even smaller local governments. On a more grassroots and civilian level, I believe there is another form of separation of powers: the right of citizens to bear arms, local autonomy, and media freedom of speech. These rights, which are not interfered with by the central government, are equally important for ensuring the rule of law and democracy in the United States.

Historically, the transition from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire can also serve as a reference. Roman society experienced great instability during Caesar's time. On one hand, the expansion of the Roman territory required more power; on the other, the influx of a large number of immigrants led to conflicts in various aspects such as culture and economy. A strong central power was needed to stabilize society, and military leaders like Caesar, who gained wealth through wars and had the support of barbarian mercenaries, overwhelmed the ordinary aristocrats and citizens.


There is a derogatory term in history, "mob," which, when viewed in the context of modern Western countries, clearly refers not to traditional Romans who lived in the city since the monarchy, but to those newly added Romans, some of whom might have had citizenship. These newcomers caused widespread instability in Roman society.

A similar situation is seen in modern Western countries, where immigrants have become the main driving force behind social instability. In the United States, the instigators of social unrest are primarily new immigrants, including Muslims or other non-traditional ethnic groups. Will this phenomenon lead to the United States transitioning from a republic to an empire, or at least an autocratic government? Will the future see the two houses granting the president, as the representative of the central government, greater powers to address widespread instability? These are questions worth considering.

In this context, is local autonomy and press freedom reliable? I believe that local autonomy might fail during widespread unrest, as mob problems might also arise within local jurisdictions, preventing local elected governments from balancing central government power. Media might not maintain neutrality and truthfulness due to economic interests, as immigrants might become their main consumers. As an Asian, I've noticed that many movie roles must include a black person or a Latino as a foil, sometimes even an Asian, even if the story originally took place in medieval Europe. This is against historical facts and is extremely absurd. Is this political correctness? I think not; it's purely profit-driven, aiming to attract minority spending. Minorities who spend money for this reason are not achieving anything; they are simply deceiving themselves. Ethnic confidence should not be achieved through self-deception.


The right of citizens to bear arms, though it may not necessarily reverse the situation, is the last line of defense that should not be abandoned. When the central government becomes fascist, local power structures break down, and media is profit-driven, imagine how bad the situation would be if ordinary people couldn't even protect themselves during chaos. Good people with guns won't rob and kill, but good people without guns will certainly be plundered and harmed by bad people. After the fall of Rome, at least republics like Venice and Genoa preserved the flame of civilization. Conversely, if there were a hundred Genoa-like entities resisting, Rome might not have become an empire or barbarized.


In summary, depriving citizens of their right to bear arms could lead to the collapse of the republican system. Once that happens, traditional values' defenders will be more passive, and democratic politics will be more easily overthrown. Therefore, maintaining citizens' gun rights is crucial for protecting America's democratic republican system.

评论

发表评论

此博客中的热门博文

The five stages and strategies of South Africanization of the United States

图片
In today's globalized world, the United States, as the beacon of Western democracy, faces unprecedented internal challenges. From racial tensions and economic inequality to surging waves of immigration, these issues are not isolated but interwoven into a complex web that subtly reveals an unsettling similarity—to South Africa's post-apartheid era. After ending apartheid in 1994, South Africa should have ushered in prosperity, yet it has been mired in long-term stagnation due to failed land reforms, economic decline, and persistent racial antagonism: forced expropriation of white farmers' land led to a sharp drop in agricultural output, gun control policies exacerbated skyrocketing crime rates, and government corruption along with media control further eroded social trust. Today, certain social dynamics in the United States seem to be replaying this trajectory: the infiltration of extreme left-wing ideologies, the proliferation of identity politics, and the cultural shoc...
阅读全文

The Third Way of Governing a Diverse Nation：Black people have the right to establish their own autonomous state

图片
    The fate of Britain after World War II—victorious yet defeated—stemmed not only from the successful implementation of the Soviet-American strategy to suppress Britain but, more critically, from Britain’s inability to devise a system capable of establishing an acceptable order for the vast territories and diverse peoples conquered during its imperialist era. In essence, the challenges confronting the United States and European nations today mirror those faced by Britain post-World War II: how to create an order that citizens of different cultures and ethnicities are willing to accept. In my judgment, the Trump administration is clearly incapable of achieving this task. Indeed, the nature of the problems it faces parallels those encountered by the British government after World War II, as well as by Caesar and Augustus in ancient Rome. Under pressure from the United States and the Soviet Union, post-war Britain opted for contraction, shrinking into a small, single-ethnicity ...
阅读全文

The overthrow of the white South African regime should be seen as aggression：Correspondence between the increase in illegal immigration in South Africa and the collapse of white rule in South Africa

图片
South Africa does indeed face an immigration issue, and the increase in foreign immigrants may have been closely tied to the overthrow of white rule (apartheid), particularly as their presence and involvement played a role in this historical shift. Below, I’ll analyze the correspondence between the rise in foreign immigration and the collapse of white rule in South Africa, as per your request, drawing on historical data and context. 1. Historical Context of Immigration in South Africa South Africa has been a hub for labor migration in southern Africa since the 19th century, especially during the mining boom (gold and diamonds), when large numbers of black workers from neighboring countries like Mozambique, Lesotho, and Eswatini were recruited. During the apartheid era (1948-1994), these immigrants were tightly controlled, treated as temporary labor without permanent residency rights, and deported after their contracts ended. Meanwhile, white immigrants, primarily from Europe, were priv...
阅读全文