Some days are better than none

Part One. Moral Underpinnings

I’m not posing a new question. It is an ancient question. It’s been an academic question in the best of times, it’s been a tactical question in the worst of times. Aristotle (4th century BCE), Cicero (1st century BCE), and Aquinas (13th century CE) to name three to have pondered it. A tyrant, to Aquinas, at least one who abuses power, loses his right to rule and rebellion can be justified if it prevents greater harm. I’d like to feature the next thinker that I am delighted to have become acquainted with while looking into this, John of Salisbury (ca 1160).

The opposite of the king is the tyrant, who is characterized by the immoderate application of political power over those subject to him. If the ruler seeks excessive domination, if he attempts to use his power to enslave the community, then he is a tyrant… The Policraticus: “as long as all, collectively and individually, are borne along at the will of a single head, they are deprived of their own free will” (FCP: 184). Nor does John believe that the victim of the tyrant ought “to make a virtue of necessity by uniting consent and necessity and by gracefully embracing that which is incumbent upon him” (FCP: 184), as this preserves the mere semblance of liberty. John instead advocates positive measures to protect the community from its tyrant—in the last instance, by tyrannicide.

Libertarians have him in their sights (even if they use a photo of a statue of Plato) so I guess I’m in good company. This podcast (the tyranny part starts at about 15:10) is not entirely uninteresting.

As we move through time and rapidly through The Reformation there is John Milton (1649) in The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates. This is a beautiful book. Check it out. Its full title

THE TENURE OF KINGS AND MAGISTRATES: PROVING, That it is Lawfull, and hath been held so through the ages, for any, who has the Power, to call to account a Tyrant, or wicked KING, and after due conviction, to depose, and put him to death; if the ordinary MAGISTRATE have neglected, or deny’d to doe it. And that they, who of late so much blame Deposing, are the Men that did it themselves.

This was published after the execution of Charles 1 and before England went back to having kings but note the word Lawfull. As we move through The Enlightenment we have Locke, Rousseau, Montesquieu, &c. The heavy lifting has been done for a philosophical and moral underpinning and the legalities are following. The English Bill of Rights (1689), The Declaration of Independence (1776) (and a fragile little written document coming a few years later), The messy French Revolution and its Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789). Luckily it all wasn’t left up to me. They didn’t exactly answer the question of when is it legal to shoot the tyrant but it is a relief that much of that casework has been done as well. In the 20th century we had the Nuremburg Trials (1946) and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998). Naming two.

Great. Things seem to be clearing up. All of this requires due process. I’m on board with due process. I love me some due process. But what constitutes due process in an emergency?

Part Two. Taking an Oath

The practice of oath taking is ancient as well.

Roman Empire. Soldiers swore the sacramentum, an oath of loyalty to their general and the Roman state. A personal oath to a leader. Medieval feudal oaths. Knights and nobles swore fealty to kings or lords, promising military service and loyalty in exchange for land. Monarchs also swore coronation oaths. Religious oaths in the middle ages and beyond. We’re an oathful bunch and oaths are still with us. However some of us think oaths are bullshit. And some of us seem to take oaths to images in our heads (See – “The Oath Keepers”). I’m skipping ahead. Long before those idiots were on the scene a monumental change happened and it affects us today. I wasn’t sure so I asked ChatGPT if the oath to the American constitution was the first oath taken to a written document and it answered yes (so it must be true uh…). And in fact the U.S. Constitution (Article VI, Clause 3) explicitly requires all government officials to take an oath to the written Constitution itself. A very important matter. No one takes an oath to the convicted felon (and civilly liable sexual assaulter) Donald Fuckwit Shitstain except for maga weirdos and Nazi-lite wannabes -luckily for us, though, we no doubt have a surplus of those sliming around.

I’m a civilian. I’ve never had to take an oath to a damn thing but I respect those who do. And, as I am an American, I have an emotional connection to The Constitution of the United States. You might say I have taken a psychological oath to it. Maybe I even feel a bit of American Exceptionalism in this one regard. We have that beautiful constitution, written and preserved. Most nations don’t have anything like it. It’s an extraordinary document that has a hold on our imaginations and purposes. All military personnel take the oath and many people through the years living up to that oath have died for it. In fact this Constitution and its attendant oath is woven fully into our lore. The American Myth is nearly entirely based on this premise. A lot of 2nd Amendment absolutists believe that it is specifically in the Bill of Rights so that the people can kill officials of our government if they become tyrannical. We’ve been listening to this shit for years. Obama was gunna take thur guns away etc. The fetishization of a dead hand’s temperature. I’d wager money without doing any research a super majority of those people voted for the 60 IQ hopeful Dictator Trumple Festerhead. I keep getting off the point to throw dirt.

Part Three. The Simple Answer

It’s not legal to simply shoot a tyrant in the head. He must be arrested and tried. Due process. And yeah I’m for that. Then a penalty will be assessed and if that penalty is shooting the tyrant in the head then it is legal. Of course this sounds a bit optimistic. In the case of a U.S. president it will never happen. At least not in the 2020s.

Part Four. When does Donald Trump become a tyrant?

Forget the research. Never mind the experts. Donald Trump becomes a tyrant when he ignores congress and disobeys the courts. I can hear the screaming now “Oh my God it’s a constitutional crisis. We’re doomed.” No it’s not. This is simple too. Donald Trump has become a tyrant and broken the contract. All bets are off. Except who is going to arrest him? The Justice Department that he has destroyed and the FBI? Does anyone expect that might happen? You’re dreaming.

Part Five. The Emergency

Sigh. You know this asshole was already under indictment for trying to steal the 2020 election and for sending a violent mob into the capitol where people died during or within hours of the assault. And he was indicted for stealing classified documents after he left office. Did any of you fucking Trump voters remember that? What if he gives an illegal order to the military to… I don’t know something stupid like invade Canada. Congress still has the power to declare war and not the President. The War Powers Act cannot be in effect here. It’s Canada. Our friend. Our best friend. Our honorable and free neighbor. Or this. Through malicious intent or idiocy he is going to render this country inoperable uh kill it and potentially kill us but he has to go through the Generals first. Or he’s going to turn our free nation into Russia. If he gives an illegal order to a General it is the obligation of that serviceman to disobey the order. Whatever. The President can fire Generals all day long until he finds one that will do his bidding. Our hypothetical General knows that. He swore an oath to The Constitution of the United States of America and he takes his oath deadly seriously. He realizes Donald Trump is about to kill America. And no one is coming to help. There is no Illuminati, folks. Can he legally shoot Donald Trump in the head? Put me down for yes and select me for the jury.

Part Six. Hail Hail The Illuminati

I’d rather it didn’t come to this. The President has disobeyed the courts and made congress superfluous. (And, by the way, if he’s still alive do you really think he’s going to willingly leave in 2029?) Someone has to stop him, right? My hope is – and it’s only a hope – that there are high level people holding high level meaningful meetings. People who love this country and aren’t just going to sit around and watch it be destroyed. Maybe John Roberts is one of those people. Maybe high ranking members of the FBI, the military, former politicians and Presidents, probably not the Speaker of the House considering who it is, but other real patriots to the Constitution. To freedom. I hope in this eventuality, and they find an ally in the Secret Service, they would physically move in and remove that motherfucker. I don’t care how. Then John Roberts can swear in the next in line. Even that douche JD Vance might look good after Donald Trump. Or if he’s implicated too ug Speaker Mike Johnson. Can this happen? Potentially but I don’t really hold that much hope.

(clean up time)
I don’t think he’s going to order an invasion of Canada I’m just saying if he thought he could he’s the kind of guy who would. And all the people around him are as dangerously stupid as he so cross your fingers and flex your knees.