Common Sense was written by Thomas Paine in 1775–1776 and took the then unusual step of advocating for independence from Great Britain for the people in the thirteen British colonies. Writing in clear and persuasive prose aimed at ordinary people, Paine made an impassioned case for freedom by elaborating on the harms of maintaining a subservient relationship with Great Britain and the moral and political arguments for a new, egalitarian government of their own choosing.
Paine’s writing was distributed widely and read aloud around dinner tables, at taverns, churches, and at other meeting places. Common Sense was considered the most influential document of its time, exceeded in readership only by the Bible.
In our present circumstances, we believe that there is a growing need for a modern version of Common Sense to inspire a new generation to fight for the freedom to choose how they are governed and by whom. Our future, and that of our children and grandchildren, depends on creating a form of government with minimal delegated authority, and one that is not beholden to monolithic or foreign direction.
As Paine presciently stated,
“Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer...”
After more than three years of governmental overreach across the globe, we seek a truly egalitarian form of government and thus complete independence from unelected foreign entities and from the oppressive measures by government into the lives of citizens. We reject any attempt designed to achieve a one world control for the forces of globalization.
Times change, but the assaults on human freedom are continuous and must be fought again by every generation which does not seek to live under oppression. This document is an initial attempt at penning a modern version of Common Sense.
Modern human beings have reached an historical crossroads at which two paths diverge, each path leading to very different futures for humanity. The time to make that choice is now before us. This choice cannot be neither delayed nor abrogated to those who would deign to rule on our behalf.
The dominant path at this time is one whose nature has been clear for the last three years. This path does not lead to greater freedom for all, but rather a form of oligarchy, a dictatorship of the richest and most powerful. The ultimate goal of this self-declared oligarchy is to subjugate all of the people of Earth to their regime. Accompanying this dystopian world vision is that human freedom and choice must be under elite control: what people are allowed to eat, what they must put in their bodies, where they will live, and how their children are to be raised, will all be regulated from on high.
The goals of this oligarchy will be enforced by captured national governments which will use whatever coercion and force they deem necessary to control their own residents. This path is different only in scope and resources, not intent, from tyrannies of the past, be they monarchies or the various “isms” of the 20th Century, fascism, Marxism, or others.
The second path is that of the renewal of the concept and expression of freedom for all peoples. This is the path that leads to a revitalization of human possibilities.
In the words of Thomas Paine:
“We have it in our power to begin the world over again.”
Much of the population, at least in the global West, has succumbed to the siren call of the global elite and have given over their minds, and often their bodies, in obedience. Not only have they adopted a slave mentality, they seek to impose this mental slavery on others.
In Paine’s day, the new World was an asylum for persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty. Today, there is no new World to escape to. Our battle must be here and now.
By studying history, we know to a great extent how American revolutionaries succeeded in their struggle for independence against the British Empire. It remains to be seen if today we are mentally and spiritually strong enough to block the global empire now arrayed against us. Do we have the courage to reclaim our own independence both individually and nationally?
The coming struggle may well be monumental in scope, disruption, and damage, but once again we have Paine’s words to encourage us:
“The harder the struggle, the more glorious the triumph.”
The pandemic actions of various governments appear to some to be a mere aberration from the past, brought on by extraordinary circumstances. It is important to realize, however, that the events we now witness have been preceded by decades of social conditioning that have been implemented to fracture the very nature of society.
Human societies, however diverse in presentation, have been characterized by fundamentals beliefs: a core family unit, a reliance on tribe/community, art in all of its forms, and a faith in a higher power. It is precisely these ancient human characteristics that have come under planned and sustained assault.
In the globalists’ proposed new world order, the family unit is undesirable and hence disposable. Families need no longer to be parents and their children, and as often presented by its proponents, the world’s population is too great and the impacts on climate too severe to allow all to have children. Rather, the choice to do so must be subjected to state control.
This latter notion ties in with identity dysphoria in which one is allowed, even encouraged, to reject their biological sex, or ethnicity, and simply declare what they prefer as a new identity.
Their right to assert a novel identity is contained within a self-serving view that it is the moral and social obligation of us all to not only accept any person’s declared identity, but also to celebrate their choices, sometimes by helping to indoctrinate our children. One consequence of gender dysphoria and resulting medical interventions is a dramatic decrease in fertility.
The demolition of the family structure, in turn, leads to the deterioration of tribal and community connections and to the perspective that such structures are archaic and thus also disposable. The solution of the elites is to replace innate community and the nation with a super-national entity, for example, the World Economic Forum (WEF). The WEF’s medium term goal is to replace autonomous counties and all local control with their directives from Davos.
What is being proposed is nothing less that a world oligarchy based on wealth and its resulting power leading to a form of modern serfdom for everyone else. The stated consolation from the head of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, is that those of us who are the new serfs can be considered to be “stakeholders” in the new world order. In practice, these stakeholders will hold no real power.
The following provides only a partial list of the assaults on the freedom of peoples that have occurred over the last few years, assaults that have been exacerbated if not planned, under the guise of the Covid-19 pandemic.
For much of the world, arbitrary regulations and unscientific mandates have been the standard response of most governments during this period. In nations that pride themselves on democratic traditions, we have come to realize that our national constitutions and Bills of Rights are functionally useless for preserving our natural and civil rights. This realization highlights a harsh reality: The rights we thought we enjoyed were merely taught to us as comforting fairy tales without actual substance and security. Sadly, blatantly totalitarian regimes are less hypocritical than those that pretend a respect for democracy and the rule of law but fail to do so.
In countries around the world, people have been subjected to massive propaganda campaigns based on deception and outright lies. The deceptions have included:
In Canada, the US, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, citizens were subjected to any, or all, of these additional restrictions:
The first step to establish true freedom is to recognize that all human beings, by virtue of being born human, have certain natural rights. As in the American Declaration of Independence, these include “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Natural rights can be suppressed, but they can never be extinguished. This declaration recognized that natural rights are innate and thus also can not be negotiated. Civil rights, however, may involve negotiations with other people in the society or with whatever structures pass for government.
In the Western “democracies”, we have been raised to believe that the people are sovereign with government as their servant.
This core belief has now been demonstrated to be utterly false with the tendencies of most governments to default into “State of Exception” behaviours, the latter apparent even before the Covid-19 pandemic. In the terminology of the World Economic Forum and those who control it, we are mere “stakeholders” to be dictated to by an elite that is neither elected nor of our choosing.
Over the last years, we have seen that governments in countries around the world, including within their administrative divisions of states and municipalities, have responded to the pandemic nearly identically. The conclusion that must necessarily arise from the above is this: For all governments to respond to the pandemic in much the same way strongly indicates a higher controlling entity that was able to exercise its will regardless of the stated political structure of any country.
The controlling entity, the WEF or a more secret structure of similar intent, has created the plans and circumstances for a complete restructuring of human society.
That this planning has been done to the peoples of the world without their consent must lead to two possible outcomes: In the first, populations surrender sovereignty to the globalists, both personal and national together with the futures of their children.
The second possible, likely the more plausible, outcome is that the push for a “Great Reset” by the globalists will trigger a significant push back, a resistance that will take the form of social and political revolution. Whether that coming revolution is accompanied by violence is solely in the hands of the globalists since it is their deliberate actions that will evoke it.
As the great American emancipator, Frederick Douglass observed during the prelude to the American Civil War,
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both.”
Once the endurance of people has been exhausted, resistance and revolution become the only possible alternatives.
In the faux democracies, people are taught that, in principle, they have the right to choose their own form of government. They are further taught that some governments may have come into being from violent revolution such as in the United States or France, but these lessons are no longer valid in the present day. We are thus paralyzed by the aporia that we are free to think we are free, but not to exercise such freedom lest it disturb existing governments. Those that come into power by force do not like being reminded of this inconvenient fact and seek to cushion their own abuses from future justice by the hands of their own citizens. In this view, while Americans and the French, and others, had their own glorious revolutions from tyrannical governments, the door to allow people today to assert rights is now forever cancelled.
The innate right of self-determination has not, however, been extinguished. The realization that it is not is beginning to percolate in the minds of those who have been subjected to arbitrary governmental regulations and excessive intrusions into their lives and livelihoods during the pandemic. The Freedom Convoy 2022 and the many thousands who stood in support was an expression of this realization.
We are now in a pre-revolutionary period, much like the years preceding the American revolution. This is the period where those determined to change their own systems of government must first wrestle with what they want any new structure to be.
One option is to simply replace an old regime with a newer one, but one that has the same structure and means. This choice is based on either the victors being unable or too lazy to imagine a different form of governance than the one they replaced.
As the American social philosopher Murray Bookchin noted:
“The assumption that what currently exists must necessarily exist is the acid that corrodes all visionary thinking.”
Simply replacing older rulers with newer ones is based on the historically naïve belief that the newer rulers will somehow be more just, more caring, and more responsive to the needs of those governed than those of the previous regime. Historically, this is invariably incorrect, and it is typically only a matter of time before the new regime begins to resemble in thought and action the one that has been replaced.
A “constitutional” monarchy, such as in Canada, describes a parliamentary system in which the actual power resides, in principle, with elected members of the parliament. If those elected have sufficient numbers based on party structure and loyalty to form government, then they are allowed by the system in place to do so. The innate flaw in any such system is that a parliamentary majority is functionally a “constitutional” dictatorship until some future election. Abuses of such systems have been pronounced in countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the originator of the model, the United Kingdom.
American revolutionaries attempted to develop a system based both on suffrage and on a system of checks and balances designed to keep each branch of government within its own domain. Suffrage was not for all at the beginning of the American experiment, but the original rights that the founders proclaimed were, in due course, also given to other groups.
The failure in the process has been in the emergence of monolithic political parties whose loyalties seem to be primarily to themselves, not to the entire nation. As well, any system that relies on a simple majority to rule and pass legislation can never avoid the risk of a tyranny of the majority over the minority.
In their long struggle for self-determination, the Kurds of Syria created another governance structure that is best described as a “grass roots democracy” where political/societal decision making begins at the lowest level, the family, then moves upwards to increasingly larger structures: family to neighborhood, to district etc., to eventually comprise the entire country.
The ability of people to participate from the bottom upwards makes the system responsive to more of the population than any simple majority rule structure can ever be. It also demands more responsibility for governance falls increasing on the governed, as it should.
With the collapse or destruction of any previous regime, considerations of the future structure of governance are inevitable, but as we move forward beyond the Great Reset it is essential to consider the future outcomes desired so as not to simply reproduce older systems of dominance. From this, it becomes apparent that some fundamental guidelines need to be suggested and accepted by the population. Some of these include:
Thousands of years of human society have now culminated in the choice of futures for all peoples. What were once local tyrannies have, in our time, become a global assault on human freedom everywhere.
We now declare our intention, for ourselves and our children and children’s children, to create a truly just and free society that serves all the people rather than a self-appointed elite.
It is our duty to posterity to accomplish this most sacred task.
