LA Does Not Love LA

 

Rolling down Imperial Highway 

Sweet Nasty Redhead on my side

Santa Ana winds blowing hot from the north 

We were born to ride.

I love Randy Newman, and I love his signature song “I Love LA.” When he won the mayor’s race in 2001, James Hahn played that anthem to celebrate his victory. From city attorney to mayor, Hahn worked to ensure some decency and competence in the city.

Fast forward to today, and Los Angeles is a hollowed-out, burned-out, blown-out shell of what it was.

Hollywood is leaving, and last year, Pacific Palisades went up in flames.

There’s no Richard Riordan or Sam Yorty to save the city now.

Two Democrats, a Bolshevik and a Menshevik, will fight for what’s left.

Los Angeles had a chance to build on the county’s election changes in 2024. In an unprecedented reversal, a Republican turned independent, Nathan Hochman, took on George Soros's handpicked District Attorney George Gaston. He received the support of numerous Democrats, and certainly of Republicans and independents, and he wiped out George Gaston. 

Los Angeles County residents were tired of lawlessness. They were tired of seeing the intimate scenes of incarcerated gangbangers raising a toast to a pro-criminal district attorney who was fast-tracking their early release. The same year, California voters overwhelmingly approved Prop 36, which re-criminalized property theft and gave local and state law enforcement more tools to crack down on crime. The work isn't done, since County courts are stuffed with woke judges putting personal preferences and idiotic ideologies ahead of public safety. But Los Angeles County is going in the right direction, and even the city of Los Angeles voted in larger numbers for Hochman. 

Then came January 2025, and the untouchable Palisades went up in flames. Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass was attending the inauguration of the next president of Ghana, and she could not be reached.  The Palisades Inferno was a massive failure on many levels—and preventable if anyone had heeded the warnings. Seven years ago, entire sections of Northern California went up in flames. Families desperate to flee the raging infernos ended up stuck in traffic and consumed by the rushing flames. The California Democratic political class didn't care then. 

 

Surely, the Democrats in Sacramento and Los Angeles would care about the left-leaning Pacific Palisades, wouldn't they? 

Nope.

This year’s primary results clearly indicate that Los Angeles city voters have not listened to their better angels. The demons have come in seven times stronger, too, since they find the place burned up and empty, and since no one's there, they've brought more of their vile hordes. How was it possible that voters across the city would embrace more of the same destructive progressive ideology when it's crystal clear to anyone that these failed policies—plus the arrogant lack of concern--are a direct result of this progressive madness?  Even in San Francisco, a growing cohort of voters has started taking over the county Democratic Party, and they have fought for some restoration of common sense, law & order, and commitment to enforcement in public safety. It's not enough, but there have been some steps, however minute.

In sad contrast, Los Angeles continues to double down on the same stupid. This isn't just foolish; it's absolutely dangerous. Unwise people with no regard for the well-being of the everyday citizen have no problem putting more of them in danger. Trump Derangement Syndrome and allergies to anything Republican truly are a mental malady, which has trapped Angelenos in a perpetual doom loop. 

A few weeks ago, TMZ host Harvey Levin complained about what has happened to Los Angeles during his lifetime. A multi-generational Angelino, Levin has seen the best of the city. Now, he cannot ignore how crappy it has become. The relentless homeless shelters, the skyrocketing crime rates, the overall lack of cleanliness and peace, and the desecration that has overrun a once-getaway destination and a second home for the rich and famous are unavoidable. 

Yet the same Harvey Levin repeatedly castigated, shamed, and openly mocked the one candidate who had a campaign platform, character, and commitment to remedy all these problems. Spencer Pratt may have been a reality TV star. But he was also a father and a homeowner who lost everything in the fires. He was fed up, and he decided that he was going to run. He launched AI commercials slamming opponents Bass and Raman with an impressive media blitz. He did a fantastic job in the debates. He cut an incredible cloth as a truly independent candidate. Not beholden to any political party, he didn't care about Trump or Biden or Kamala Harris. He did care about the incompetence of incumbent mayor Karen Bass and her socialist left-leaning challenger Nithya Rahman. 

He's a common-sense guy, and anyone with sense would have elected him mayor. But common sense is no longer common—or welcome—in the City of Angels. They stopped electing Republican mayors in 2001, and then they stopped electing Democrats with any regard for the well-being of the city after 2013. 

It's a tragedy to see the once-heavenly Los Angeles turn into a hellscape. It's a tragedy that so many voters don't love LA, that their hatred of Trump, their disdain for Republicans, and their insistence on all of the shallow, shameful progressive issues are far more important than the necessities to make sure that their city can function. 

I never thought it would come to this, but Angelenos simply haven't hurt enough. How many more homes have to go up in flames? How many more families have to be torn apart by the death of a mother or a father because of crime or natural disaster? How many more businesses have to be destroyed, desecrated, forced to shut down because City Hall refuses to use its power to do what is best for the rest? 

These problems festered two years earlier. Before anti-American immigrant socialist City Councilwoman Nithya Raman Challenger made it into the runoff against Karen Bass, she had won re-election to City Council outright in 2024! For weeks during the March 2024 primary, business owners and homeowners repeatedly complained about the homeless and the crime in the streets. And yet for all their complaining then, and a recent protest test of makeshift homeless encampments outside of Rahman's home this year, voters still sent the elitist socialist to city hall.

Los Angeles, be afraid.

The Democratic Socialists of America have aggressively targeted you. Four of the city council members are DSA all the way. They are vying for a city council majority and the mayor's seat. Registered Republicans can’t help you now: they have given up on voting or moved out of the city altogether. 

What will it take? I am astounded at the destruction and degradation. New York City was one thing. President Trump had pretty much solved the migrant crisis and allowed some degree of enforcement, so New Yorkers got complacent, perhaps? But Los Angeles witnessed the unprecedented disaster that destroyed homes. We all saw the unconscionable incompetence of Los Angeles's political class. 

Yet even with that, LA voters voted for more of the same. 

I love LA, but clearly LA no longer loves LA.

UK MassResistance Forces Major Museum to Remove Pride Flag

 

British MassResistance leader forces major museum to remove pride flag.

UK’s pro-LGBT state policy yields to our activist!

Another story of how one person can make a difference.

June 22, 2026

 On June 10 the museum was flying the "pride flag" (left). By the weekend it had been replaced with the St. Albans city flag!

This is yet another example of what one principled activist can make happen!

In our previous post we described how a Kansas MassResistance activist pushed the leftist Topeka & Shawnee County Public Library to cancel their “Pride Month” displays and all other LGBT-related events during June.

Our British allies are achieving similar success!

Earlier this year, Adrian Ruffhead became our new UK MassResistance chapter leader, continuing the courageous work started by David Skinner several years ago. (See our recent report on David’s stunning win in court.)

 Sign at an MR meeting in Salisbury, England in 2017.

In Adrian’s hometown just north of London, the St. Albans Museum normally flies the Union Jack on its main roof. But every June, it has replaced it with the LGBT “pride” flag. This year Adrian decided to do something about it!

People in Britain tend to be mealy-mouthed and overly polite when it comes to confronting their public officials on hot-button culture war issues. But starting with David Skinner, bold UK MassResistance activists like Adrian have been breaking that mold.

 The St. Albans Museum normally flies the British Union Jack national flag - as it should!

Adrian first went to the museum and spoke with a staffer about removing the flag. He was polite but very descriptive and firm. The staffer definitely got the message. But Adrian realized he needed to contact the museum’s Visitor Services Manager directly.

On June 10 he contacted her, and sent her the kind of strongly worded email she probably rarely receives from regular citizens. Among other things, Adrian made the following points:

Who authorized the flying of the gay pride flag? Was it an instruction that came from the City Council or someone on the museum’s staff? The pride flag is controversial and is a political statement which the museum should not be drawn into.

The local Muslim community has put out a document about how to navigate pride events as a warning to their families, particularly their children who can be influenced by the gay agenda.

That is not the only faith group that finds gay pride controversial as well as offensive. As far as I am aware, all the major worldwide faith groups stress heteronormativity and heterosexual marriage. So it seems strange that a public building like the museum should fly a flag that is a symbol of the opposite.

You need to understand that just because religious leaders try to endorse the gay agenda does not mean that their followers do. Most of them object to it.

The flag stands for a kind of lecturing, hectoring position – whereby the majority heterosexual community needs to be lectured into a silent acceptance of the gay lifestyle.

There is a much darker side than the media and pro-gay pressure groups give. There are huge problems with sexually transmitted diseases due to the homosexual lifestyle. Even some local pro-gay charities have the up to date STI figures; you look them up. Gay pride marches are also not the nice, carnival type events that the media likes to give in its sanitized images.

Flying pride flags on public buildings may also have the effect of promoting a lifestyle to children and minors that their parents do not want them to adopt. There is a big problem with schools doing this, parents are very unhappy about the pro-gay teaching in schools and the museum should avoid following this.

The flag should certainly not be paid out of the taxes of the people, or museum funds.

This clearly had a strong effect. On the weekend, Adrian saw that the flag had been replaced with the flag for the city of St, Albans. It's a yellow St Andrew's cross on a blue background. As we write this, the city flag is still flying over the museum (without the “pride” flag).

This is a great victory! The locals love it.

And more coming from our re-energized UK MR chapter

Adrian said he will be working with other activists to hold a spirited protest of the London Pride parade in July. (We were there back in 2017.) And he will be lobbying Parliament to defeat their second attempt to ban reparative therapy across the country. (We also helped stop that the first time in 2023.)

Adrian has also worked closely with our friend Lisa Nolland, a pro-family activist based in Bristol and leader of the “Marriage, Sex, and Culture Group,” a nationwide organization that informs Britons on how to fight the LGBT agenda and defend the family. He has also been attending various public rallies where he’s attracted others to join our growing UK chapter.

Final thoughts

We’ll say it again: One person who is determined, principled, and persistent can make a big difference!

People are saying that the United Kingdom is on the cusp of a pro-family resurgence. We hope our UK MassResistance chapter will help make it happen!

   

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!

Who's the Boss? Trump, That's Who!

 

He sets the stage.

He makes the demands.

Trump’s in charge, ladies and gentlemen of the Republican Party. Get in line, get out of way, or you will get gone. You push back on his agenda, and you are gone.

Congressman Thomas Massie is the latest to learn this lesson too late. He could talk about “his principles” all day long, but what did he accomplish?

Nothing.

He went along with Speaker-designate Kevin McCarthy in January 2023. In exchange for Massie’s support, McCarthy gave him a coveted spot on the House Rules committee.

In May 2023, McCarthy was pushing through another porkulus spending debt-ceiling increase. Fiscal conservatives were clamoring for its failure. It came before the must-pass House Rules Committee, where it squeaked by to the floor on a 7-6 vote. Thomas Massie, Mr. “National Debt Alarm Clock” principled libertarian conservative, was the tie-breaking vote.

At that point, I realized that Massie was all talk and no walk. There were no principles he was willing to fight for, if it meant losing a seat on a key committee or not being able to grandstand against President Trump.

The same President Trump had endorsed him in 2020, even though Massie had made him mad by calling for a voice vote on the COVID-19 pandemic spending. The same President Trump backed him in 2024, as well.

When 2025 rolled in, with Trump at the helm and Republicans running both chambers of Congress, Massie just threw a fit and stalled the Speakership vote. Instead of incumbent Speaker Mike Johnson, Massie nominated Tom Emmer. The Minnesota Congressman had withdrawn his name for consideration two years ago because he was too liberal, more liberal than Johnson!

And yet, “principled conservative libertarian” whatever Massie chose the liberal Minnesotan. Make it make sense!

It doesn’t.

Massie was a grandstander, a virtue-signaling grifter throughout the Second Trump Administration. He voted against immigration enforcement. He voted against the spending reforms (and cuts!) in the Big Beautiful Bill.

Then he started bellyaching about Israel and the Epstein list.

Massie had long cast contrarian votes on bills and resolutions relating to Israel. There’s nothing wrong with voting the will of one’s constituents when they clash with Trump.

Massie picked too many fights, though, and he lost. He angered the general conference by forcing votes. He set off Christian Zionists with his hostility to Israel. He then outraged Trump and his MAGA base by voting down the BBB, then blasted the President over the Epstein files and voted against the party’s main-line agenda.

Massie should have limited himself to two targets, and one of them should not have been Trump.

As Scott Jennings shared on a recent CNN roundtable, Trump has transformed himself into the consummate party boss. And not a moment too soon! The Republican Party has long struggled with unity and organization. An incumbent President often serves as the leader of the party, but the boss-like maneuvers that Trump has employed rival all of his previous Republican presidential colleagues. Bush I and II, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, and onwards into the past all showed more of a deferential attitude toward the GOP conference, oftentimes because Republicans not in the majority to begin with. Playing along was essential in those days.

Trump has changed political dynamics, ensuring Republican majorities with sustained party discipline.

If you cross Trump, you'd better knock him out, step aside, or get ready to lose your seat.

By and large, this kind of policy and political discipline is refreshing. Republican voters have long had to tolerate campaign conservatives who moved in line with the Potomac two-step once in office. Voters didn’t realize the importance of holding incumbents accountable until the Tea Party movement, and even then, it was a hit-and-miss effort.

With Trump, bad incumbents are getting the heave-ho, and it’s all for the better.

Louisiana’s Bill Cassidy was always a moderate, and he showed his conciliatory (read, backstabbing) ways when he voted to convict Trump. That kind of wishy-washy failure has no place in the larger movement.

Sure, some will complain that Trump is turning the GOP into a Trump-Only cult. The truth is that some Republicans in both chambers have voted against the President, even criticized him openly, and yet Trump doesn’t trash them or force them out. Consider Congressman David Valadao (R-CA) and US Senator Susan Collins (R-ME). Both of these moderate-to-liberal RINOs are popular in their respective Democrat-majority constituencies. They have to lean to the left to scoop up enough votes.

Collins and Valadao don’t showcase their resistance to Trump, though. They just disagree with him, vote against the party on some bills, but they support the GOP leadership across the board, which enables the majority of conservative priorities to pass.

Trump is bossing out the RINOs, the sellouts, the grifters, the bad Republicans in deep-red districts who insist on selling out and undermining the larger cause. The Republican conference needed this kind of cleaning out for a long time, and I am grateful.

Of course, Trump as the boss has had some misses. He bombed during Election 2022, when all of his US Senate nominees challenging open seats or Democratic incumbents exploded. This year in California, his endorsement frustrated two Republican gubernatorial candidates from getting into the Top Two.

Nevertheless, Trump’s endorsement misfires are getting rarer with each election cycle, and with Election 2026, we have witnessed TWO RINOs get the boot, with clear assurances that stronger Republicans will take their place. We can look back at 2010 and 2012, when the Tea Party Movement was stretching its legs and learning to flap its wings. There were more devastating misses, like the US Senate races in Delaware and Alaska, and then bigger US Senate failures in Missouri and Indiana in 2012.

Republicans, following Trump’s more media-savvy messaging, have learned to knock out the RINOs but maintain a more mainstream message. They win the independents and some of the disaffected Democrats. State your MAGA principles, but focus on the bread-and-butter issues, and you win more elections.

Trump the Boss is calculating with long-term wins in mind, not just the next election cycle. It’s about principled victory through pragmatic means, ensuring that liberal Republicans, feckless consultants, and retired GOP brass keep their mouths shut or go away.

Trump the Boss is also finishing off the left-leaning podcasters, pundits, Woke Right wrecks who have spent more time targeting Jews and Israel rather than focusing on the needs of America and Americans. Corporate media did its best to prop up anti-Trump wannabe America First candidates, and they have all crashed and burned. 

Boss Trump’s current coalition is managing internal and external opposition, but he’s trouncing the dying corporate media, decaying academia, and fussy big business interests trying to get cheap labor. Trump has maintained a warm and ready steady hand of leadership, pushing his agenda through. 

His aggressive stance has taught Republicans how to fight, or has forced them to fight, or has forced them out because they fight him or won't fight at all. That's what a good boss should do:  Maintain the well-being of the party, ensure that the mission is accomplished, and provide good standing for everyone so that they're all getting the job done.

Sore Loser: Cagey Kaji Plays the Race Card Following Election Loss

Now this is just shameful.

Towards the end of the campaign, Councilman Jon Kaji was the subject of an FCC complaint from the FBI.

Here's how he responded:

Whether the "FBI" is an acronym for a private entity or the letters refer to the actual Federal Bureau of Investigation is immaterial to my point.

Why does Kaji mention 1942?

Because he's tying this political attack to Executive Order 9066 and the discrimination, incarceration, deportation, and internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

He literally compared his campaign setback to the Internment of Japanese-Americans.

This response is not serious.

In fact, it's quite offensive.

I don't recall David Kartsonis:

1. Forcing Kaji to sell his goods.

2. Forcing Kaji and his family to move out of their home.

3. Forcing Kaji to live in a horse stall as temporary shelter

4. Forcing Kaji and family to live in an internment camp

Did David Kartsonis do any of this?

Last time I checked, Kaji and his family are still safe and sound in North Torrance. There are no internment camps. Japanese-Americans in general are facing nothing like that level of discrimination today.

Most importantly, Kartsonis has done nothing of the sort to suggest or advocate for such treatment.

People are more than welcome to have their differences with Kartsonis (I certainly do).

But to implicate him with such abject racism and abuse is a low blow.

To disparage and exploit the Internment of Japanese Americans because you lost an election, that is just despicable.

Kaji was his worst enemy this election, and I must say at this point, he deserved to lose.

With Comedic Flair, Seinfeld Reduces the Palestine Conflict to Nothing

 

Jerry Seinfeld has been dragged into the Arab-Israeli conflict. He’s been at war with the pro-Palestine progressive left ever since the October 7^th atrocities, which gave anti-Semites the right to crawl out of the cracks and bash Israel and Jews, all while hiding behind: “It’s the IDF’s actions that we are protesting!”

Of course, Islamic groups and progressive leftists have been hoisting Nazi flags and targeting synagogues and Jewish hospitals. And now they are coming for the comedians, at least the ones who won’t pick sides and promote the meaner ones so that they don’t get cancelled.

Do the left-wing activists target Jerry Seinfeld because he’s Jewish? Of course.

They also target him because people listen to him, and they want him to say what they want said:

“Palestine must be free. Free Palestine!”

Comedians, to be successful, don’t tell people what they want to hear.

They tell people what they themselves are thinking and what others don’t want to say.

Comedians are supposed to be the most anti-PC members of society. They push the boundaries; they rant and rave about the fact that everyone is ranting and raving.

Comedians stand out because they stand up for, well, the right to say whatever they want about something.

They say what they themselves want to say, and they tell people what they don’t see, or they are too polite or afraid to say.

Which brings us to the Seinfeld-Palestine controversy.

How Jerry Seinfeld threaded the needle on the challenge posed by the Palestinian protesters was a miracle to behold.

Last year, he dismissed their demands with “I don’t care about Palestine.” After all, he was enjoying a walk with a friend.

Then, when pressed on the issue by another pushy activist, all while he’s entering his car, mind you, Seinfeld simply stated: “It doesn’t exist.”

He told them what they didn’t want to hear, and it made it clear that he didn’t care one way or another.

Whether he’s teasing them or whether he truly believes that there is no such thing as Palestine, we don’t know.

And that’s the beauty of it.

Seinfeld is the genius we need for these very tough times.

He rejects wokeness without calling it wokeness. He can reject wokeness while falling asleep listening to the boring demands of the Woke Left and Right, who demand the death of Jews, Israel, and anything else with a Star of David attached to it.

Consider an earlier example of how he deftly dunks on these daft weirdos. When one entertainment reporter wanted to get into the diversity and representation issues in media and entertainment, he just rolled his eyes: “Oh, yeah, let’s get into that!”

He sounded off what everyone else is thinking, but is unwilling to say because of cancel culture.

He shuts down the abusive Marxism, but he doesn’t go after the scourge of humor and fun from a political stance. He just makes fun it, treats it as a dismissive nothing.

What about the Elephant, or rather the President, in the middle of the room?

First, Seinfeld called Trump “God’s gift to comedy.”

Then, he called his happy face “scary.”

Then he states that he’s not interested in making Trump jokes.

Can you blame him?

His co-creator in comedy, Larry David, wrote a sitcom-flat rant about his “dinner with Hitler” for the New York Times. The whole point was to compare Trump to Hitler and shame anyone who likes Trump. David’s humor isn’t funny because it’s positing something fundamentally untrue: Trump is not Hitler, and the people who like Trump are not Nazis.

And anti-Trump rants are not insightful or interesting. “F--- Trump” doesn’t resonate. It’s angry, bitter, empty. Everyone has had enough of Trump, except for the wonks and the policy-makers. They care.

The rest of us, the vast majority of simple humanity who want our country back, and who can see that Trump has some good—or a lot of good—about him, we want to have a good time and live our lives.

Other comedians have crashed and burned on Trump. Wanda Sykes went off on Trump shortly after his election, and the crowd booed. Her set took place in Massachusetts, so I doubt the booing came predominantly from hardcore Trump supporters. They just don’t want the lecture. Comedians need to learn: you can’t win with Trump because he’s so polarizing, charismatic, colorful, and such a media creation on top of it all. You can’t win by going after him or going toward him, so just ignore him.

Seinfeld deftly deflected the Trump issue recently, too, joking that he’d rather tell jokes about … raisins.

I guess he heard it through the grapevine!

Seinfeld has chosen wisely. Without admitting it, Seinfeld is following the blunt wisdom of Gene “KISS” Simmons: Just do your art, and shut the f--- up.

The art of comedy looks at the ordinary and finds the extraordinarily funny in it. That’s been Seinfeld’s successful schtick this whole time. People don’t want flabby political commentary or a social science lecture about how they should feel about the state of the world and its politics and the wars and what they should do about it.

 They’re attending a comedy club.

They want to laugh.

Seinfeld has some welcome precursors of comedy who kept it comedic, never bitter or hateful.

Johnny Carson made fun of all the presidents. Yes, he was a liberal, but he had enough class to ask for thoughts and prayers when President Reagan was nearly assassinated, and Carson asked for this kindness during the Academy Awards.

Jay Leno was funny because he made fun of both political parties, although there’s plenty of evidence that he’s a confirmed liberal.

Jimmy Fallon fussed candidate Trump’s hair, made fun of his skin and accent in skits, but he also focuses on the funny. He doesn’t lecture, scold, or pontificate. He still has a late-night show, while preachy “Karen” Stephen Colbert is off the air.

Jerry Seinfeld understands this game, as well. His complaints about presidential aspirations is hilarious. Instead of getting political, he gets personal. After all, who would want to be president? Only a crazy person would want the job, right?

Sure, he did a set in his car with President Obama—when he was president. Yet even then, the conversation was less political, more personal.

He doesn’t take Palestine personally, either—and he doesn’t take it seriously at all.

That’s the real relief. Whether on the left or the right, the fact that this contentious matter has invaded some of our time, space, and brain matter, we all want a break!

The protest culture is wearing thin. The outrage culture is getting old. The cancel culture is just wrong, and people are speaking up.

Seinfeld is the best at making fun of it because he makes the joke the important part, and we all get to laugh along with him. He’s permitting us, without saying a word, to laugh at the madness in the streets, and we can know that tomorrow, we will meet friends at local café and argue about whether to use the bottom button, how to drink orange juice, or whatever “Yada, yada, yada” means.

Tenth Amendment Center: It was Self-Defense. Not Rebellion.

 

It was Self-Defense. Not Rebellion. Forgotten Declaration: Why they were Fighting Back  (article | podcast) **NEW BOOK FOR PRE-ORDER: REVOLUTION BETRAYED

“Unconditional submission” or “resistance by force.”  Thomas Jefferson, John Dickinson, and the Second Continental Congress said those were their two terrible options less than three months after the battles of Lexington and Concord and the “shot heard ‘round the world.” This is the story of the forgotten declaration in which they explained why they fought back. THE DECLARATION It’s July 6, 1775 - the Second Continental congress just unanimously passed a resolution written by Thomas Jefferson and John Dickinson - the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms. They explained that the legislature of Great Britain “attempted to effect their cruel and impolitick purpose of enslaving these Colonies by violence, and have thereby rendered it necessary for us to close with their last appeal from reason to arms.” Despite this, they felt morally bound to tell the world exactly what was going on. “Yet, however blinded that Assembly may be, by their intemperate rage for unlimited domination, so to slight justice and the opinion of mankind, we esteem ourselves bound, by obligations of respect to the rest of the world, to make known the justice of our cause.” The primary issue? They told us in the first paragraph. Parliament claimed the right to unlimited power over the colonies - in all situations, for all time. “If it was possible for men who exercise their reason, to believe that the divine Author of our existence intended a part of the human race to hold an absolute property in, and an unbounded power over others, marked out by his infinite goodness and wisdom, as the objects of a legal domination never rightfully resistible, however severe and oppressive, the inhabitants of these Colonies might at least require from the Parliament of Great Britain some evidence, that this dreadful authority over them has been granted to that body.” This was, of course, a clear reference to the Declaratory Act of 1766, where the British claimed power over the colonies “in all cases whatsoever.” Of course - Jefferson, Dickinson and the entire Congress vehemently rejected the notion that even the unwritten British constitution authorized such a power. “The Legislature of Great Britain, however, stimulated by an inordinate passion for a power, not only unjustifiable, but which they know to be peculiarly reprobated by the very Constitution of that Kingdom” GUN CONTROL That brings us to the fateful day - the “shot heard ‘round the world” on April 19, 1775. Jefferson and Dickinson called out the British as violent aggressors, starting first with Lexington. “General Gage, who, in the course of the last year had taken possession of the Town of Boston, in the Province of Massachusetts-Bay, and still occupied it as a garrison, on the 19th day of April sent out from that place a large detachment of his army, who made an unprovoked assault on the inhabitants of the said Province, at the Town of Lexington, as appears by the affidavits of a great number of persons, some of whom were officers and soldiers of that detachment, murdered eight of the inhabitants, and wounded many others.” That wasn’t enough for Gage. The British kept pushing for more and marched on Concord. “From thence the troops proceeded in warlike array to the Town of Concord, where they set upon another party of the inhabitants of the same Province, killing several and wounding more, until compelled to retreat by the country people suddenly assembled to repel this cruel aggression. Hostilities, thus commenced by the British Troops, have been since prosecuted by them without regard to faith or reputation.” But the redcoats didn’t march on Lexington and Concord to collect taxes. They were there to confiscate guns and powder so they could better enforce obedience to a series of laws implemented to assert the power of the Declaratory Act. This Isn’t Rebellion. It’s Survival. Article Here: https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2026/06/17/forgotten-declaration-why-they-were-fighting-back/ Podcast Here: https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2026/05/this-isnt-rebellion-its-survival/ This October, 1774 “suggestion” from Lord Dartmouth to Gen. Gage is a powerful example of their total gun control mindset and strategy. “Amongst other things which have occurred on the present occasion as likely to prevent the fatal consequence of having recourse to the sword, that of disarming the Inhabitants of the Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut and Rhode Island, has been Suggested” Backed by an almost complete ban on the importation of arms and ammunition to America issued by King George III just two days after Dartmouth's recommendation, Gage took that suggestion and ran with it.  Broad searches for arms and ammunition quickly ramped up in the Boston area. And the British didn’t hold back on taking them, either. An account published in April 1775 showed the scale of the seizures. “The Neck Guard seized 13,425 musket cartridges with ball, (we suppose through the information of some dirty scoundrel, of which we have now many among us) and about 300 lb. of ball, which we were carrying into the country--this was private property.--The owner applied to the General first, but he absolutely refused to deliver it.” This gun control program continued even after the fighting started on April 19th. Jefferson and Dickinson described it in detail. “The inhabitants of Boston, being confined within that Town by the General, their Governour, and having, in order to procure their dismission, entered into a treaty with him, it was stipulated that the said inhabitants, having deposited their arms with their own Magistrates, should have liberty to depart, taking with them their other effects.” But this was just a dirty trick, something gun grabbers have always been known for. “They accordingly delivered up their arms; but in open violation of honour, in defiance of the obligation of treaties, which even savage nations esteemed sacred, the Governour ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid, that they might be preserved for their owners, to be seized by a body of soldiers; detained the greatest part of the inhabitants in the Town, and compelled the few who were permitted to retire, to leave their most valuable effects behind.” This is what we'd call today a war crime. For them, it was the lowest of the low - the crime of perfidy - a deliberate betrayal of trust.   “By this perfidy, wives are separated from their husbands, children from their parents, the aged and the sick from their relations and friends, who wish to attend and comfort them; and those who have been used to live in plenty, and even elegance, are reduced to deplorable distress.” The moral and legal criminality of perfidy traces its roots back to ancient Rome and Greece - and later the medieval rules of chivalry. But few captured how repulsive this treachery was seen as better than Jean Jacques Burlamaqui. “We likewise observe, that, without any great thought or reasoning, a child, or untutored peasant, is sensible that ingratitude is a vice, and exclaims against perfidy, as a black and unjust action, which highly shocks him, and is absolutely repugnant to his nature.” ROOT CAUSE In the Declaration of the Causes, Jefferson and Dickinson again pointed to the Declaratory Act as the source of the problem. “Parliament was influenced to adopt the pernicious project; and assuming a new power over them, have, in the course of eleven years, given such decisive specimens of the spirit and consequences attending this power, as to leave no doubt concerning the effects of acquiescence under it.” They included a long list of British acts to show the consequences of this unlimited power, including: Take money without consent Expand courts of admiralty beyond their limits Deprived them of trial by jury Suspending legislatures Blocking commerce Protecting government agents from standing trial Standing army Quartering soldiers And that was just a partial list, intentionally too. Because the Declaratory act meant unlimited power, they didn’t even see the point in listing out every single one of the abuses and usurpations. “But why should we enumerate our injuries in detail? By one statute it is declared that Parliament can "of right make laws to bind us in all cases whatsoever." What is to defend us against so enormous, so unlimited a power?” NEW BOOK: REVOLUTION BETRAYED America Rebuilt the System the Founders Fought a War to Secede From This is the story of what the Revolution actually was, told through the voices of Adams, Jefferson, Paine, Otis, Dickinson, and many others. Plus the thinkers who shaped them - and a clear-eyed reckoning with how completely it has been thrown away. The redcoats never left. They just stopped wearing red. GET IT HERE PATIENCE They made it clear that fighting back was not a rash decision. They were patient - for years. “We saw the misery to which such despotism would reduce us. We, for ten years, incessantly and ineffectually besieged the Throne as supplicants; we reasoned, we remonstrated with Parliament, in the most mild and decent language.” Pointing to the First Continental Congress in September 1774, it’s clear they were working their way up an escalation ladder very intentionally - sticking to peaceful measures, like boycotts. “We have pursued every temperate, every respectful measure; we have even proceeded to break off our commercial intercourse with our fellow-subjects, as the last peaceable admonition” Even this was considered pretty extreme because they wanted to remain friends in peace. But liberty was more important. “Our attachment to no Nation upon earth should supplant our attachment to liberty.” At the time, they thought the boycott would be the last step required. But with hindsight, they realized it had no chance - because tyrants don’t care. “This, we flattered ourselves, was the ultimate step of the controversy; but subsequent events have shown how vain was this hope of finding moderation in our enemies.” The British response to this “peaceable” final effort? The empire did what empires do: more troops. “Large re-enforcements of ships and troops were immediately sent over to General Gage.” It was at this point that Jefferson and Dickinson acknowledged that all their protests, petitions, and peaceful boycotts were like running face first into a brick wall. “Fruitless were all the entreaties, arguments, and eloquence of an illustrious band of the most distinguished Peers and Commoners, who nobly and strenuously asserted the justice of our cause, to stay, or even to mitigate the heedless fury with which these accumulated and unexampled outrages were hurried on.” THE “OFFER” Back to General Gage - Jefferson and Dickinson made it clear they weren’t too fond of his tactics. “The General, further emulating his Ministerial masters, by a Proclamation, bearing date on the 12th day of June, after venting the grossest falsehoods and calumnies against the good people of these Colonies, proceeds to "declare them all, either by name or description, to be rebels and traitors; to supersede the course of the common law, and instead thereof to publish and order the use and exercise of the law martial." This was in reference to the General’s proclamation of June 12, 1775, where he had the audacity to make the Americans an offer he thought they couldn't refuse: Give up your guns.  Give up your friends. And we’ll give you “peace.” “Do hereby in his Majesty's name, offer and promise, his most gracious pardon in all who shall forthwith lay down their arms, and return to the duties of peaceable subjects, excepting only from the benefit of such pardon, Samuel Adams and John Hancock, whose offences are of too flagitious a nature to admit of any other consideration about that of condign punishments.” Strategically, Gage was trying to overpower them - scare them into submission by burning and murdering. “His troops have butchered our countrymen; have wantonly burnt Charlestown, besides a considerable number of houses in other places; our ships and vessels are seized; the necessary supplies of provisions are intercepted, and he is exerting his utmost power to spread destruction and devastation around him.” THE RESPONSE They knew they only had two options: Live on their knees, or fight back. “We are reduced to the alternative of choosing an unconditional submission to the tyranny of irritated Ministers, or resistance by force.” Their response? NO DEAL. “The latter is our choice.” Despite the great danger in that response, they had strong moral standards - and backbone - that would allow no other path forward. “We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery. Honour, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us.” Echoing Samuel Adams’ 1772 warning that compliance meant tyranny for “millions yet unborn” - they also knew that submission meant never-ending tyranny - not just for themselves, but for generations to come.  “We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them, if we basely entail hereditary bondage upon them.” JOIN TAC, SUPPORT LIBERTY! Let’s keep building the foundation! For as little as $2/month, help us take a stand for the Constitution and liberty - whether the government likes it, or not. (they don’t!) details and join here SELF-DEFENSE Jefferson and Dickinson then reiterated two key principles: The right of self-defense is a gift of our creator, and when violence is used against you - you use it back. “With hearts fortified with these animating reflections, we most solemnly, before God and the world, declare, that, exerting the utmost energy of those powers which our beneficent Creator hath graciously bestowed upon us, the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume” “Liberty or death” was no mere slogan for the American revolutionaries. It was a way of life - no matter how difficult or dangerous the situation might be. “We will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverance, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being, with one mind, resolved to die freemen rather than live slaves.” They wanted everyone to know - despite not yet fighting for independence, they were giving an example to the whole world: A free people will never live on their knees.  “We fight not for glory or for conquest. We exhibit to mankind the remarkable spectacle of a people attacked by unprovoked enemies, without any imputation or even suspicion of offence. They boast of their privileges and civilization, and yet proffer no milder conditions than servitude or death.” The self-defense principle was so important that Jefferson and Dickinson again drove the point home: They were fighting back in defense of natural rights - life, liberty and property. “In our own native land, in defence of the freedom that is our birth-right, and which we ever enjoyed till the late violation of it; for the protection of our property, acquired solely by the honest industry of our forefathers and ourselves, against violence actually offered, we have taken up arms.” Just in case the empire was hard of hearing, they closed out the Declaration with one more response to that offer from Gen. Gage.  NO DEAL “We shall lay them down when hostilities shall cease on the part of the aggressors, and all danger of their being renewed shall be removed, and not before.” 📖 Read it in your browser → HERE 🎙️ Watch or listen to the podcast → HERE As we commemorate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, this article and podcast are a big part of how we’re ramping up our efforts to teach more and more people what the goverrnment-run “education” system never teaches. There’s also our new book, now available for pre-order Revolution Betrayed: America Rebuilt the System the Founders Fought a War to Secede From Please consider picking up a copy today HERE We’re also commemorating our own anniversary this month: 20 years of teaching people the true principles behind the American Revolution and the Constitution. And we’re gearing up for much more. But we can’t do it alone. Your membership support is crucial to keep these timeless lessons alive. JOIN US TODAY! Prefer to make a one-time donation? Pitch in here: https://donate.stripe.com/fZecNzggUaDG3LydR0 You can also mail a check to: Tenth Amendment Center 4000 Barranca Parkway, Suite 250 PMB 705 Irvine, CA 92604 Brick-by-brick. Person-by-person. Building a strong foundation for liberty – whether the government happens to like it, or not. (they definitely do not) Thank you so much for reading - and your support! Concordia res parvae crescunt (small things grow great by concord) Michael Boldin, TAC