top of page
  • Benjamin Celver

Right View, Right Intentions, Right Action

Updated: May 19

Is the Constitution the Supreme Law of the Land? Is it Really? I guess on paper it is.

Ladies and gentlemen, allow us to place legal, moral, lawful, de-facto and de-jure in its proper context. We have allowed our rulers to point to letters and claim their rights de facto. Are we inhuman animals that we should accept letters for Conscience or give freedoms for security? Or if the law has become a weapon instead of a Shield, how then can it be lawful? Continue--

Let us assume that letters are law. Shall we not argue that the Supreme letters of this land are the Declaration of Independence? By those letters, we declared ownership of our unalienable rights, and by those letters, we expressed their meaning in our founding documents and structure of government. Yet our letters go back further. I will go only as far as the Olive Branch Petition for your purview. We, ourselves, return the discussion to which matters: Conscience.

The Olive Branch Petition was a declaration of Conscience, a designation of colonial grievances toward unjust administration or, as we say, "maladministration."

The government on the Isle of Britain wanted all the benefits of ownership over its colonies yet refused to give the authors of its benefits the natural rights of Englishmen. Although we see, in the Petition, some clamoring for this design--is that really what they declared? Are those grievances really the Right View and Right Intention that led to the Right Action? We see the action; we do not see the modus operandi--"mode of action."

No, ladies and gentlemen, their grievances set the stage for history. Our first founders roused the sentiments of free men and free women in their nation. And by their actions, they roused the sentiments of free men and free women everywhere. Successful or not by the standards of history, did we not observe the human mind across the globe sing the songs of self-governance and the universal demand for the improvement of the human condition? Let us hold fast to the question of man's success in that historical moment. A moment we called an "experiment in peaceful governments." Instead, let us move beyond the past and discover the mode.

By what law? By what letters? By what right? Did this transformation in human thinking transpose what is not written to what is written? Can you hold those questions as concepts and seek their resolution? What was the mode of action--the Right Reason that drove them to take from the ether of existence and declare in one voice, "all men are equal" and to further this condition of humanity (our equal station)? By what right or power did they write it down for posterity?

By convention and indoctrination, we say that what is law is law by presentment and affirmation by the people's representatives. Is that law? Where does law exist if we show, by this convention, that the law did not exist before it was transposed into words?

Oh, but history decries that all men are not equal! Some have more, some have less; some take from some and give to others. At that time, "all men" was a pejorative when viewed with our lights. Looking back, however, who decides its final meaning? Rulers or ruled? Do we need to be a victim to be victorious today? Or to be a victim today to be victorious tomorrow? No victims will ever be victorious in intellectual or moral combat because victims view others as either aggressors or heroes. Honest men seek only to be treated as equals.

Hamlet Words, words, words. Polonius What is the matter, my lord? Hamlet Between who? Polonius I mean the matter that you read, my lord.

Hamlet Slanders, sir; for the satirical rogue says here that old men have gray beards, that their faces are wrinkled, their eyes purging thick amber and plum-tree gum, and that they have a plentiful lack of wit, together with most weak hams; all which, sir, though I most powerfully and potently believe, yet I hold it not honesty to have it thus set down; for yourself, sir, shall grow old as I am, if, like a crab, you could go backward. Polonius aside Though this be madness, yet there is method in ‘t.

Shall we clamor for slogans or stand fast in what we know? All men cannot be equal in a mind that would take from one and give to another, nor will we stand by while others are taken from or go unsupported in common causes. By allowing injustice, we steal the unwritten truths and replace them with cages of "words...words...words."

Our codes of Conscience demand that words mean what we think they mean--we go to war over words and leave the human condition ten paces back. Why would we improve the human condition to return to the arena of the Leviathan or the natural state of man, which has been confounded? Man is corrupt unless tempered by the love of his fellow man or by the dreams of future peace and prosperity for his children.

These two pillars of peace and reconciliation are continuously attacked by unreason and indoctrination. Will you let it stand, or will you garner your sacred honor and stand fast in that which is self-evident and requires no written words to know:

"All men are born equal in station, and no man, by virtue of land or title, shall be held higher than the lowest of men."

We have a claim if our wealth and lands have been taken by fraud or force. All the peoples of the world have this claim; it is the claim of free men and Right Reason. Why, then, would a man of conscience, whereby this claim rests, avoir himself to the weapons of this physical world? Should he do so, he has reason to fear the Reaper.

The only weapon a man of Right Reason needs is the conscience to stand fast. Direct man not to the words but to their Spirit:

"We hold these truths that all men are conceived in liberty and own certain unalienable rights (which are ) transfixed through space and time."

These words are the records of our history, but these are not records founded in words. They are the moments of enlightened self-interest which, by a sublimation of thought and deed, our forebears transfixed the unseen to paper.

Will you manipulate the paper to create a world of your own design? Let the paper speak for itself and act in accord with its sounds. Teach your children Right Reason, and you will observe the operation of a Sacred Diet fix the modes of action. Pass on, in self-interest, the confidence of a clear conscience. Never submit to the weapons that were meant as shields, and--by the shield of a greater law, man shall have his peace.

Thus in one voice, this Diet sings a harmonious tune: fight not with weapons but with the unseen powers of Conscience: "Fight for the value of your person. Fight for the virtue of your pride. Fight for the essence of that which is man: for his sovereign rational mind. Fight with radiant certainty and the absolute rectitude of knowing that yours is the Morality of Life and that yours is the battle for any achievement, value, grandeur, goodness, and joy that has ever existed on this earth." Ayn ran this race with Who is John Galt? and leaves us with a compelling case for a philosophy of morality consistent with a nation of equals. We post it below.

Your Friend,


Scientia Plat

Read our philosophia on our homepage:

59 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page