Weimerica? — Carl Schmitt on the Rule of Law

Carl Schmitt, 1888–1985

The Liberal System likes to adorn itself with the label “the rule of law,” implicitly suggesting that other systems of belief,  other non-liberal states or statelets throughout history solely function as lawless entities violating the freedom of their citizens. This is not true. Since time immemorial states worldwide, even the worst tyrannies, have used legislative policies when passing a verdict against political opponents or common criminals. The problem is not whether those illiberal states or statelets are/were just or unjust; the problem is rather the right or wrong choice of words and the subsequent interpretation of those words by the detractors or proponents of those states.

For instance, legislation in communist Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union contained detailed constitutional structures covering all aspects of citizens’ lives. The same goes for Fascism in Italy and National Socialism in Germany (1922–1945), whose leaders considered their country’s laws far more freedom-loving than the laws of the Liberal System.  In contemporary America, under the cover of the grandiloquent expression “the rule of law,” the judiciary tends more and more to slide toward excessive legalism—lawfare by any other name, which sooner or later leads to administrative disruption with a possibility of triggering civil unrest. Currently, this process of lawfare can be observed in the US judiciary, as illustrated by numerous indictments against former president Donald Trump, by Letitia James’s crusade against VDARE, the Charlottesville lawsuit, and much else.  Moreover, the quasi-Soviet-style trials of thousands of January 6 Capitol protestors are in full swing with defendants becoming subjects of poorly defined and often abstract misnomers (rioters?, trespassers?, insurrectionists?, terrorists? …or freedom fighters!?). It must be pointed out that the salvo of mutual accusations, felony charges, and countercharges from Trump’s legal team versus US government-sponsored local DAs and activist, Trump-hating lawyers like Roberta Kaplan are not an inherent feature of the American system. Not at all. In fact, overt hyper-legalism in the US, bordering increasingly on administrative anarchy, represents the very essence of the historical dynamics of the Liberal System.[i]

Quis judicabit? — who makes the final legal decision?

The striking similarity between the current US judicial system and the semi-anarchic judiciary in Weimar Germany that had resulted in incessant civil unrest and serial political killings was observed by Carl Schmitt in his numerous critical articles published from 1933 to 1944 in legal journals of National-Socialist Germany. One must, however, keep in mind several points of concern when studying Schmitt’s legal work. The English language does not have the equivalent for the compound German noun “Rechtsstaat” (state ruled by law), a noun which has its exact verbal and conceptual replica in all continental European languages (état de droit, pravna država, stato di diritto, právní stat, etc.).  Instead, US/British legal scholars resort to a more general expression such as “the rule of law” or the “constitutional state” — terms which do not convey the same specific meaning as the German “Rechtsstaat”. The expression I use in my translations of Schmitt’s citations, i.e., state ruled by law may by closest to the original German noun “Rechtsstaat”.

Secondly, one must keep in mind that Schmitt, who is often quoted today by scores of contemporary US and European traditionalist scholars, Alt-Right, or New Right intellectuals and activists, was not only a legal expert and a renowned political scientist, but also a multilingual scholar constantly prodding into the meaning of political concepts and their semantic distortions by diverse ruling political classes in Europe and the US. The expression “fake news” did not exist during his lifetime, although Schmitt was well aware of the faked legalese embedded in liberal judicial jargon. Despite his open sympathy for National Socialism and Fascism it is worth examining the relevance of his articles, especially when assessing the current US and EU legal systems within international law. In his article under the laudatory subtitle “The National Socialist state is a righteous State” he writes:

Whether a “Rechtsstaat” [i.e. state ruled by law] exists depends on a specific property that one attributes to this ambiguous word and also to what extent a Rechtsstaat  comes close to a righteous state. Liberalism of the 19th century attributed to this term a specific meaning, thus turning the Rechtsstaat into a political weapon in its struggle against the state. Whoever uses the expression, must exactly spell out what he understands by it and how his Rechtsstaat differs from the liberal Rechsstaat, as well as how his Rechtsstaat should be national socialist, or for that matter any other kind of Rechtsstaat.[ii]

Given the widespread overuse of the term “the rule of law”, it must not come as a surprise that this term hardly sounds credible any longer. “In this sense,” writes Schmitt, “liberalism has indiscriminately endeavored over the last century to portray every non-liberal state, be it an absolute monarchy, be it a Fascist state, be it a National-Socialist or a Bolshevist state, as a state not ruled by law (Nicht-Rechtsstaat), or as an unjust or lawless state (Unrechtsstaat).”[iii] Furthermore, the Liberal System, as its supporters tirelessly point out, is established  as a two-tier social construct with a sharp division between the state apparatus and a private person. The underlying assumption is that such a division can best prevent the rise of a powerful state and a dictatorial leader. The liberal state, according to liberal theoreticians, must solely function as an occasional “nightwatchman,” never interfering in the private sphere of the individual:

This two-tier nature explains the typical two-tier constitutional framework of the bourgeois Rechtsstaat. Fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the liberal-democratic state and its constitutional system are essentially the rights of the private person. For this reason alone [those rights]  can be considered “apolitical”. The liberal state and the constitutional framework are based on a simple and direct contrast between the state and the private person. Only on the basis of this contrast is it natural and worthwhile to endeavor to create the entire building of legal protections and facilities in order to protect a helpless, defenseless, poor, isolated private person from the powerful Leviathan “state”. Only for the protection of a poor individual do most of these legal protection measures, in the so-called Recthsstaat, make sense. They can be justified on the grounds that the protection from the state must be increasingly modeled on judicial proceedings, and even more so in line with the decision of judicial authority independent from the state.[iv]

The above-mentioned quote on the romantic self-perception of the Liberal System is flawed. One might raise the question: is it true, as liberal theoreticians claim, that division between the civil society and the state can best guarantee individual liberties, and best protect private citizens from arbitrary state decisions? Hardly. Is it true that the much-lauded liberal checks and balances, including a sharp separation between the executive, the legislative and judicial branches can best prevent totalitarian temptations? Hardly. The overly praised cleavage between the private sphere and the public sphere is deceptive; it does not enable citizens to escape from the modern liberal surveillance state. It must be emphasized over and over again that in the Liberal System it is no longer the state that exerts control; instead, a myriad of elite, well-funded pressure groups, NGOs, media companies, and lobbies influence citizens on the daily basis while wisely using the state only as a legal cover. Schmitt analyzed long ago the negative impact of nongovernmental counterpower pressure groups.

However, all of this gets completely absurd as soon as strong collective associations or organizations conquer nongovernmental, non-political spheres of freedom, and as soon as nongovernmental (but by no means apolitical) organizations get hold of private persons, on the one hand, while confronting the state under the guise of various legal titles (people, society, free bourgeoisie, producing proletariat, public opinion, etc.), on the other. Such nongovernmental, but, as mentioned, thoroughly political associations, come to dominate both (via the legislature) the will of the state as well as (through social and “purely private law” coercion) the single individual whom they turn into a media subject. They are actual and real political decision makers and manipulators of the levers of state power.”[v]

Does this sound familiar? What is now derisively named as deep state was well anticipated by Schmitt, although this term did not exist during his lifetime. In their criticism of the liberal Weimar Constitution German nationalists introduced and popularized all over Europe the term (das) System, a term that can easily be substituted today for the modern liberal deep state. Surely, in a Liberal System where power is decentralized, known in academia as the “power-sharing” process, a dissident citizen can only fantasize about toppling the government by force in  his resident state. At first sight this may sound like a noble freedom-protecting trait of the Liberal System. However, the atomized nature of dispersed power in Liberalism, resulting from its famed checks and balances policies, inevitably leads to a dispersed mutual distrust and hatred among citizens, in which the line between the victim and the perpetrator gradually disappears. The late Claude Polin, who was one of the best observers of liberal contradictions, raises a haunting question: “How is it possible that one fears a king exercising his power, and why is it that one has less fear when the same power is conferred on millions of little kings?”[vi]

Hundreds of nongovernmental kingly figures and hundreds of private agencies in the US and EU, including scores of ethnically based pressure groups, each displaying often a bizarre victimhood, and each controlling its own turf, have their own methods of repression against dissident voices. Surely most NGOs in the US and EU, do not hide their deep aversion of the strong state and are quick to denounce any sign of populism in the government bureaucracy.  Yet they do not shy away from exercising their own repressive policies against other out-groups, while begging at the same time  the state for generous subsidies.  ADL, SPLC outlets in the USA, dozens of antifa and transgender foundations, including government-funded Chistian and Jewish institutions in the EU, such as Crif, LICRA or Amadeu Antonio Stiftung  operate very similar to former Soviet local people’s commissariats. They all take for granted, however, that they are entitled to a slice of government, i.e., the taxpayers’ cake. In the name of abstract “tolerance” and “the rule of law” they consider their democratic and legal duty to spy and denounce their fellow citizens who are critical of liberal judicial dogma. The postmodern liberal democracy, although bragging about being the best of all the worlds, is increasingly reminiscent of the early medieval states-in-the-making.

The Liberal System, i.e., the deep state in contemporary US and EU, being basically an oligarchic system, did not drop from the moon, nor is it made up of conspiratorial monolithic gangs of self-declared thieves bent on subverting the state. The Liberal System in the West is just a logical outcome of different, often mutually feuding groups that willingly—and sometimes unwittingly—as in the case of Christian religious groups promoting liberal refugee policies—work on the social, racial and national decomposition of the state and its people — a trait inherent in the very dynamics of the liberal (mis)rule of law.

[i] T. Sunic, “Historical Dynamics of Liberalism: From Total Market to Total State? “, The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies 13, no. 4, (Winter 1988), p. 455.

[ii] C.  Schmitt, „Fünf Leitsätze für die Rechtspraxis“ in Deutsches Recht, 3, Nr. 7 (1933), S. 201–202, reprinted in Gesammelte Schriften 1933–1936 (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2021), p.56. (also: https://archive.org/details/carl-schmitt-gesammelte-schriften-1933-1936)

[iii] C. Schmitt, Der Rechtsstaat, first published in  Nationalsozialistisches Handbuch für Recht und Gesetzgebung (München: Zentralverlag der NSDAP, 1935, S. 24–32) reprinted in Gesammelte Schriften 1933–1936, p.286-287.

[iv] C. Schmitt, „Die Verfassungslage Deutschlands“ in Preußische Justiz – Rechtspflege und Rechtspolitik, Nr. 42, 5. Oktober 1933, pp. 479–482, reprinted in Gesammelte Schriften 1933–1936, p.74.

[v] Ibid, p. 75-76.

[vi] Claude Polin, “Pluralisme ou Guerre civile ?” Catholica (winter, 2005–06), p. 16.

13 replies
  1. charles frey
    charles frey says:

    Unquestionably, Israel’s Minister for National Security, Ben-Gvir, encapsulated 3 millenia of ultimate Talmudic wisdom on statecraft best, when, after the interim judgement from the ICJ at the Hague, he opined: ” Hague – Shmague ! “

  2. Alan
    Alan says:

    The very Great Tom Sunic .
    We cannot add or subtract from or to most of his spectacular analytical clarity. We have only 2 ,perhaps 3, very minor quibbles,differentiation s or interpretive variatives here from the vast and gorgeous conceptual truisms and quintessential historical to current definitional right thinking in this fabulous Tom Sunic article Yeah,.”.” We never fail whenever possible,all jew repressionary internet censorship aside,to read or listen to Tom Sunic. The remaining communists over there, hate Christ,.. hate Christian freedoms,.. where Tom is,..,and there are still many communists,…,must dread his reality.” Young people should savor..treasure ,really investigate,,almost every word and conclusion Tom sedulously posits. His brilliance and overall correctness aside for just a nanosecond,or a pico second,..we speak reflexively in a. different postmodern sense to the foundational conditions needed for most Americans and certainly young people ,who may stumble onto TOO and find ,serendipitously,..this magisterial article. Points to realize…1 This perspective is a protypical european, actually slavic perspective on a world that is long gone…vanished easily 85 years prior….a time before television,prior to massmedia,before internet… as we appear to recognize former radio,television,books, scholarship in Hitler s era, versus 2024 Sam altmans jew AI or Larry fink s Aladdin ,or CIA psy op Taylor swift..a tranny? a man?…jewish millionaire Greta thundberg..a boy?… handsome truth a Mexican jew faggot?… laura or..larry loomer? .2. If you are not european it’s exceedingly difficult in the tik tok, rumble ,odyssey farcebook,Microshaft..Google gulag era to expect young people who can make 20 thousand pr month after taxes, having porn sex of sorts to be bothered to strive to..comprehend or appropriate..grasp all the depth of scholarship we expect of Tom Sunic.
    3. .In 2024 we have the…”rules based or -dah” ..please forgive and tolerate our diction,dear moderator, … from onerous psychotic globohomosexual weapons and agitprop selling pro pedophile literal cannibal Jews, …mentally ill establishment JEWS… yeah..its always Establishment
    Jews versus freedom .”
    we dont have a nation of true non churchocentric real spiritual firey christians,..not dullards,bingo playing catholic open borders unobstructed illegal adoring conformistic democrat types and or idiotic evangelical dupes,who are both in deep with the synagogue of Satan jews,dancing with the Devil and all.
    .Be clear..duped churchocentric low information “christians”.?are they..really..”christians?” in what way,?….support JEWS. and jewish agenda s…not most real Christians we know. 4. Liberal is a word term like Gay.
    .Gay a very long time ago meant happy ,care ,free ,a condition of harmonized empathy. Now ..in 2024..Gay means degenerative …homosexual,faggot,queer,perverse
    ,sodomizer or potentially demon possesed child or baby rapist.Liberal,similarly in scorched earth current collapsed america…”jewmerica, ..means silicon jew valley technofacist grifter dupe..Liberal means conform to the Big pig Big Brother Jew narratives or die. .It is not enough to obey Big Jew Big Brother,you must Love Big Jew Big Brother.”Young people…new readers….think long. hard and very carefully on this. Some misconcocted misinterpreting ridiculous people claim nick Fuentes is the New Julious Evola.We don’t think so.We add this absurd example in america, because older Europeans and the young Europeans who know something of them (the older europeans,)..often find they are stuck on some historical point in the 9th or 11th century…to give their euro super nationalism and..ethnicity,..not nesecerily racial realism..some root…,at least prior to the current satanic and neurotoxic overutility of social massmedia, .Tom is of course correct easily in 98 or 99 percent of what he writes in our view but the bottom line in fallen scorched earth america is … the horrifying vile wef blackrock..splc, ,bnai brith,hias,…who,cdc,nih,zoa,apaic,naambla..glaad..supreme court jew clowns at best..the jewish communist nea clowns,the dr .oz the rino turkic child castrator pal of jewdog trump the jew chump deceover….and jewdog trumpdog pro lgbtq plus jew lobbies,the adl scum, jewish planned parenthood,ted turner,….”rabbi Warren buffet..”-sarc,.. paul ehrlich,..little rat faced massmurdering jew fauci.. jewdevil cyborg bill gates..ezekiel emanuel,beryl lazar s and schmuely boteach ..idiotic pack rat chabad jew sociopath super supremacists.Zuckerfarce and orca winfrey..the demon possesed fractured robotic faces of the Hebrew African political monopoly cartel …surreptitious coercive cyborgs ..at the end of the day..to chislam and hateful beta male kushner too,we can only say..”thanks but no thanks Jews!”
    5 .By the way..putin the Jew is in deep with Chabad just as t..rump..trumpdog is. We hope that new american readers and or young people will fact check and thus rediscover Tom Sunic s erudition as someone who ,like ourselves ,knows jewish communism,…moshe pijade,uddban,stasi.communist franjo tudjman…,maybe not as sick as jon cohn kerry,the horse faced horses ass jewdevil….. tito style in Eastern europe..
    really,..middle europe. Be advised that JEWS who expropriated…covid funds ..you know, the New Jew Kung Flu funds ,…redirected monies,petrodollars, to ms13 and la Raza
    and to other violent illegal alien gangs,.We are informed by friends on the east coast that NYPD has been ordered to ignore,not arrest ,shut up about, this new jew schadenfraud pre-designed to decimate the blue cities..,that is Democrat cities…. so we are told. So much for demonrats and equally culpable rino republicrats lusting for cheap,read ,slave labor and white erasure. Whatever gorgeous dialectical clarity from Tom Sunic, be advised, the Jews have made sure the West is unmoored,untethered,..obliquely abstracted..disconnected from any straight line logic or non jewish history.The jews need no defense,they have no moral defense,they are the destroyer liar subverters of every non jewish nation state or civilization.All the intellectual greatness,extreme objectivity and erudition of Tom Sunic and orof.KM aside,they are fabulous but this requires more than beautiful analysis ,more than seeking psychological impetus…they ….require…removal from all positions of secular authority over non jews..the Holodomor2.0 continues,not just in the Holocaust ethnic cleansing in Palestine..”….we oppose any war with Iran” Isreal has now 7 wars in 2024 and demands america fight all of them “To Hell with the Synagogue Of Satan.”All best to Tom Sunic. His works,Not The Talmuds! Hitler correctly burned the talmuds and jewpig wilhelm reichs original lgbtq sex change for Goyim tractates …writings. sick theories, gay marriage ,books. Theres no jew rat tunnel …no sewer too low for the Synagogue of Satan wef blackrock cyborg filth.” Jews want you to forget about tunnels. Wake up Gen Z.! Conversely..as in diametric opposition.. Tom Sunic articles should be required reading for all decent freedom minded thinking folk.
    Our Volk.
    Dovidjenia.Hvala ti.Tom. Hvala puno. Grazzi. Dankeschoen,merci.Jinque. Gin dobre. ….Gracias.
    Shi shi. Koh nichi Wa. Te Kan iss.. For all who are able, not just enamored of or subsumed in the intellectual world..as beautiful as it is… ,it is time… absolutely …..”Rearm Now.”

  3. Herbert
    Herbert says:

    Hallo verehrter Herr Sunic. Die sogenannte “Demokratie” ist in der Tat ein einziger Schwindel und Betrug, einzig dafür da, die Völker zu täuschen. Wie das Sprichwort schon sagt: Würden Wahlen etwas ändern, wären sie verboten. “Fake News” gab es als heute gebräuchliches Phänomen zu Schmitts Zeiten nicht, aber Synonyme wie Lügenpresse, Falschnachrichten, Tatarenmeldung, Desinformation, Fehlmeldung oder Zeitungsente. Wobei eine Theorie besagt, dass der Begriff sich phonetisch aus der Abkürzung ‚N. T.‘ (oder auch ‚nt‘; englisch: not testified oder ganz einfach aus ‘not true’) ableitet, die in einigen englischsprachigen Zeitungen hinter nicht überprüften Meldungen den unklaren Wahrheitsgehalt kennzeichnet. Die Bezeichnung entstammt dem Lateinischen non testatum (‚nicht geprüft‘). Nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg bekamen viele deutsche Zeitungen ihre Informationen von den amerikanischen und britischen Streitkräften. Diese Informationen konnten aber oft nicht überprüft werden. Daher wurden sie mit dem Zusatz ‚N.T.‘ versehen. Da auch falsche Meldungen dabei waren, entwickelte sich ‚NT‘ in der Umgangssprache zur Ente und damit zur Zeitungsente. Beste Grüße

    from Google Translate:

    1,159 / 5,000
    Translation results
    Translation result
    Hello dear Mr. Sunic. The so-called “democracy” is in fact a fraud and fraud, designed solely to deceive the people. As the saying goes: if elections changed anything, they would be banned. “Fake news” did not exist as a common phenomenon today in Schmitt’s time, but synonyms such as lying press, fake news, Tatar news, disinformation, false news or newspaper duck did. One theory says that the term is phonetically derived from the abbreviation ‘N. T.’ (or ‘nt’; English: not tested or simply from ‘not true’), which indicates the unclear truth behind unverified reports in some English-language newspapers. The term comes from the Latin non testatum (“not tested”). After World War II, many German newspapers received their information from the American and British armed forces. However, this information often could not be verified. Therefore they were given the suffix ‘N.T.’. Since there were also false reports, ‘NT’ developed into a duck in colloquial language and thus into a newspaper duck. Best regards

    • charles frey
      charles frey says:

      01 Thanks for teaching me something new about our German language, at 84.

      02 Had never pondered the origin of the word Ente [ phonetically nt ], or duck, as designating an outright falsehood in the media.

      03 Looked up the meaning of TARTARENMELDUNG, which originated with the reporting of the Crimean War [ 1854-6 ]; GB, France, Turkey, Sardinia vs. Russia, in the London TIMES.

      04 Purportedly, the TIME’s local reporter had discovered some relevant, secret information from a captured Tartar courier, on the Russian side. Likely of the kind pleasing the pofiteering war funders and assuaging the taxpayer.

      05 In the world of elevated journalism, Tartarenmeldung now refers to a generally correct reportage, in which minor points may have been MANIPULATED.

      06 As in the generally accepted reportage on the October 7 attack, vs. the now unproved/disproved forty beheaded babies fabrication, among numerable others. Invented and spread under the experienced IDF’s ” IRON TRUTH ” disinformation program

      07 Hardly an insignificant discernment, which will, after all, play a major role in November.

  4. Tom Sunic
    Tom Sunic says:

    Danke Herr Herbert for your words. The German language is the richest European language – an excellent tool for psychological an and legal studies. We know what happened with it though. Other than footing the bulk of the EU tab – the German langue is barely used in the Brussels Politburo. .
    Since 1945 the German people – and by detour all peoples of European stock – the “victorious” side included, have been subject to self-penitentiary, self-hating polices imposed by the US/UK/Soviet world -improvers, who in turn must also be subject to the edicts and ukases of their non-European, often Levantine masters.
    I’d urge all US young scholars of European stock to learn the German language, study the German thought of the 18th ct. – a thought of great thinkers and poets -aka Denker und Dichter.

    • Herbert
      Herbert says:

      Dear Dr Sunic, thank you very much for your kind words. Yes, I absolutely agree with you. The German language is indeed a historical phenomenon. It enables very complex, structured, systematic thinking, which is very beneficial to logic. I think I once heard that the majority of all books ever written were published in German.

      All the deconstructivist nihilistic ideologies have done a lot of damage to this fragile linguistic fabric, what still (wrongly) calls itself German today is a willful perversion and rape. What is taking place here is a hybrid war on all levels, economic, political, historical, cultural, linguistic, sexual, and much more.

      The EUSSR is a masonic institution designed to “contain Germany from the outside and thin it out from the inside”, to weaken it through permanent financial blackmail. If you just consider that tiny Malta has the same weighting in their Politburo (“Council”) as Germany, it becomes clear.

      A certain “Lord Ismay” once said NATO was created “to keep the Americans in, the Russians out and the Germans down”. The same can certainly be said about all other “supranational” organizations on European soil. The main profiteers are based in Jew York and in their artificial robber state.

      Thank you for your German-friendly attitude and your valuable contributions and trains of thought, which, even after they have been automatically translated, display an above-average degree of logic, meaningfulness and fluidity.

      P.S. I recently read that Spanish is now spoken by the majority of “Texans”. One dares not even ask what will become of “Texas German”…

    • Herbert
      Herbert says:

      Jew Heine (cousin of Marx)
      imagined Germany like this:

      “Franzosen und Russen gehört das Land,
      Das Meer gehört den Briten,
      Wir aber besitzen im Luftreich des Traums
      Die Herrschaft unbestritten.”

      “The land is held by the Russians and French,
      The sea’s by the British invested,
      But in the airy realm of dreams,
      Our sway is uncontested.”

      One can only reply: “Michel, wach auf,
      daß man im Schlaf dich nicht verkauf!”
      (“Michel, wake up so that you
      don’t get sold in your sleep!”)

      • Weaver
        Weaver says:

        Yes, Jews dominate in ideologies, ideals, dreams, mythologies, histories, fantasies, soft sciences, etc.

        WASPs and likely Germans see these areas as lowly. They prefer “real jobs.” And so we are exterminated.

  5. charles frey
    charles frey says:

    01 Decades ago, I read a scholarly German history book on the post-war creation of the Federal Republic of Germany in 49.

    02 I well remember, that the draft of its proposed constitution, designated as GRUNDGESETZ, was taken by an already elected Socialist future MP representing Cologne to Paris, from where it made its way to Israel, ONLY TO BE RETURNED VIA THE SAME ROUTE, ALL MARKED UP WITH RED PENCIL.

  6. Amalric de Droevig
    Amalric de Droevig says:

    Every nation has laws.
    A hyper-strict adherence to those laws is nothing to celebrate, though tyrants love such an approach to law because it means its law enforcing goons will be down your throat & up your butt at all times.
    The so-called rule of law invariably tends to translate to greater government control over human life.
    What matters, anyhow, is the quality of the laws in a place.
    If the laws are tyrannical, innumerable, overbroad, and so on, a strict adherence to them becomes nothing but a straight jacket for society.
    Our laws are designed to destroy us, whites.
    Championing that legal regime is madness, collective suicide.

    • c matt
      c matt says:

      As Stalin said, it’s not who votes, but who counts the votes. Likewise, it is not the laws, but who interprets the laws.
      There is no such thing as rule of law. Laws are not self-executing.

Comments are closed.