Revolution in America
The many violations of individual rights and attacks against the U.S. Constitution by the second Trump administration, compounded recently by the blatant murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, have led many in “the Resistance” to question whether the time to transition from peaceful protests to violence is now justified.
It is not. Not yet.
A common formal framework to structure the moral justification for revolution can be found in the words of America’s Declaration of Independence:
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [protecting inalienable rights], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
There is no question, after over ten years of evidence and statements, that Trump and the MAGA movement are “pursuing invariably . . . absolute Despotism”. Removing them from power is given as morally imperative (or, to use the natural law usage of the Declaration, it is the people’s right and duty).
Revolution qua revolution is morally justified, but when violence is justified is not posited by the Declaration; only implied. May I offer the following, explicit proposition:
As long as a people can replace their government through peaceful means, violence should never be an option. A government derives its powers from the consent of the governed and such consent is legitimately given when the following four elements exist:
* The laws of the country are only created by a legislative body, which is directly elected by the people in free and fair elections;
* These laws are applied through thoroughly independent judicial courts;
* There is no censorship of political speech; and
* Political parties are permitted and can advocate for their ideologically-different positions.
As long as these four elements exist, the means of peaceful revolution not only exist, but are preferred. Violence is destruction. One cannot advocate for the rights to life, liberty, and property while simultaneously advocating for death and destruction, when peaceful means, which preserve the objects of such rights, are options.
These four elements exist within the United States, though barely. The midterm elections later this year will be the litmus test, whether they still happen (as required by the Constitution) and whether they are free and fair (or whether ICE or some other Federal body attempts to seize voting machines to conduct their own “audits” of the returns). If they are, then the American people can elect enough Congressmen to impeach Trump and Vance for the many high crimes and misdemeanors in which they have engaged (or they can express their support for dictatorship, as they did in 2024).
The American people must continue to focus on peacefully protesting against their government’s abuses, including street protests and mass strikes. A particular and critical focus must be placed on ensuring that the midterm elections take place, that protections and safeguards are in place to protect against intervention by the Trump Administration, and an army of legal professionals are employed to fight any battles which come under the purview of the judiciary.
More than anything, “the Resistance” must identify for what they are advocating. It is clear, that the common standard to which the left, center, and right are most amendable is the U.S. Constitution. It is also a wedge issue that can further enhance the schisms in the MAGA movement, as its supporters would be forced into the untenable positions of either supporting Constitutional government (which they profess to love) or the despotism of Trump (whom they love).
No clearer example of this is that of the shooting of Alex Pretti and the Trump Administration’s anti-gun response, in which they imply that carrying a gun in public is justification for being arrested or shot . This is an opportunity for “the Resistance” to compel the more libertarian supporters of MAGA to abandon it. This can be done not only through hammering on the Administration’s recent anti-Second Amendment stance, but also by advocating for the right of individuals to bear non-military-grade arms (a reasonable position that even appeals to factions of the Left).
Advocating for a return to Constitutional government, with Congress being the sole lawgiver and the President only being the executor of such laws (and not a medieval king who can tax and oppress his own people on a whim), is not only a winnable platform, but necessary for preserving the rights of each individual American.
