Mostly we know the story. A Roman Catholic, part of a despised and persecuted religious minority in England in 1605, was involved in The Gunpowder Plot. This operation was supposed to kill the House of Lords and King James I (of England, VI of Scotland) to make way for a Catholic monarch to take power and end the tyranny of the Stuarts and the nobility. Someone ratted the coup out, and on the night of 5 November, Fawkes and 36 barrels of gunpowder in the basement below the assembly room. After torture, he confessed and was executed. He was supposed to be hung, drawn, and quarters, but he broke his neck falling from the gallows.
He was not a republican (that form of English rebel came 40 years later) nor was he a democrat: he believed in monarchy, in accordance with the teaching of Rome at the time. Today, thanks to changing perceptions, movies like V for Vendetta and its use of Guy Fawkes masks (to be copied in hundreds of protests, especially in Anglophile regions), he is seen as a symbol of resistance against government tyranny.
His story, his perceived example, is an important part of British history, especially given the behavior of both monarchs and Parliament (not just Lords but Commons) in the last four+ centuries: the more forceful tyranny of Charles I, the English Civil War and rule by Parliament under the Protectorate, and on down to the present.
Continue reading



Rights, theft, and democracy
“When a legislature decides to steal some of our rights and plans to use police force to accomplish it, what’s the real difference between them and the thief? Darn little! They hide behind the excuse that they’re legislating democratically. The fact they do it by a majority vote has no moral significance whatsoever. Numerical might does not constitute right, no more than a lynch mob can justify its act because a majority participated.” — Hubert Leon “Bill” Richardson, California state senator (1966-1988), author, Founder and Chairman of Gun Owners of America, writing in December 1995.
A republican form of government with democratic principles must be held in check by the natural, God-given rights of the individual citizens. Morally, no majority can vote away the rights of others — that is absolutely contrary to the fundamental concept of human liberty. And to the charter which established the government of a free people.
Continue reading →