Michael Anton is probably on the FBI's "next-to-hit" list. So read his essay; there may not be more. Here's just a piece:
...I will tell you some of what I see. A
giant, unaccountable, unelected fourth branch of government that does
what it wants without input or supervision from the people, and that
usurps executive, legislative, and judicial power. Rights are routinely
trampled. Two-track justice—one standard for friends of the regime,
another for its enemies—is now the norm. Just last week a man killed with his car
a teenager for the “crime” of being Republican. He’s already out on
bail. Meanwhile there are still dozens of January 6 protesters in
pretrial detention for ridiculous noncrimes such as “parading.”
The Justice Department, FBI, CIA—all
the security agencies—are out of control in attacking American citizens.
The FBI is now doing SWAT raids for misdemeanors. Earlier this month,
the president of the United States gave a speech calling half the
American population enemies of the state. I could go on.
What is conservatism’s response to
all this? What is the response of “the weasels, compromisers,
mediocrities, and losers of the Republican-conservative-libertarian
establishment”? Those are not my words, but I like them. They sum things up concisely, accurately, and vividly.
Conservatism’s response is to get
angry. But not at any of these abuses or the people who commit them. No,
rather it gets angry at people like Mollie Hemingway, Julie Kelly, and
Heather Mac Donald (and others) who point out these outrageous abuses....
I especially like the part where he describes Scott Fitzgerald, Brian Steil, and Mike Gallagher--and their mentor, Paul Ryan, who shook the Janesville dust off his feet as fast as he could.
So where does that leave the "conservatives"?
...to the extent that the modern
conservative takes his “principles” seriously, he must oppose the
founding principles, which are not conceivable absent the American
Revolution. But he must oppose the revolution—what with its friend-enemy
distinction, its radicalism, its “instability” and “incivility,” its
violence. Plus, of course, its racism, sexism, classism, lack of
transgender bathrooms in Independence Hall (though, for all I know,
they’re there now), and all the rest....
Can't have any of that, can we?
He's getting to the point.
...So, returning again to the beginning: What do the founding principles require of us today?
First, they require an honest
assessment of where we are, of the present regime, of how it operates,
and toward what ends. Let’s do an honest reading of the 18 (or 27,
depending on how you count) charges against George III in the
Declaration of Independence and compare them to our situation....
... I have a question for the
conservatives—actually several. Which I know they won’t answer. So,
really, the questions are for you, the reader, to ponder.
Is the right of revolution ever justified? Was it justified only that one time, in 1776, but never again? If so, why was it justified then and what
makes it unjustifiable ever again? Because of historicism? Because the
American Revolution was somehow an irreversible leap forward?...
Nah.....Ben Domenech will NEVER ponder those questions. He'll be too busy eating doughnuts with Megan McCain, his wife. Sykes? He's too old to think about these things.
... Now, we should all hope that this
remains merely a theoretical discussion. And, in the terms of that
theoretical discussion, I maintain it as axiomatic that you can’t have
natural rights without a right of revolution, just as you can’t have the
founding without an actual revolution, and since you can’t have the
regime of the founders without natural rights, you can’t have the
founding principles or the founders’ regime without a right of
revolution. ...
Yes.
In the end, the question is "how much". How much do we have to endure? How much should we force our children and grandchildren to endure?
“The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps
from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our
brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it
that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so
sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?”
Good question. And Anton's not the only one who's curious.