WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO CRITIQUE OF THE SOCIAL CONTRACT II By William Thorpe

In part one to this work I basically gave a narrative composite of the value realization along with terms and relations within a Social Contract, specifically our contemporary American one, as being perverted, betrayed and distorted by the political critique and analysis of a middle and center. In sum I disabused the purported analysis of having any redemptive utility, save for treachery, which I then fleshed out how our contemporary American political moment is a defacto consequence and result of that political critique work and its analysis of a purported middle and center. In this part II, the critique I present, is simply this: why isn't critique of this political moment, presented on it's terms, without dabbling into that strawmanesque theater of firstly legitimizing its incorrectness by responding to it as if it has and can claim any intellectual, aspirational and practical legitimacy, when we know that it doesn't. Our and The American Democracy as Constituted isn't a petty reduction to just the exercise of an unchallenged and unquestioned Executive "BULLY-PULPITISM", in any form and incarnation. In other words, we cannot on the one hand claim that nobility and aristocracy are discredited Social Contract terms and relations, then affirm their conservative dynamics and existence with the resulting and inevitable antagonisms by ceding our agency of critique on our terms as we purse the affirmative realization of the inexorability of progress as organic inevitability. Which is what brings me to this, contrary to the intellectual-liberalism of reaction and its idealistic impositions, violence, respect and its fear dicta have nothing to do with the aspiration and work of perfecting the unity of the people. Yes The People as organic entity can be terrorized and cowered into that state of zombie compliance along with its attendant suppositions, but what it subsequently produces (and chronicles of our existence are replete with it and the resulting labor of rebuilding the human person, irrespective of altruistic reasons) is of course that negation of the fruits of our Sapience and claimed theological, cosmological narrative in the form of creating that one-dimensional social creature, correct political critique and analysis intends and anticipates liberating. So this corresponds to this political moment in this form and fashion. The United States as Constituted is a Nation according to Constitutional Dicta right? And we experienced this logic during the reaction to Nicole Jones's 1619 Project, where the opposition and rejectionist formulations, hinged on the sophistry that the United States didn't become a Nation till 1776 and 1789 as such The 1619 Project's thesis of the political-economy of Enslavement Of Africans as dynamic of all that is Americana must be false. This work isn't responding to that sophistry save to say that what's good for the goose is most definitely excellent to the gander, because, if this contemporary American political moment is one that is fractious, extolling the supremacy of the partisan and faction, then we are not a Nation and despite the exercised police powers and organized violence of the executive, appropriating agency under the exegesis of The National Executive in pursuit of a factionalized and fractionalized politics that is in explicit enmity with the citizenry cannot then claim National character as basis for its activities, because it is at war with the Nation as Constituted and its this level and form of critique this moment demands.

By William Thorpe