Start A Petition
Group Discussions
Obama Meets King Charles
4 years ago

By Peter J. Hughes

Consider the parallel between President Barack Obama and the seventeenth-century king of England, Charles I (1624-1649).

King Charles followed Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Queen Elizabeth -- the first of whom started a "universal faith" for England, with the latter two propagating it.

Henry the VIII started a fight with the Catholic Church, declared himself the winner, and created new rules governing Christianity.  Henry's son, Edward VI, also believed in his divine right to govern the church, but his controlling advisors convinced him to delay the issue.  And after Edward, Queen Elizabeth took her royal position by re-authorizing The Act of Uniformity, which provided detailed written instructions for conducting identical church services allowing only a divergence of two sentences for any ceremony.  Pastors and parishioners were, in effect, told how to pray.

During Edward's and Elizabeth's reigns, those "universal rules" (The Act of Uniformity) were not rigidly enforced because of more pressing issues, like foreign wars.  But opposition to "universal faith" had already begun to stir by 1625.  

King Charles I

Once King Charles was crowned, he differed from his predecessors by quickly applying "universal faith" rules to every church, every denomination, and every single English citizen.  King Charles used the archbishop of Canterbury to ensure religious uniformity by disallowing all non-conformist clergy and closing opposing organizations.  Charles now used the Act of Uniformity to legitimize rigid enforcement of specific religious texts and carefully controlled sermons.  Opposition to the changes was physically punished.  All religious ceremonies were to be identical, and all statements would be the state's view of truth.

Additionally, Charles republished the "Book of Sports" (1633 version), a document used twenty years before during the subjugation of Scotland.  It was intended to resolve any conflict between those who practiced silence and limited activities on Sundays and those who didn't.  Charles ordered every church in England to read it out loud at services.  Many religious leaders refused and were punished.

Anyone who disobeyed his new rules for faith would lose their churches, be fined one year's income, or spend one year in jail.  A second offense could get you jailed for life.  To punish those who refused to accept reforms, the king used the two most feared and arbitrary courts in the land: The Court of High Commission and The Court of Star Chamber.  The High Commission could compel individuals to provide self-incriminating testimony, while the Star Chamber could inflict any punishment whatsoever (including torture), with the sole exception of death.  Charles used the Star Chamber more than any previous king.  Defendants were regularly hauled before the court without indictment, due process of law, or the right to confront witnesses, and their testimonies were routinely extracted through extensive torture.  Even though death was prohibited, somehow leading citizens were tortured, then hung, and then quartered.

King Charles's Parliament disagreed with him on foreign policy, domestic taxes, and religious practices.  In Charles's first year as king, he frequently argued with them and periodically dissolved Parliament for short periods.  However, after five years of disagreements with them, Charles dissolved Parliament permanently.  English citizens called the following eleven years (1629-1640) "The Eleven Years' Tyranny."  Charles and his courtiers called it the period of "Personal Rule."

After dissolving Parliament, Charles remembered that only Parliament could impose and collect taxes.  So he got creative with extra-legal techniques to raise money. 

He declared The Distraint of Knighthood (1278 law), requiring any citizen who earned 40 pounds or more each year to present himself at the king's coronation to join the royal army as a knight.  Then he imposed a fine on anyone who didn't know he had been invited to attend the coronation back in 1626, three years prior.  Charles not only collected his fine from his "new knights," but he also imposed additional annual taxes on them for their new status as knights.

An even more unpopular idea was an obsolete feudal tax known as Ship Money, or a tax on goods coming and going from ports.  The law had been used during wartime for hundreds of years, so Charles decided that, even without a war, the tax was within his prerogative and for his "good pleasure."

Charles's abuses drove over 25,000 loyal British citizens out of England in just twenty years, from 1620-1640.  For example, the Great Migration, led by John Winthrop (1587-1649), a Puritan lawyer and leader, exemplified the exodus in 1630, with 700 Christians fleeing England in a convoy of eleven ships of "dissenters."


This post was modified from its original form on 14 Dec, 15:32
4 years ago

Initially, "dissenters" of Charles were allowed to get on ships to leave because they were undesirables.  However, wealthy individuals (called "pensioners," ho were needed for tax revenue) and pastors (agitators) were not allowed on the early ships to America.  John Winthrope and other religious migration leaders actually deceived the king to get on the ships.  Also, Charles had "searchers" who boarded each ship to check "papers" and impose on each adult an oath of loyalty to the king.  Despite the obstacles, so many of Charles's citizens had fled to America by 1642 that Charles cut off any further immigration to America. 

In 1649, thoroughly annoyed British citizens rose up and dethroned Charles.

Barack Obama II

As King Charles, Obama had followed "administrations" that desired to enforce a "universal health" program that ultimately failed passage because of congressional opposition.

Wanting, like Charles, to draw attention to his magnificence (King Charles was impressed with his own brilliant taste in matters such as art and religion), Obama used his early public "magnificence" to intimidate Senate courtiers into creating a program worthy of his historical leadership.  They came up with "universal health care." 

Like King Henry VIII, Obama picked an unnecessary fight (against the insurance industry) for his own benefit and declared himself the winner.  Objectors were met with the royal proclamation "I won."  Unlike Obama's predecessors, who were thwarted by Congress, Obama was determined to avoid government by the people.

As King Charles used the Act of Uniformity, which mandated only certain religious texts, President Obama used the Affordable Care Act to mandate only certain insurance texts.  As King Charles mandated the state's version of the truth, President Obama publicly denied the impacts of his mandates and ridiculed opponents to discredit and silence them. 

As King Charles used the Court of High Commission and The Court of Star Chamber, President Obama uses dependent nobility such as the secretary of Health and Human Services, the Internal Revenue Service commissioner, the secretary of the Treasury, and the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as non-governmental courtiers, such as Organizing for America, the AFL-CIO, and the Teamsters Union, to promote obedience, even as he exempted them. 

Obama's new nobility, agency secretaries, are allowed to mock law by writing agency administrative rules requiring obedience.  They collect and use personal information for enforcement or simple intimidation.  Like King Charles used the High Commission, Obama uses the IRS to compel self-incriminating testimony and silence dissent through seizure of personal income and property.  As Dissenters (opponents of "universal faith") were treated in 1630, Americans now are denied personal liberty and the protection of legitimate law.

Charles dissolved his Parliament; Obama ignores half of his.  He brushes off Congress on the budget, environmental issues, financial policy, energy policy, and foreign policy.  Just as King Charles used dukes, counts, and knights to enforce his agenda for the kingdom, King Obama also uses High Court commissioners and royal courtiers (e.g., Senator Harry Reid, Attorney General Holder, leading Democrat officials, media personalities, and other political dependents) to fulfill and legitimize his own "Personal Rule". 

America's centralized ("universal") programs had been approved by citizen-representatives in Congress.  Those large and expensive programs that taxed citizens did not require active physical participation and cooperation by individual citizens.  They did not change rules for professions and did not tax according to age of the citizen.

Just like King Charles, King Barack went farther than his predecessors.  He proposed limiting "universal rules" on every living and unborn American.  His nobility created a program while ignoring opposition and passed the law by deceit.  

Just like Charles, Obama's idea of "universal faith in government" requires active participation, new beliefs, new limits on personal liberty, and new burdens for citizens.

King Obama appropriated trillions of dollars belonging to citizens, including the unborn, using the money to fund supporters.  As King Charles attacked shippers and merchants, King Obama attacked profitable oil and coal companies with made-up rules to limit their ability to function.   He funded failing, uncompetitive solar and electric car companies belonging to supplicants and supporters.  Alternatively, he punishes dissenters with administrative rules (EPA), financial burdens (IRS audits), and insulting public statements.

As opposition to King Charles increased, he branded the "dissenters" as disloyal, unpatriotic, and ignorant.  As opposition to President Obama increases, he brands his "dissenters" in the same way.


4 years ago

As Mohandas Gandhi put it, "[t]here have been tyrants, and for a time they seem invincible.  But in the end, they always fail.  Think of it.  Always."  We still have yet to see whether Obama's reign will prove Gandhi right again.



This thread is archived. To reply to it you must re-activate it.

New to Care2? Start Here.