Scott Horton Show - Just the Interviews - 7/3/26 Michael Boldin on How the American Revolution Has Been Betrayed

Episode Date: July 7, 2026

Scott interviews Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center about his new book about how the efforts and accomplishments of the American revolutionaries have been betrayed, bringing about a system of government that is effectively identical to the one they fought a war to overthrow. Discussed on the show: The Revolution Betrayed by Michael Boldin Michael Boldin is the founder and executive director of the Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates state nullification as a means of local resistance to unjust federal laws. Follow him on X @michaelboldin.  Sign up for the Scott Horton Academy of Foreign Policy and Freedom at scotthortonacademy.com For more on Scott's work: Check out The Libertarian Institute: https://www.libertarianinstitute.org Check out Scott's other show, Provoked, with Darryl Cooper https://youtube.com/@Provoked_Show Read Scott's books: Provoked: How Washington Started the New Cold War with Russia and the Catastrophe in Ukraine https://amzn.to/43D82oY (The audiobook of Provoked is being published in sections at https://scotthortonshow.com) Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism: https://amzn.to/4eMQblu Fool’s Errand: Time to End the War in Afghanistan https://amzn.to/4a5fKvx Follow Scott on X @scotthortonshow And check out Scott’s full interview archives: https://scotthorton.org/all-interviews This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Tax Attorney Matt Sercely https://agoristtaxadvice.com; Moon Does Artisan Coffee https://scotthorton.org/coffee; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom https://www.libertyclassroom.com/dap/a/?a=1616 and Dissident Media https://dissidentmedia.com; Expat Money https://expatmoney.com/scott; and Crowdhealth https://www.joincrowdhealth.com/ (use promocode Horton) You can also support Scott’s work by making a one-time or recurring donation at https://scotthorton.org/donate/https://scotthortonshow.com or https://patreon.com/scotthortonshow Audio cleaned up with the Podsworth app: https://podsworth.com Use code HORTON50 for 50% off your first order at Podsworth.com to clean up your voice recordings, sound like a pro, and also support the Scott Horton Show! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All right, folks, the show is brought to you today by expat money. Figure out how to become an expatriate and get yourself a plan B. Just go to expatmoney.com slash Scott and you'll get this free handbook, Plan B, Residencies and Instant Citizenships. That's expatmoney.com slash Scott. Ladies and gentlemen of the press have been less than honest, reporting to the American people, what's going on in this country? We're dealing with Hitler revisited.

This is the Scott Horton. show libertarian foreign policy mostly when the president doesn't that means that it is not only we're going to take out seven countries they're doing negotiate now end this war and now here's your host scott porton all right you guys it's uh michael bolden on the line here my old buddy um he's the founder and the director of the tenth amendment center And that is 10th Amendment Center, all spelled out, 10th Amendment Center.com. And hey, man, how are you doing? I don't know whose idea was to have Bolden on, but it's good to be here.

What's my idea? Was it you or wasn't Rachel? No, no, no. She's like, who the hell is Michael Baldwin? You're like, dude. I feel like we almost got to do a catch-up. Like, we're just going to do a hangout here. Well, I'm feeling very patriotic this week is why I thought of you, man.

It's a 250th anniversary of the country. treating the 50th anniversary of me in like a week or two. How much July 76, baby, you know? So it's a day of morning. To mind, you know? What? It's a time of morning, not your 50th. Because that's when the good years start.

But this 250 thing, it's definitely a time of morning. The old me was a lot younger. You know, there's a big discussion on Provoked last night with Daryl Cooper, where they were all in the chat room. So surprised to find out that I was only, 50. They all seem to think that I was much, much older. Oh, dude, that's me. That's me. I'm hitting 54 this year. Oh, man. You look great. I need to start dyeing my beard like Osama bin Laden. Jesus. I'm going to start trying to get away with it. All my hair fell out. You need more Dr. Pepper.

Listen, I have you here for a reason. Oh, I shouldn't be eating into the microphone. I'll just ask my question and then mute me. It feels natural to me. Listen, talk to me about the, what good is the American Revolution anyway, man? Do you have any opinions about that? Hell yeah, I do. Revolutions are good things. Revolution, of course, have you thinking of the American Revolution.

And John Adams described this very specifically in a series of letters over the years, back and forth with Thomas Jefferson after they became friends again. The Revolution was not the war for independence. He specifically described the revolution. as a radical change in the viewpoints of the people, their duties, their sentiments, their obligations. From 1760, 1761, James Otis Jr.'s speech against the rits of assistance. This is general warrants, warrantless search and surveillance, where he said an act against the Constitution is void and should be treated that way.

The revolution started then and went through 1775 when the shot heard around the world hit Lexington and Concord and then the war for independence. He said the war for independence. That was just the outgrowth of the real American Revolution. So, yeah, I mean, the revolution was important for that time, but it's up to the people themselves to actually protect and defend their own liberty, whether government happens to like it or not. And government does not like that kind of thing.

And over the years and it started happening pretty quickly in the years after the American Revolution, things start sliding back. And in fact, I make the case in this brand new book called Revolution Betrayed, that America today is actually rebuilt the system that the founders fought a long, bloody war to secede from. Because, well, ultimately, government is in charge of whether government violates the rules given to the government. And that's the British system. Yeah, afraid so. And that is the whole thing of it, right?

where self-government and representative government and the rule of law and all that, all that can't just be public relations for the regime of power and whoever is able to seize it. Kind of. But on the other hand, it can be made somewhat true, depending on the degree to which people believe in it and attempt to practice it, right? Well, Samuel Adams said, all might be free if they valued freedom and defended it as they ought. So it really is a one-two punch. You have to have a people who really truly understand and love freedom and then have the backbone to defend it against all hazards. And that's all enemies foreign or domestic.

Just because something as law doesn't mean it's necessarily good or bad. It's just a tool to actually try to accomplish those things. Jefferson specifically referred to law as often being the tyrant's will when it violates the rights of an individual. So you have to start with the basis. And the basis, if we're talking declaration of independence, is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, rights from our creator, our natural rights. They're not gifts from government.

We don't have a Second Amendment right. I mean, that's one of the most kind of skin-crawling thing I hear people say. It's my Second Amendment rights is if the people who drafted the Second Amendment were like, oh, well, no one's going to have a right to defend themselves unless we get these words on paper. and then those words on paper are going to somehow magically enforce themselves against government, when government always just all through history

has always grown and grown and grown. It's been, as Benjamin Franklin described it, he's like this all through history in every state and kingdom, there's always been a kind of a war between the governing and the government. And if you look at it from that perspective, I think it makes sense how, well, people got lazy

and let it get out of, well, to where we are today, I guess. Yeah, and, you know, There is on the public relations part of it. It's really kind of a great disguise where the government gets to call itself the country. And then like even the worst things that they do is at worst, a self-inflicted wound. The democracy chose wrong and made a counterproductive decision or whatever. But somehow it's all of our responsibility and it's not the people in charge.

So there's a that we the people covers up a lot of BS. You know what I mean? But then again, I mean, it's impressive to me and it's supposed to be impressed upon the people that they should value. And if we all had consensus about this, it seems like it would be very valuable that the people come first and we have rights

and we allow the government to exist. As you were saying there about the Second Amendment and all of that, that the government is, as they, I forgot who coined this the way I read it years ago was among the founders. They called it a temporary limited, constitutional republic. And just meaning that it exists at the will of the people to be its security force, as it says in the Declaration of Independence, it's up to us to decide what our security

forces. And so essentially, we owe them nothing and they owe us everything. They're supposed to be found by that contract. They're the hired help. I mean, whether it was John Jay, who became the first Chief Justice, George Mason, Thomas Jefferson, everyone in between, they all looked at government as an agent of the people of the several states. Even Alexander Hamilton, this is the guy who wanted a president for life. In Federalist 33, when he was, he was, you know, calling for ratification of the Constitution,

you know, they were asking, are they're curious about the supremacy clause? This is going to be a problem. Well, Hamilton said, well, they can only do things that are pursuant to the Constitution. Anything beyond that is a usurpation. Usurpation is stolen power. power not authorized and deserves to be treated as such.

If they steal something from you, let's say they steal your car. You don't just suddenly treat the person who stole your car as the rightful owner. There's certainly somebody that needs to have that car taken back. Same thing goes for power. So if government is just supposed to be a tool for the people, then it's up to the people to actually understand what the rules given to the government are, not defer to the government to decide if the government violated those rules in the first place. And a free people just doesn't tolerate arbitrary power at all.

That's what the whole Declaration of Independence was all about. Hey, you guys, you want to catch up. You want to learn all of what I know about American foreign policy. Check out the Scott Horton Academy of Foreign Policy and Freedom. It's Tom Woods idea, basically like his Liberty classroom, only, of course, centered on foreign policy. It features me and other real great experts including James Beauvard, Ramsey Baroud, William Bupert, Adam Francisco, and soon will be adding a course on APEC by Grant F. Smith and many others.

The second half of my course on the new Cold War with Russia and the war in Ukraine is also almost ready. And so now's the time for you to go and sign up at Scott Hortonacademy.com. Hey, y'all, Scott here for Moondos artisan coffees. You know, they told me if I kept drinking so much coffee, I would turn into some. And then I finally did. And there it is. It's Scott Horton's show morning breakfast blend there from Moondos, artisan coffees get it.

They hate Starbucks because Starbucks supports the war party. So they're Moondos, artisan coffees. And they got Scott Horton flavored coffee there. It's Ethiopian and Samatra mix, and it's so good. And it's free to me. as long as you keep buying it, just go to Scott Horton.org slash coffee. And so how do you view the U.S. Constitution in terms of its consistency with the principles of the Declaration?

You consider it to be sort of the continuation of what they started with the revolution or some sort of counter-coup? I mean, a little of both, to be honest with you. So St. George Tucker, who wrote the first kind of legal commentary on the Constitution in early 1800s. Jefferson had this book handed out to his entire cabinet. It was like the thing that they cited on the Supreme Court at the time. And he said the American Revolution gave birth to a new political phenomenon. In every state, there was a constitution written to clearly explain the powers of government. And then they had another one, the Articles of Confederation and another one, the Constitution

for the United States. So you could love and hate any of those documents. documents. But birth from the American Revolution where they labored under the tyranny of the unwritten British Constitution. I mentioned before James Otis Jr. in 1761 said an act against the Constitution was void. He didn't say that because they didn't consider the British system a constitutional system. But when you don't have the rules printed out, like here's what you can do and everything else you can't do, the attitude was we at least have to start there. So the people can understand what government is authorized to do. And when they go beyond that, then the people have to keep it in check. So a good constitution can promote a good administration as how John Dickinson

described it, but it doesn't guarantee it. Ultimately, whatever that constitution says, that people have to understand it and have an absolute contempt for even the tiniest step beyond its limits. And then there's an amendment process if they don't like it to kind of change. the thing. Right. Yeah, it's funny. It seems so archaic learning in school about the amendment process. We don't do that anymore.

Congress just does whatever they want. Oh, yeah, especially with war powers. Yeah, especially with war powers. So now on the Bill of Rights, and I know your speciality is number 10 there, the 10th Amendment. So we'll talk about all that, but I like focusing on the preamble to the Bill of Rights, which is something that I discovered only through, like, right-wing guntsman, militia propaganda in the 1990s.

You can find that stuff anywhere. No one will teach you about that stuff. UT Law School will never mention it. But there's a preamble to the Bill of Rights. And it says that these rights are being added as declaratory and restrictive clauses, not gifts of rights to the people, but restrictive clauses against the government

in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers. I said it in the opposite order. That was why. In order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, these further declaratory and restrictive clauses shall be added so that people think. So then not only is the Bill of Rights,

the Bill of Rights, but it supersedes any other presumption of any other interpretation of power inside the Constitution. And then the 10th Amendment, was it always a dead letter? The 10th Amendment says, if it's not delineated right there in the prescribed powers of the government,

it does not exist. It belongs to the states. and they just really ignored that from George Washington on, right? Yeah, and Jefferson specifically in some letters during the ratification debates back and forth with Madison and a few other people, he basically said, hey, you know, I really want a bill of rights. And he really kind of narrowed down a bill of rights to, if it's not expressly delegated, they can't do it. Protection of trial by jury and no standing armies. That's basically what Jefferson wanted for amendments to the Constitution.

they didn't even call it a bill of rights back then. It was further restrictions, even in that preamble to the Bill of Rights. They didn't call it, hey, these additional rights are being added. These are further restrictions just to make clear that they can't do anything that isn't delegated. The federal, I mean, the Federalist side, James Wilson, Hamilton, everybody else said, hey, if you add a Bill of Rights, people are going to get kind of confused and think that this is kind of, they're getting rights from the document and it's going to be confusing because

they don't have a power delegated to them to restrict freedom of the press or freedom of the speech already or the right to keep in bare arms. That's not in there. And the anti-federalist, Patrick Henry, for example, said, you know, this is kind of a novel system. Government's always kind of getting out of control. So we better really, really hammer this home. And that debate I think was really won by the anti-federalists at the time, which is why Madison came in and said, all right, you know, you're on to something. Let's do this and add this to the document. Right. I was wondered, because I knew that history and I always wonder, what do you think? Was Hamilton being sincere in that? No. Hamilton. I mean, Hamilton, you read.

He certainly went the other way and said government could do whatever they want. No question about that. Especially when it came to 1791 and the creation of the first bank where Thomas Jefferson argued against it and said, look, even to take a single step beyond the limits of the Constitution is to give them boundless field of power. Because soon as those, those. those lines are kind of malleable. They can do whatever they want. The next person is going to do more and more. I think Hamilton was a scammer, really, when you get down to it. He made the case the way that people wanted to hear it at the time. Now, during the American Revolution, that is a powerful thing, though, for him to say, listen, we don't want a Bill of Rights because that gets the entire presumption of the

Constitution upside down. James Wilson said the same. The people are giving powers. They're giving authority to this thing. how can it give rights to them? It's completely contradictory. And that's a pretty good argument if it's a sincere one, but then also like you're saying Patrick Henry's like,

nah, I don't trust your ass. We're still putting the restrictions on there anyway. Right, right. Well, and one of the things that they said was like, especially Henry, Richard Henry Lee, some of the other guys in Virginia specifically were like, look, okay, your argument, James Wilson, Alexander Hamilton, Roger Sherman,

who said no bill of rights ever bound a government longer than the honeymoon of a new married couple? I mean, the lines that these people used made sense. The words on paper aren't going to do the job. So if you got a different problem, let's address that. But the anti-federalists were like, look, we didn't have to list out a bunch of rights in the Articles of Confederation. We had Article 2, which was a precursor to the 10th Amendment, which said if it's not in here, they can't do it. We'd be cool with that. But there was so many long lists that they wanted to add a bunch of other stuff as well. But it is a powerful argument. Hamilton was pretty badass during the American Revolution.

He specifically talked about how, you know, it's ridiculous. He said, how ridiculous to say that our controversy with Great and Britain is over a mere three-pence tax on tea when the issue is power? All these usurpations built on the Declaratory Act of 1766, where they claimed power over the colonies in all cases whatsoever. Unlimited total power for all time. Yeah. All right, you guys. This show, again, is sponsored by expat money. And it's this great guy, Mikkel Thorup, and I met him a couple of years ago on the Tom Woods cruise, touring around the Mayan ruins down in Mexico. Great guy. Anyway, he's been an expat for about 25 years. It's just a real expert in how to live all

around the world, where you can buy property and or other things, and build yourself a plan B and even obtained citizenship in other countries, if that's your interest. As everything in America goes to hell, you should at least think about it. And you can get this free booklet, Plan B, Residencies, and Instant Citizenships at expatmoney.com slash Scott. That's expatmoney.com slash Scott. Hey, y'all, don't forget to check out my substack. Paid subscribers get the show a day early and with no ads. And also access to the audio book of Provoked, the first two-second.

are up, but there's more coming soon. Scott Horton Show.com. Hey, look, Scott Horton Show and Scott Horton Academy swag. It's all available right under the YouTube at YouTube.com slash Scott Horton Show and any episode of that right there. You agree. All right, so now look, man,

I know that there are people in this audience who are saying that, yeah, but who gives a damn, right? Because it's a republic if you can keep it, but the American people could not keep it. I think it was Orrin McIntyre was saying, we're on the fifth American Republic now or something. That's that over-upmesis, right, I think? I'm sorry?

Some of them over-Avmesis published like fifth or sixth Republic too recently. Oh, yeah. Oh, okay. Maybe that was where they got that from, too. But yeah, that makes sense, right? That, you know, we had the Civil War and we had the Wilsonian Revolution and the New Deal and the Great Society and then, you know, whatever, George W. Bush and the aftermath of the, the war party revolution of the 21st century and all of this.

So I don't know exactly where you demarcate it all. To me, it's 1791. I think the Republic started collapsing in 1791 with the creation of that first bank. Hamilton proposed this bank. James Madison even took the position arguing against it. And he didn't say who it was. He's like, look, we had a proposal in the Philadelphia Convention, which was secret at the time,

where we would authorize the federal government to charter corporations. And everybody said, no, we're not going to authorize that power. Now you're saying we're going to do this. This is absurd. And that's where Jefferson said. Yeah, Jeffers signed. Right. He's like, look, if you're going to do this, this is, it's game over.

And sure, there was some back and forth, first bank, second bank, Jackson, all this stuff. But it really established what happened in 1913, which we all know was a really, really bad year. So you're saying they should have just stuck with the articles of Confederation. I mean, not even most of the anti-federalists were taking that position, unless you're like more towards, even Patrick Henry was like, yeah, I'll take some amendments. And I think ultimately if they did that, as long as the people were okay with government violating rights, creating permission slips for our natural right of self-defense, for warrantless surveillance and searches for unconstitutional, endless wars, as long as the people tolerate that, it doesn't matter what words are on paper.

I mean, even Benjamin Franklin, that a republic, if you can keep it, that was after the convention or maybe in a salon later on. But on the floor of the convention, he had a speech. He was too old to read it. But he said, look, I agree to this constitution with all its faults. Everyone knew the faults that he was arguing, specifically. He thought the executive had way too much power and would end up like a monarchy. But he said, look, a good. A constitution can only do so much. If we have a good administration, it'll be fine. But this can

only end in despotism when the people become so corrupted as to need despotic government being incapable of any other. So as long as the people are so morally corrupt that they will allow government to do to them, whatever it wants, there is no system that can stop that at all ever. So I don't know if articles of Confederation went ahead a different result. Madison and Jefferson specifically talked about how that was violated all the time. They created a central bank under the articles as well. Okay, yeah.

Well, and the problem is, of course, that the state is relatively small and highly financed and organized, and the people just aren't. So for the people to not stand for it anymore means for them to risk everything to go to war and overthrow their regime, which most people are not willing to do,

not very often, not for light and transient causes, when they're very used to what has been going on around here. You know, we got, if you wanted to redo the Declaration of Independence now, our list of complaints against the national government makes their list of complaints pale in comparison. But who is really willing to actually turn America upside down and who thinks that that would work, that that would fix it? You know what I mean?

That that would be, they talk about having a constitutional convention. Boy, this one might be a dead letter, but the next one will be so. much more. You know, and I get the idea of like, okay, let's, everything's so bad, let's change the rules and see if they'll follow the new rules that we've given to them, even though they never, ever, ever follow the rules and they make them up as they go. It changes based on the circumstance. I get the idea because it's a nonviolent way for the people and the states to kind of assert

their control, but unless the people even have a grasp of what general welfare or interstate state commerce and necessary and proper, which is the legal doctrine of principles and incidents. If they don't understand that, I can only imagine what the people running that type of a system or that type of a convention are going to come up with. It's only going to be more socialist garbage. The so-called conservatives today are as socialist as can be, too. It's just insane. $7 trillion a year, this thing.

The only cure for a corrupted republic is your piece at the 10th Amendment Center. And this is mostly just about the spirit of the people and where they're at with all this right now and whether they're willing to do something about it. I mean, my thing, the reason I'm always focused on foreign policy is because it seems like, you know, as Rothbard said, war is the key to the whole libertarian business because you just can't have a limited government

and a world empire. And with America's the most powerful nation state in the world and intervening in everybody else's business and determined to be the dominant power in Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and for that matter, South America and Africa too. Then how in the world can we possibly have anything like a constitutional, limited sort of government with a free society here, when everything has to be one way or the other geared toward building up this national

government and its ability to continue to dominate the planet. And so it seems like you got to abandon the empire first. Then we can stop and take a week off and get our shit together. know what I mean? We're like, we're not going to be able to do any of that until we stop with all the war all the time. Can't even assess where we're going right now, you know? I totally agree, and you know the famous James Madison quote from 420, 1795, where he said, war is perhaps the greatest threat to liberty because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies. From armies, you get debt taxes and debts and taxes and armies and debts and

taxes are the known instruments for putting the many under the domination of the few. War has always been the tool of control, fear of foreign danger is what they use, as Madison put it to Jefferson, to attack liberty at home. But not everybody's motivated by the same thing. I would love for everyone to take on the empire, but if there's other people that are thinking about focusing all their time on the flock surveillance system all over the place or the warrantless surveillance or civil asset forfeiture, the more that the empire is chipped at, from every single angle possible, the better. That's the way I look at it.

Yes, I totally agree. But it is important, and I guess this really has begun to change over the last maybe 10 years or so, where non-interventionism becomes accepted, not just by more people, but understood by the masses to be a very broad kind of take. rather than like to me the whatever like a cliche would be you know Janice Joplin and her big hippie sunglasses and whatever and like just silliness from the summer of love or whatever but like hippies don't know anything about national security anyway so nobody's really asking them you know what I mean so it has to be that there is a broad spectrum of people who are opposed to American foreign policy and who actually know a bit of what they're talking about and

coming from especially a constitutional and capitalist point of view so that the anti-war position is no longer pigeonholed as the kind of thing that just comes from people who wouldn't be any good in a fight anyway and aren't really even interested in what's at stake. You know what I mean? So the more people who are, you know, like yourself, constitutionalists and 10th Amendmentists and all of that and taking a stand against imperialism at the same time, I think, is the better because it really helps set the example for other people. You know what I mean? And if you think of all the ways that they use that foreign policy machine,

we've been talking a little bit about how, you know, this is kind of the root of the problem. I think the root is actually under it where people just tolerate it. It's allowing usurpations of power. I mean, they didn't use the word grievance in the Declaration of Independence. They weren't complaining about bad policy. That happened in the years up to it. Jefferson specifically used the phrase,

injuries and usurpations and abuses and usurpations. That whole list of grievances was about government going beyond what it was authorized to do. And they weren't concerned about the policy. Two years earlier, Jefferson wrote something called summary view of the rights of British America, which is really what got him the job drafting the Declaration of Independence. And he went through a laundry list going back 100 years to mercantilist policy, policies, trade restrictions where he said, like, we're not complaining about these things. These are not a nullity because of how they have been enacted because they're bad policy. We're calling them void because

you have no power over. So you're not authorized to do this in the first place. So I think that really is the starting point. But if you think about how foreign policy and the empire has been used as a tool, all the excuses, all the spending, which requires stealing and printing, which is stealing, which requires surveillance and control, all these different things that come out of it is just, I can't even list them all. It's beyond fathomable in some ways. Hey, guys, Scott here for Matt Sersely at agoristtaxadvice.com. And he's a great tax lawyer. And he hates the government as much as you do. And he wants to help you keep your money. And his service is for small businesses and for high salaries.

professional types who are looking for ways to protect their earnings from the national government and its depredations. So check them out. Matt Sersely at aggristaxadvice.com. Hey, I'll Scott here for crowdhealth at join crowdhealth.com. And it's just like it sounds. It's crowdsourcing for your health care costs. It's not health insurance. Who can afford health insurance? What a rig game that is. But now who needs it? The deal is simple. You help chip in and pay for other people's bills. They help chip in and pay for yours.

And the more people join, the lower the costs for everyone. And it works very well. I was skeptical at first, but I had a good talk about it with my good friend Tom Woods and then some of the leadership there at Join CrowdHealth as well. And they explained it all to me. And it does work just like a charm. And I encourage you to check it out at JoinCrowdealth.com. Use promo code Horton.

And your monthly fee will only be. $99 for the first three months. Join crowdhelp.com promo code Horton. I don't know what's going to happen tomorrow, but I just moved on to this block, and I'm going to read the Declaration of Independence to set off firecrackers,

and I hope the neighbors like it. Sweet. I hope they don't hate me. You tell me everything. Huh? Do you do a bullhorn? Yeah, I should, right? I was just thinking I could just break out

my little scarlet thingy and a speaker, and I have everything I need right here. I might just project. I can talk a lot if I'm talking. Yeah. Hey, man. So tell me everything about this,

book of ears. Oh, man. It makes the, oh, it's 10th Amendment Center.com slash betrayed. All spelled out. If you don't mind, a quick promo. It's on pre-order right now. Quick 120 pages.

I tell the story of what the founders and the old revolutionaries considered to be the American Revolution from 1760 through 1775. It's built on natural rights. The view that rights are not gifts from government. They don't come from documents, not a constitution, not a bill of rights. They were against standing armies.

They were against arbitrary power. They recognized the danger in the precedent of a mere three-pence tax on tea. They saw that allowing one single step was a step too far. It was about virtue and courage. And so I cover that whole story. So it's very clear that the revolution, they weren't like, they didn't end up fighting a war just to get represented to tax them. I mean, that's absurd. They fought a war because, well, the British marched on Lexington and Concord in a gun control

program and they had the fight back. Thomas Jefferson and John Dickinson specifically said, in defense of our freedom, which is our birthright, we have taken up arms, and we only lay them down were hostilities on the part of the aggressor end and not before. So they recognized that when government decides to start taking your means of self-defense, that's when it's game on. You know, and at the end of the book, I have a fun little chapter called How to Spot a Redcoat, an easy guide, because we're literally in this system. And I think it becomes very clear once you understand what they were for and what they were against at the time, that that system is here today. We may have a written constitutional system, but the way it plays out in practice is certainly

what they fought to free themselves from. And we are, literally surrounded by redcoats, the mentality that rights are coming from government, that government gets the final say over its own rules, that standing armies are an absolute necessity and things like that. So it's a fun one. Awesome, man. I can't wait to read it. Well, listen, I'm going to let you go, but happy forth to you. I hope you have a great Independence Day celebration there out in California. Likewise, my friend, I really appreciate you having me out, man. I was good, good hanging out for a little bit. Yeah, absolutely. All right, everybody, check out Michael Bolden. He's at

10th Amendment Center.com. And again, the book is at slash betrayed. And the book is called Revolution Betrayed. America rebuilt the system. The founders fought a war to succeed from. Thanks again, man. Peace. I appreciate it. The Scott Horton show is brought to you by the Scott Horton Academy of Foreign Policy and Freedom, Roberts & Roberts, Brokerage, Inc., Moondos, Artisan Coffee, Tom Woods Liberty Classroom, and APS Radio News. Subscribe in all the usual places and check out my books. Fools Aaroned, enough already, and my latest, Provote,

how Washington started the new Cold War with Russia and the catastrophe in Ukraine. Find all of the above at Scott Horton.org, and I'm serializing the audiobook of Provote at Scott Horton Show.com and Patreon.com slash Scott Horton Show. Bumpers by Josh Langford Music, Intro and outro videos by Dissident Media, audio mastering by Potsworth Media. See all next time.