The word "Radical" comes from the Latin word for "roots." A "radical" is a person who:
- holds or follows strong convictions or extreme principles; extremist.
- advocates fundamental political, economic, and social reforms by direct and often uncompromising methods.
What are the "roots" to which a "radical" seeks to return? The Constitution? The Articles of Confederation? British monarchy? The Lex Mercatoria? Unalienable rights in a "state of nature?"
¿Who is more radical:
• A person who wants to "restore the Constitution" or
• A person who wants to abolish the Constitution altogether.
Imagine today is March 5, 1789. Yesterday the new government under the Constitution went into effect. As an anarchist, I would call for the complete abolition of this new government and repeal of the entire Constitution. Wow! Is that "radical" or what? That would entail the firing of over 900 people, and cutting several thousand dollars in government spending. ( Patrick Henry and George Mason would already be on board! )
In 2007, there are people calling for "the restoration of Constitutional government." They do not call for abolishing the Constitution; they support the Constitution and want all unconstitutional government repealed. Imagine the change! "Restoring Constitutional government" today would involve firing tens of millions of people and cutting trillions of dollars!! This would require more education, more conversions, more regenerated hearts, more transformed worldviews, and a whole lot more footwork than convincing every American in 1789 to abolish entirely the federal government as it then existed.
But these people are called "conservatives" and I am considered the "radical" because I'm an "anarchist."