What is a Frankpledge?
By Louis Zdunich
Co-founder of Frankpledge Party
And National Anti-Sodomy Crusade
Revised February 18, 2015
The Frankpledge was established in England in the eleventh century at a time when that kingdom was rapidly dissolving into chaos, much indeed as the USA is doing today: William of Normandy's basic political unit, thus named, proving forthwith to be the ideal remedy, reengaging the citizen personally and intimately into the daily workings of the state. Hence do we of the Frankpledge Party re-invoke the self-same catalytic restorative process, of a frankpledge—or basic political unit of ten heads of household—that insures law and order by going well beyond them to a renaissance of personal-agency as "when knighthood was in flower", when popular neighborhood connections were strong, when the idea of the nation was properly and vigorously understood. The Frankpledge Party abstracting entirely from arguments about "smaller" and "bigger" government which haunt folks on Fox, the frankpledge system promising to return us to that genuine state whose very purpose is the fullest moral and political development of the common man, thus providing such a definitive boon that it can in no sense be considered "too strong". A commonweal which truly has the common man at its helm envisioned here, which does honor to his soul, which "asks what he can do", in the words of a martyred John Kennedy, to make this world a better and truly-freer place in which to live. Releasing vast potentials of both inner and public man, going well beyond empty bombast that has defined political life since that crisp fall day in 1963 when Kennedy was so treacherously struck down. The Frankpledge Party pledging to reinstitute that ruddy sovereign state-of-health the soil of which has been salted by an onerous top-down centralization which global finance has inexorably and designedly brought into being since that day, the gateway to so many others of its dreadful kind. While we must further be aware that those white-collar tyrants who now control the state and keep it in chains—as loud as their praises of liberty might be—will answer our efforts by raising up false emergencies and false-flag incidents like 9/11, with merciless barbarity hoping to rally everyone back "around the flag". To distract us by sheer terror and chaos, like fiends from Hell, so that we forget this project so dear to the very soul of the common man. Giving another go to these highly-familiar pretenses, always straining toward new levels of the spectacular—indeed with Fox News and the gang advancing a "big government" of surveillance and control beyond anything hitherto seen—oversteps doughtily, "patriotically" justified in home-grown provocateur deeds. Much slight-of-hand being involved in these big/small government comparisons: from men who conspire to unleash the powers of the police state and the corporation against the liberty and free-agency of the common man. The sounds wonderful on paper of the present system—most deliriously advanced by a cunning breed—being in fact the very demise of popular rule.
Although first stages of the development of this reinvigorated frankpledge system will unavoidably diverge somewhat from the historical model, yet many things will remain the same: for instance, just as in the days of William the Conqueror, each person who comes into a new locale will be required to join himself to a frankpledge, each of which in turn, when it exceeds the number ten (heads of household), will split into two units of lesser size, until once again coming to "full strength". Furthermore those who arrive as a group will be required to each join a different frankpledge: as a primary function of this sociopolitical unit is to maintain the rights and character of the locale, and to resist the encroachment of alien or furtive influences, of overpowering moral or ideological infiltrations of any kind. That kind of subterfuge the perfect vessel of which might be a whole frankpledge full of complete strangers, arrived from who-knows-where. Hence it goes without saying that those who already reside locally when this frankpledge system is put in place will form up in tens as well—indeed you can start a rudimentary frankpledge right now among neighbors, co-workers and friends—with choice-of-(frankpledge)-affiliation to be decided where possible by prior occupational and/or locational connection, enabling as much mutual interest as possible. Since as noted the genuine state or commonweal, far from radical, impotence-breeding delimitations of Tea Partiers and Fox or MSNBC News enthusiasts—both hypnotically plying the noted popular-power-frustrating "that government is best which governs least"—rather embodies a degree of mutual benefit which by nature delimits the state: as good things of any kind, perhaps especially good states, have little real tendency to expand beyond their proper kin, unless deliberately thus maneuvered by enemies within. These typically-enough hawking cries of liberty and "smaller government" all the while. Yet within each frankpledge close blood-relationships will likewise be disallowed, as these can lead to passionate factions, jealousies and other disorders and aberrations, of a sort against which we cannot too strongly warn. The frankpledge thus tending toward the common good of a representative cross-sampling of the micro-local population, readily identifying in this way as well with a broadly-and-healthily-conceived common good in district and regional terms, with which such a generic configuration always finds ready ties, readily collaborates and conspires.
Thus reestablished, then, the frankpledge will thereafter assume the duties it had of old: of local political representation, for which in our version one member will be a spokesman to a higher body (the hundred), which latter will have its own court for minor offenses, as in times past. Likewise each frankpledge will be in some ways legally responsible collectively for its members, will be required to "raise the hue and cry" to see to the apprehension of any of these who by "due process" is accused of any crime. In this way too will debts be kept in check, as the frankpledge members will also provide reasonable standard means of surety for each other, this self-disciplining process thus helping rein in today's debt-driven economy, returning it to a short leash in this re-inaugurated fundamental form. The life-throttling chain-letter-economy of the present system however being most volubly praise by—you guessed it—the same Tea-Party "smaller government" crowd.
The hundred will be a local assembly, reflecting in a way the old tribal moot, and will likewise easily be the venue for a host of services and festivities, artistic and cultural activities, and so on, upon which the wider neighborhood would embark, while having counterparts in the larger setting of the district, as represented materially in the "thousand" (families) sometimes thus aggregated in medieval times. While counterbalancing this upwardly-climbing trellis of popular political/economic/social power will our system provide a traditional nobility, one deeply enmeshed in the practical affairs of the commonweal. A nobility both higher and lower coming into being by divine providence, as acknowledged in the past, amid inevitable, seer-predicted instabilities and upheavals soon to arrive, when the metal of true leaders will prove itself, according to that old Croatian adage of my ancestors of the Adriatic hinterland of the Velebit: "in the time of trouble then will the hero reveal himself". This establishing of hereditary noble houses being critical to the erection of a nation with foundations of stone, cementing a sense of continuity not easily overcome by interlopers or infiltrators of any kind, they whose stock-in-trade of today is media mendacity and electronic voter fraud on a massive scale. Members of this aristocracy perhaps being dismissible only by a minimum three-fourths ruling of a judicial proceeding in which commoners, nobles and churchman all take part: although such measures, seldom it is hoped to be used, can be formulated in due time. But the retention of each such noble family is to be preferred for its incomparable economic, moral and other stabilizing merits, even to the suffering of temporary drawbacks of a purely human kind: indeed, hardly to be expected will be any repeat of mammoth dysfunctions which our own "best possible system" has so consistently brought-into-being. Noblemen it is hoped, as in the case of the frankpledges, can be grouped in consultative bodies no larger than ten in size, as they mount upward in stature, each in tandem parallel to the other, to the crown: drawn from ever-larger regions, with each such regional body designating a chief figure or leader to represent them to the body just above. This smallness-of-operational size, ten, thus arbitrating nimble decisiveness and ready coordination-of-efforts. The highest of these bodies to form a kind of star-chamber around the throne: a royal family being itself no doubt fixed upon in the same providential way anticipated in the formation of a nobility, while if circumstances permit the king will be confirmed by popular approval from the frankpledges, hundreds and other deliberative and consultative assemblies at various levels mounting upward from there. (No electronic voting-booths here). Regional or nationwide assemblies of common citizens could be convoked for specific important reasons—and to negotiate and renegotiate "charters" whether of rights, privileges, duties, and so on, with noble figures at all levels above or at parallel positions-of-power—but any strong tendency to "rule by assembly" must be carefully weighed in the balance: as it is in these bodies today that treacherous infiltrators leave their deepest mark, in assemblies where personal responsibility for wrongs can easily be diluted or sidestepped, and various psychological devices—breeding fear, panic or complacency—can rather easily be put into play. Hence does our system always work in a tandem way, between nobles, with their own bodies of knights and other advisors, and those local and regional bodies of commoners who represent the popular arbitrating will. Our advocated polity, in its deepest founding principles, having little power to modify the decisions of local figures and groups over their own affairs, being designated rather to bring these into approximate harmony with one another (where necessary) across the land, as long as they don't contravene that law of God which would inform all official local and national level decisions. And were our system finally to become Catholic, as I believe that by popular acclamation it someday will: then legislation and court-doctrine would be morally framed and formulated as explained and interpreted by the Church. The divine law thus filled out and clarified being the only constitution our system would have, apart from which no law would be considered valid or require obedience.
Thus in a popularly-proclaimed Catholic state, which again I believe impending catastrophic events both natural and political will urgently call into being—dire circumstances likewise favoring the very frankpledge system expounded here, one especially natural to men in emergencies, but easily and foolishly forsaken when the danger is gone, citizens commonly growing lax and negligent when times seem good, brokering a next crisis far worse than the last. Reforms of all kinds in the newly-inaugurated frankpledge system to be developed in partnership with the Church, which has historically been the origin of every kind of political enfranchisement, since late-ancient days of a Roman state Catholic to the core, the true birthplace of civic liberties of our Christian-era times. Likewise did the Church establish admirably-free ecclesiastical burghs, thus settling much of early-medieval central and eastern Europe with full-citizen burghers: a Church which next after the glory of God puts the physical and spiritual, political and intellectual needs of the human person first and foremost among its concerns. Indeed in writings and policies of Pope St. Gregory the Great, in teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Ballermine, Mariana and a host of other popular-rule-advocating theologians, in the drawing up of the Magna Carta by bishop John Langton, in missions of Jesuits around the world, the Church historically led the way in universal institutions of full and genuine, popularly-participatory self-rule: a reality quite distinct from rigidly-elite-catering ancient-pagan Greek or Roman republican forms. Hence in all these above-noted ways would true liberty be pursued, and avenues of replacement of the unworthy built into the system itself. The clergy meanwhile being that body most vigilant, above all others, as history has so often vividly shown, against injustice or malfeasance of any kind: as exemplified for instance in the watchfulness of Jesuits over Spanish-Habsburg or native Criollo officials who so often treated American natives to policies of cruelty and greed, in an empire which was generally the very opposite of the local popular rule envisioned here.
Ours would be a system which correlates regions and political persons and bodies with one another, rather than pitting one branch of government against another, as if in a Newtonian physics lab, making the state impotent against those wrongs it was designed by a good God to punish or redress, for which formidable reason indeed, to quote both St. Paul and Our Blessed Lord, "Caesar bears the sword". Hence conversely the abject prostration of U.S. foreign and domestic policy before power-usurping schemes of Jews, of law-enforcement before closely-related global-corporate might, the drug-trade and other kinds of organized crime. This a multifaceted, long-standing shameful saga which by itself impeaches this "democratic" system beyond all reprieve.
But in fact aside from terms briefly considered here many systemic reaction to tyranny can hardly be anticipated in any detail, as for one thing the traitor, the criminal, the infiltrating spy generally have formidable resources at their disposal, have varied their approaches over time, and can only be countered by men trusted with substantial liberty to employ their well-sharpened intuitive powers, honed by experience of years. A treasury of personal courage and aptitude which our own endlessly-counterbalanced, abortively-cautious and counter-logical system should by now have taught us to humanely empower in any way we can. Plainly, any government planned primarily to "limit the power of government" rather than to pursue good and positive goals basically without restraint will be entirely helpless against that treachery which hunts the commonweal as if it were some sort of big game, a kind of trophy to hang in the den of some Midas of global sway. That genuine, dominant, globalist axis-of-evil—the overwhelming chief purveyor of modern wrongs of every kind—which closes in upon us more ominously by the day. That self-righteous imposture which violently imposes "regime change" in order to install an anemic polity which doesn't tap into true sources of popular strength, which hesitates and debates at every turn, which enacts perverse and immoral legislation, amply facilitating real enemies in their swift and deadly work. The strength of the state being sapped by nothing so much as constant frustration or endless talk, during which precious time is lost, and real enemies silently and secretly, at uninhibited, unmonitored higher levels, divide and rule.