Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
How did this happen
~~~ It goes back before one was born ~~~
(26:26)
Corriographed
So it wouldn't be known
TheWarAgainstYou
Unspoken truth
~~~ Comes through education ~~~
(3:35:45)
Take the time
jaynamy
A constitutional republic for which it stands
Nar a mention
Of a democracy
Not once
Individual liberty or universal equality
~~~ Subversion of language ~~~
(2:51)
Where lies the ultimate destiny of each
Puretrauma357🇯🇲
The legitimacy of government
by Ernest Hancock
A discussion rages on at high speed with great passion here in Arizona regarding the "social contract" we're all supposed to be forced into. While the discussion continues, I was compelled to share this article with you all due to the impact it had on my ability to understand the issue and how I might share it with others.
Mark Fuller Writes
What are you proposing? Anarchy? Government has a legitimate role of protecting your life, rights and property. Its existence may cost money. Whether it is a direct or apportioned tax to cover that existence is another argument, but even if government were doing all it should do - you still have jurisdiction issues which may not be consensual.
The only option which would be available in that case would be sudden war by the government against you due to your unwillingness to clear up a minor problem. It could only be war because we're not under the jurisdiction of the government's legitimate role of clearing up such issues in the name of protecting life, rights and property.
I'm really not familar with any time in our history that things worked like this, and I always conclude that Anarchist Libertarians wish to go beyond our origins to something else. Maybe I misunderstand.
Ernest Hancock
Speaking for me, you're correct. I wish to go beyond your origins to something else. Colonial-era slogans aside, let's see what those political origins actually are. You're recommending that people not abandon the instutition called government, on the grounds that this might entail confusion over jurisdiction, and possibly even violence - a small but "sudden war by the government against" me in the event that I couldn't get along with my neighbors.
But when referring to even the recent past, we find that government is by far history's greatest peril.
Confusion over jurisdiction: Find me a year that goes by without men being sent to die in a border dispute. Know anybody who went to Grenada? Know anybody who went to the Gulf? Know anybody who's going to go to Bosnia? Know anybody who went to the European Theater?
I can point to a hundred and fifty million political dead this century alone. You can point to a hypothesis about confusion over jurisdiction in the case of a burglary.
A time in history that things worked like this? Guilty. There's conjecture about ancient Iceland and more conjecture about the American West, but nothing all that convincing, even to me. I'm not convinced there'll be a 300 Mhz desktop computer, either; I'll believe it when I see it.
Here's what we do know, though: All States nova. All tribes disperse. There is no historical precedent for a permanent State, or a stable one. Of the extant States today, the exceedingly young USA may be the oldest, which says nothing good about the advance of the science of statism.
When States nova, which they invariably do, they usually do a very bloody job of it. I've never seen a war. I've never seen a mass grave. I've never seen corpses accumulating in piles. I hope I never do. Above all, I see no reason to manufacture rationalizations for the institution that never fails to accompany wholesale slaughter. Without a government, Mark, the worst you can do is a riot.
Mark Fuller
Government has a legitimate role of protecting your life, rights and property.
Ernest Hancock
Hence, the elaborate theories about something called a "social contract." The difference between a contract and a social contract, of course, is that the former is consented to by both parties while the latter is imagined by one but binding upon another.
(Ain't it strange how we've learned to look for hokum wherever a derivative of The S Word comes up? Social Democrat. Social Justice. Social Contract. National Socialist Party. The world is filled with strange coincidences.)
If government is legitimate, merely tell me whence it derives its legitimacy.
Social contract is currently fashionable, in the ebb and flow of on-line political debate. This is a contract I never signed, that I've never seen, that has no terms, that is binding upon me but not upon the other party, that can be dispensed with at will by the government but must submitted to by me upon pain of incarceration, whose terms may change on-the-fly or even retroactively, from which there is no escape clause, which is binding in perpetuity, which binds my ancestors and descendants, which requires fealty but guarantees no consideration.
And it's bullshit on its face. But that's not the interesting thing. There are a thousand intricate dodges designed to cover the ass of statism, and refuting one of the lot isn't that fun or that illuminating, at least if you've been working these boards for a while. There will always be another transparent cloak for the Emperor to wear.
What's interesting is that there are a thousand cloaks, but there aren't a thousand-and-one. Here's the thousand-and-first, and you'll never hear it from a statist:
Because they have guns and if you don't obey, they'll shoot you. [emphasis added]
I'll come clean. I'm not writing to Mark Fuller. I have no hope of showing him anything, because I think he's determined not to be shown. But for those who aren't solely concerned with building dungeons out of cards, this is useful.
Statism can't be justified. I can give you a list of minds bigger than mine who wanted it so badly they were willing to torque their own brains, and a longer list of folks who didn't know any better. Fuller's own Locke, and Rousseau. And Blackstone. They had a common ancestor, Hugo de Groot. Back to Aristotle and all the way to Thales, forward to Rand, and even to Nozick, Jefferson, Madison, Marx, Mill. All of you have read some, and some of you have undoubtedly read more than I.
None of them said it, because all of them are beehive-busy trying to find another reason for this: "If you don't obey, we'll shoot you." That's not legitimacy, so they had to find another way. Social contract. Consent of the governed (probably the most opaque self-contradiction of the millenium). Will of the majority. Threat of descendence into chaos. Greatest good for the greatest number. Progress. Good of the Motherland. Throwing off dominion of the ZOG. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
If government is legitimate, merely tell me whence it derives its legitimacy. Why does it need so many different justifications?
If government is legitimate, why does it need guns?
Mathematicians don't need guns. We think they're legitimate. Physicists don't need guns. Biologists don't need guns. Musicians don't need guns. Tool and die makers don't need guns. Copy editors don't need guns.
Government needs guns because it isn't legitimate. It cannot persuade you, and it cannot base its appeals in reason, because there cannot be a basis in reason for an appeal to dumb savagery.
I don't care whether it claims to be instituted by my consent, or for the sake of my welfare, or as the product of some non-evident contract, or in response to the prospect of mass starvation, or for the protection of life and liberty and property. None of that matters. It cannot be justified in reason. It has not been justified in reason in four thousand years, despite all the effort of all the courts of all the despots of all the centuries. And the hand-waving of your next encounter with yet another electronic acolyte in the cult of the State will prove this yet again:
Government is not legitimate. You can tell by the effort people must go to to make up rationalizations for it.
Now, here's the dirty little secret. I said, all their rationalizations are a veneer, all their happy-babble is cover for what's really going on: "If you don't submit, we'll shoot you." [emphasis added] That's true, but to any proposition there is a converse.
The converse to the proposition in question is this: If they could compel you, they'd have no need to convince you. [emphasis added]
Understanding where we are
And where we must go
Is invigorating to the soul
See you on
The other side
Of what it
Will be
After listening watch again
With the sound off
To feel the body language
Is one
From where one comes
There wouldn't be lawlessness
~~~ Everyone ~~~
(47:32)
Would be self governed
Tipping point radio
A profound perspective
~~~ On human thought ~~~
(26:25)
The locust of personality
DailyClout
Good vs evil
A master plan
~~~ Originating from the united nations ~~~
(2:08)
To change the political and economic system of the world
The good, the bad & the ugly
Sounds like a declaration of independence
~~~ From an enemy force ~~~
(2:22:10)
This is an invasion
The deep state war series
~~~ Issuing this warning ~~~
(55:17)
To the American people
~~~ What is fear through deception ~~~
(1:11:17)
When a clear shot can't be made
MrTruthBomb
Understanding the psyop
~~~ Road back to a Republic ~~~
(1:16:12)
For which it stands
Eye of the tiger
Chembuster
History
~~~ Is not what it seems ~~~
(1:34)
Evidence makes sense
Moving forward
Jim Crenshaw
The world is waking up
~~~ To what has been done ~~~
(1:31:26)
TheCrowhouse
A snapshot of reality
~~~ From different perspectives ~~~
(1:19:32)
Separating the trees from the forest
TheCrowhouse
What is it about life
~~~ That makes one pay attention ~~~
(1:06:23)
Does it have to hurt first
When the root cause of a problem
~~~ Is addressed ~~~
(1:57:51)
Information will flow
Americans united against the new world order
The world is shaped by catastrophe
~~~ When it is blindsided ~~~
(14:41)
Historically speaking
For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport
NaturalNews
This brings more to the table
~~~ Calm before the storm ~~~
(1:02:07)
Have to stand together
What is it about going back
~~~ Excitement or dread ~~~
(2:05:01)
When
Why we are here
Isn't known
The world as a witness
~~~ This resurgence ~~~
(1:20:03)
Of a strong and prosperous America
Will lead to
A strong and prosperous world
James red pills America
Understanding is key