Creating the Game Changer..
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.
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.
Have you ever seen the rain
Something to know
Its been coming for quite some time
As reality
Presents itself
That only mirrors
What one
Can see
This goes
Beyond that
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]
They seek both dominion and legitimacy
But their dominion
Is largely based on perceived legitimacy
Undermining their legitimacy
Is one of the most powerful strategies
For removing their dominion
~ Frederick Mann ~
Humans allow themselves to become enslaved
By buying into irrational statist ideas
Superstitions, lies, concepts, terms (words), definitions, and arguments
~ Frederick Mann ~
Comment on the above quote
The people never give up their liberties
But under some delusion
- Edmund Burke: (1784)
To present
As reflection
Becomes relevant
Moving forward
Does it actually matter
Are there any voices
To the contrayer
contrary
There are two factions
Upholding law
Question Is
Which law
Understanding both
Reveals the forest
Thus the pull
To the trees
Nicotine is not an addictive tobacco element
Harvard proved that in 2015
~~~ Pyrazines were added ~~~
(2:30:55) start @1:11:11 for nicotine
To make it so
AWAKEN
What is it about life
That make it
So complicated
When choosing a dog
One must become familiar with
The needs of the breed
What are they bred for
Knowing this brings familiarity and function
Leads to an understanding
As the family flows
While building a relationship
19, 9, 17, 20
Makes one wonder
If we all call the tune
Then the piper will lead us to reason
And a new day will dawn
For those who stand long
And the forests will echo with laughter
When all are one and one is all
To be a rock and not to roll
There are so many perspectives
To understand a topic
Why limit its growth
Something to do
With each other
In the bigger picture
Substitute own
With control
It's all under
The same roof
Poof
Now it isn't
Going to any measure to protect a narrative
~~~ Cognitive dissonance ~~~
(1:19:09)
Is key
If things are a certain way
~~~ Why should it be different ~~~
This country is under attack
From within
Do not comply
Or give in
What is it about a particular attitude
~~~ Who are the trolls ~~~
(2:22:23)
Spreading F.U.D.
You may be right
I may be crazy
Streamlining patience
Is golden
Along with the rest of it
Keep on keeping on
What is the ultimate
~~~ Form of poisoning ~~~
(1:11:48)
While blocking the remedy
NaturalNews
Ten days
Of darkness
In the middle of it
What is a palindrome date
~~~ This month ~~~
(1:13)
Like no other
What are the odds
Dissident7
Taking advantage of our limiting five senses
~~~ For a deceptive reality ~~~
(2:21:14)
What to believe
NaturalNews
What is "mRNA Medicine"
To avoid misunderstanding
People will wake when it hits home
Bootstraps are an important tool
Psychologically speaking
Awareness is key
The hive mind
Is indicative
Of no mind
Being entertained is much different
Then enlightenment
Where attention is payed
Is this the end of the world
Or an end
To the illusion
Maybe the journey isn't so much about becoming anything
Maybe it's about un-becoming everything
That isn't really you
So you can be
Who you were meant to be
In the first place
~ Paulo Coelho ~
Now that's safe and effective
~~~ Along with informed consent ~~~
(2:28)
SM-102
Smoke&Mirrors
Nothing but crickets
A dog in a kennel
Barks at his fleas
A dog hunting
Does not notice them
Never forget what they did
~~~ In the name of health ~~~
(1:32)
Smoke&Mirrors
Which rule of law
Does one speak of
Understanding the two
Priceless
Conscious awareness
Is a key element
For survival