Political Theory

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

mhamlin — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 21:01:39 GMT

It would be exactly like telling a mobster he doesn't have authority to run his extortion ring. A barrel full of laughs.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

bloomj31 — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:39:46 GMT

You should go to court and tell them that they don't have authority. I would like to watch that.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

mhamlin — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:37:03 GMT

Did you guys even read the expatriation case? The court ruled that even if you're not a national, you're still under the jurisdiction of the state you reside in. So you can renounce your nationality but you will still be bound by the law. You can go to court and tell them they don't have the authority to try you maybe you'll win.

There's no need to read the case if I don't recognize the court's legitimacy in the first place (though it's no surprise that the government court rules in favor of the government). You've yet to demonstrate the legitimacy of the court, other than by asserting the legitimacy of the Constitution (beg that question!).

Of course we're in agreement of the reality of living under such a system. I'm simply demonstrating how monstrous and illegitimate that system is.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

bloomj31 — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 20:08:18 GMT

Also, I agree with Benjamin. Either you build a greater force or you submit to the current one.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

Spideynw — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 17:47:06 GMT

"I think it might be too long to be digestable."

There is some redundancy in it. I can probably cut some of it out. However, I do hope it is interesting enough that people will read something that is one page.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

Spideynw — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 17:46:01 GMT

"What are you fighting for, and how do you propose to keep it if you win it?"

I am fighting an intellectual battle against lies. Once enough people realize that the idea that U.S. government is legitimate, is a lie, and enough people lose their fear of not having a government, then the government will just go away, just like slavery went away once people realized owning another human being is wrong.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

Benjamin — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 17:03:54 GMT

that makes the business a criminal organization

Sure, but what are you going to do about it?

Force only retreats before a greater force.

You have too options; help create a greater force, or submit to the existing force. (Force isn't necessarily violence)

If you chose to create a greater force, the question becomes how to keep the new force from being corrupted like the old one.

The framers of the Constitution had one strategy for attempting this. People like Tolstoy and Gandhi had another. Still, the real question is, if you were to win against the criminal organization, then what? What are you fighting for, and how do you propose to keep it if you win it?

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

twistedbydsign99 — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:51:40 GMT

Spideynw:

If someone built a grocery store, and then wrote some words on paper, that no one signed, declaring that everyone within 50 square miles has to buy food from that grocery store upon threat of death, would you think that would be a legitimate way to start a business? What if you were allowed to vote for the management? Would you then feel that you were obligated to buy food from that grocery store? Do you think this would give the business a legitimate claim to your money? Just because some words were written on paper and you were allowed to vote for management of the business? If this business were able to become established, and it was copied around the world, so that no matter where you went in the world the same kind of grocery store model existed, do you think in the future people would not be able to comprehend the market providing grocery stores?

How was the business, called the United States government, established? It was established in the exact same way. Some men wrote some words on paper, called the U.S. constitution. No one signed it, (the signatures are as witnesses only, which means it was not even binding to those who signed it). It established the business called the United States government and let people vote for the management. If this is not a legitimate way to establish a business, that makes the business a criminal organization. That makes taxation and fees extortion. Just like the example above, do you really think the market cannot provide justice and education and roads without the government? If so, you can visit Mises.org for information on how markets work.

I think it might be too long to be digestable.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

mahsah — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:30:51 GMT

Can't have a discussion of the US constitution without posting good ol' Spooner:

http://jim.com/treason.htm

Seriously, if for some reason you haven't read it you should.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

Spideynw — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:04:33 GMT

I don't even know what Bloom is arguing. The so called constitution is an unsigned document. Even his theory that the signers could obligate everyone fails, because there are no signers. It is just a piece of paper with some words on it. Anyone that would argue that obligates anyone to anything just lives in a fantasy world, and cannot be reasoned with.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

Paul — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:48:23 GMT

because that's how the law works.

That's not how any other law works. It's not possible for anybody to bind third parties to any agreement they make, at any time in history, except this particular group of people 200 years ago?

If it had been the intention of the Framers to let people opt out or their children opt out they would've included that language in the original document. But they didn't.

So?

Anyways, I give my consent to the Constitution and I think it's understood that pretty much everyone else living in the US does.

It only takes one person who doesn't...

We have the means of enforcing it, what do libertarians have?

Morality and justice. (And who is "we"? I doubt you have any means of enforcing anything. You're even more of a slave than "us" -- at least we're aware of our chains)

I think the courts have the authority in the first place because they have the force to support their power and enough people like me who give consent for them to use that force.

You can give consent for them to use their force on you. You can't give consent for them to use it on anybody else. If "because they have the force to support their power" is sufficient justification, there is, by definition, no such thing as a crime -- if I murder you, that very fact demonstrates that I had more force than you, and therefore my act was justified, so surely the courts should laugh in the faces of your relatives who want me prosecuted!?

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

bloomj31 — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 03:48:51 GMT

I think the courts have the authority in the first place because they have the force to support their power and enough people like me who give consent for them to use that force.

Besides, if the courts don't have the authority who does? You? Do you have the power to enforce your ruling?

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

mhamlin — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 03:44:04 GMT

By the authority of those still living I suppose and the power of the executive branch to uphold the laws of the US and the power of the judicial branch to judge you. As long as there is popular consent to the document, it looks like people who don't consent are still bound and as long as the US has the power to enforce the document, those who break the laws will be punished.

This is a correct explanation concerning by what power persons are compelled to obey the government and its edicts. This doesn't establish the authority in the first place, however.

But again, perhaps you have an argument, you should take it to court. I am not a judge. I cannot tell you whether you are bound to the contract or not.

That begs the question. You presuppose that the courts have authority to decide the matter in the first place.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

bloomj31 — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 03:38:45 GMT

But again, perhaps you have an argument, you should take it to court. I am not a judge. I cannot tell you whether you are bound to the contract or not.

Re: What do you all think of using this as a flyer?

mhamlin — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 03:23:42 GMT

Well, I'm sorry you think the game isn't fair. But if you can't get the law to recognize your right to opt out then...that's unfortunate. Will you break the law anyways?

Yes, it IS unfortunate that a band of knaves and ruffians won't recognize a person's right to his property. But you've yet to establish by what authority the 'Framers' could have possibly bound the lives of those NOT YET BORN to a contract, let alone those countrymen who have never signed nor even seen the contract to which the state claims they are bound.