What Does It Take To Convince You?


Before I begin I would like to take a moment to clarify something. I have never asked those who read my articles to blindly accept the things I say in them. All I ask is that you have an open mind and consider that what I say might possibly be true. I would hope that by writing these little missives I can get you to do your own research; fire up the old grey matter and come to your own conclusions based upon the facts you discover. If you want my honest opinion, one of the greatest sins a person can commit is to blindly accept anything; be it from me, the news media, their teachers, or those whom they elect to represent them in government. If I were to answer the question of what was my own personal motto I would have to say, “Trust, but verify.”

Now that I’ve gotten that out of the way, what say we continue on to the subject matter of this article; property.

I think there is much confusion over what constitutes property, the extent to which you own it, and the extent to which government can restrict the use of it. I may not be right, or 100% accurate in the things I am about to say; it is a subject I have only recently begun researching. These are just my opinions at this point in time; but they are based upon the facts I have discovered and the conclusions I have drawn from those facts. I would hope that your minds are open enough to at least give the things I say a fair chance before you dismiss them outright.

Before I go any further the question must be asked, “What exactly is property?” If you were to be asked that question I wonder, how would you respond? Most, I believe, would say that property is the things you believe you own; such as your house, your car, your clothing, and all the other possessions inside your home. That answer would only be partially correct, and at the same time totally wrong. It is this paradox that I hope to explain.

On March 29, 1792 James Madison wrote down his thoughts regarding property. His comments are as follows, “This term in its particular application means “that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.” In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage.

In the former sense, a man’s land, or merchandize, or money is called his property.

In the latter sense, a man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them.”

But that isn’t all Madison said; he also declared, “In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.” If property then is something to which one can claim ownership to, then our rights are also our property; and no one can deprive us of them, or limit our exercise of.

But for the time being let’s keep our attention focused on the more tangible things that make up property; like land ownership. If you believe, as I do, that God created the Earth, then how can man, or a group of men, lay claim to that which God created? This is a subject upon which Locke discusses in Chapter 5 of his Second Treatise. Locke states, “Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his.

Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property.”

When the first Pilgrims came to America in 1620 the land was not technically owned by anyone. The concept of land ownership was foreign to the Native American Indians that inhabited it; that concept being something which was brought over along with their other customs and beliefs.

You have to understand that although the land was not considered anyone’s property, by the fact that those who came here to live had to obtain a charter from the King of England, it was considered to be a possession of the British Empire. That is the basic definition of a colony, “a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country, typically a distant one, and occupied by settlers from that country.”

Before establishing the colonies which would become the first 13 States in the Union, those who came here had to obtain permission from their King to do so. This permission came in the form of a charter, “a written grant by a country’s legislative or sovereign power, by which an institution such as a company, a college, or city is created and its rights and privileges defined.”

In essence, the first settlers to America were British citizens; the only difference being that they occupied land 3,000 miles away from their sovereign, or government. Yet seeing that they were subjects of the British Empire they had to obey the laws passed by the sovereign of that empire, and more importantly, all property was considered to belong to the empire, not the people who inhabited it.

Am I making sense so far?

At the same time America was beginning to fill up with settlers from Europe something else was going on; the Age of Enlightenment. It was during this period of radical new thought that John Locke wrote his Second Treatise; a document which Jefferson would incorporate into the Declaration of Independence and also influence those who established our Constitution.

If you consider the fact that those living during the era which saw our nation grow into a thriving group of Colonies during this Age of Enlightenment, and the fact that they were separated by an ocean and left pretty much dependent upon their own wits for survival, and you can see how they may have resented the fact that in 1765 the King issued a direct tax upon them to support the expenses incurred by the British for their defense; particularly during the recent French and Indian War.

The King felt that, as his subjects, he had the right to impose taxes upon them for their protection from his enemies in the lands which had been colonized by countries such as Spain and France. However, as the Colonists did not have anyone directly chosen from among them to represent them in Parliament, the phrase taxation without representation became a commonly heard saying in response to the increasing number of taxes imposed upon the Colonies.

As we all know, at least I hope we all know, tensions between the Crown and the Colonies continued to rise, when on April 19, 1775 the Kings men attempted to take away what the Colonists rightly felt was their property; their arms by which they could defend themselves. Although the Revolution may have happened anyway, it was this event; the attempt to deprive the Colonists of their ability to exercise what they felt was the first law of nature; the right to defend themselves, which led to the war starting when it did.

As we all know, America gained her independence; becoming the United States of America. The question then is, who owned the land they occupied? Since they were no longer subjects under the King, it could not have been England. Furthermore, since they were no longer subjects under the King, all charters granted by the Crown were essentially null and void.

So again, who owned the land?

There are two trains of thought to this. One is that since the Colonies became free and independent nations unto themselves that the land belonged to the States themselves. The other is that since the land was originally not owned by anyone, that it reverted back to that status and anyone could stake a claim to a particular plot of land that was not currently inhabited by another.

One thing is for certain though; the land did not belong to the federal government, because the creation of the federal government would not occur until the Constitution was formally ratified in 1789.

This leads to a point which is imperative that people understand if anything else I am going to say is going to make sense. What is the power by which governments have a right to exist? The answer to that question is found in the Declaration of Independence, “…Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

After the establishment of our current system of government, the Supreme Court created by the Constitution heard the case of Chisholm v Georgia. In his comments on the case, Chief Justice John Jay reiterated what I’ve already said, “All the country now possessed by the United States was then a part of the dominions appertaining to the Crown of Great Britain. Every acre of land in this country was then held mediately or immediately by grants from that Crown. All the people of this country were then subjects of the King of Great Britain, and owed allegiance to him; and all the civil authority then existing or exercised here, flowed from the head of the British Empire.”

However, it is the following comment by Jay which I wish you to focus your attention on, “…at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects…”

Therefore, for any system of government to be legitimate it must have derived its authority to govern from a grant of power by the people coming together and creating it. This is what is known as constituting a system of government; hence the written documents which outline the structure that government shall take, the powers it shall have, and the restrictions placed upon it. These documents are known as Constitutions; and they are nothing less than laws written by the people which concern how their systems of government shall operate, and the powers they shall hold.

If these Constitutions grant government certain powers, then any law passed in pursuance of that power is just and legitimate. On the other hand, if the government exercises a power which is not among those specifically granted it by the Constitution, its acts become usurpation, unjust, and tyrannical.

How does all this pertain to property? Well we must look to the Constitution itself to see if the people surrendered the land which comprised the United States to the government, or if that land remained in the state it had prior to the creation of the government.

The only mention of land ownership by this newly created government is found in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, where it states, “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings…”

There then arises an interesting question. Since at the time of our governments inception there were only 13 States, occupying for the most part the Eastern Seaboard, what about the land, and the States created by the land, that was later acquired by either sale or conquest?

Article 4, Section 3 merely states that, “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”

The Constitution does not say that these new States will be subjects under the federal government, with the land belonging to the federal government. In fact, in Section 2, Clause 1 it states, “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” Furthermore, in Section 4 it declares, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.”

If the citizens of one of the original 13 States, therefore, had the right to own land, then the same was true of any citizen of States which were added to the Union after the creation of our system of government.

Yet do you truly own the land you live upon? If you were to find oil in your back yard would that oil belong to you; the property owner? If you answer yes, think again. In fact, think again if you think you truly own the land your house rests upon.

How is it that you can be taxed for something which you have purchased; and if you refuse to pay the taxes imposed upon you then the land can be taken from you? Is that ownership, or is it just another form of serfdom where we are allowed to live on the land owned by our rulers…as long as we pay tribute to them in the form of taxes?

In very few instances do the people of this country have true, or allodial ownership of the land they live upon. There are instances where it is possible to truly own the land you live on, and in Minnesota their State Constitution declares, “All lands within the state are allodial and feudal tenures of every description with all their incidents are prohibited.”

But in the rest of the country land ownership is, as Minnesota prohibited, feudal in nature; we are allowed to live on them at the good grace of government. Should you refuse to pay your tribute, or taxes, the government can evict you from their land; never compensating you for the money you paid for it. Also, should the government decide that it wants that land for another purpose there is always the Eminent Domain clause which allows them to take your land; only paying you what they feel is the value of that land.

If you really owned that land there is no force on Earth that could do those things to you. Think about that the next time your property tax comes due; do you really own your home and the land it sits on, or are you just a serf under a tyrant masquerading as a democracy or republic?

The government made these decisions on its own and they are not among the specific powers granted them by the people, nor are they found anywhere in the Constitution. The government created by the true sovereigns of this nation believes that it owns millions upon millions of acres of land which rightfully belongs to the people.

The Bureau of Land Management owns upwards of 247 million acres of land; the Forest Service owns another 192 million acres; the Fish and Wildlife Service owns a meager 89 million acres, and the National Park Service owns a pittance; 79 million acres. That is a total of roughly 608 million acres the federal government claims it owns. The total acreage of the lower 48 States is 1.9 billion acres. So the federal government claims that it owns roughly 1/3 of the total land which comprises the lower 48 States.

By what authority might I ask do they make this claim? Certainly not by anything found within the Constitution. And I haven’t even discussed how many bases and military installations they have scattered across the country; all of which are off limits to the general public.

I don’t know about you, but that sounds like a whole lot more than the ten square miles the Constitution authorized the government to take possession of.

Yet when people such as the Bundy’s of Nevada and LaVoy Finicum of Oregon stand up for what is rightfully theirs the news media portrays them as the bad guys, and the sheeple of this country buy into that lie. I’ve even heard people say that LaVoy Finicum got what he deserved when he was gunned down by law enforcement. If I might be so bold to ask, what laws are these people enforcing? Certainly not the Constitution, otherwise it would have been those in the Bureau of Land Management who were gunned down for violating the rights of both the State and the people.

And while we’re on this subject, if you recall, Madison said that we have property in our rights. Does not the Second Amendment say that we have the right to keep and bear arms? I don’t see anywhere in that amendment where the word arms is limited or restricted, or that we need to obtain a permit from some agency of the government to exercise it. Our rights, which are also our property, are constantly being violated at all levels of government; from local ordinances which restrict them, to federal laws which do the same.

When are people going to wake up to the complete onslaught upon their liberty that is going on around them?

Getting back to real property for a moment longer, our government has even codified the fact that we do not own the land the comprises the United States. In 1933 they passed Senate Resolution 33, which states, “The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called ownership is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and that use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.”

Let me ask you something, does what I’ve just said come anywhere close to what Locke said about the nature of political power and our Natural Rights, “To understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man.”

Yet that right there is the definition of liberty, of freedom. And still people, after reading this, will stand by their guns, (so to speak), and claim that this is still the land of the free.

What else must I say to prove otherwise?

About Br'er Rabbit

I'm just one person out of millions of others. The only thing different about me is that I don't walk around with my head up my ass.
This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to What Does It Take To Convince You?

  1. Don says:


    The land of the fee — and the home of the slave.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.