It has been said that the first step of solving a problem is recognizing that the problem exists. Using that same logic, the first step towards real freedom is recognizing that you are not free – you may think you are, but you aren’t, not really.
Freedom and liberty are almost synonymous, with freedom being the ability of an individual to do whatever they please while liberty is the same, but with protections against invasions upon the equal rights of others. I don’t care which word you use to attempt to describe your state of existence, freedom or liberty, neither of them apply to you in this country today.
The truest measure of a person’s freedom is their ability to do as the please with their property. Now I’m not solely talking about a person’s personal possessions, like their automobile or their home; although those are certainly included among a person’s property. My life is my property, and therefore I ought to be free to do with it what I choose. My income is my property, and I ought to be able to enjoy the full benefit of it without having it stolen from me by government to fund things I disagree with, or which are blatantly unconstitutional. My rights are my property, and therefore they are not subject to the whim and caprice of the public, or those the public elects to represent them in government.
Freedom means freedom; it means no limitations or restrictions; it means not having to ask permission to do something; it means not having to pay a tax or a fee to enjoy the benefits of what you wish to do with your property.
What can you honestly call your property if it is subject to confiscation by government?
Your life and your freedom can be forfeited if you violate any of the untold millions of laws government has enacted; regardless of whether in violating those laws there is a victim. For isn’t that the real definition of a crime, that Person A does something that either harms, or deprives Person B of their life, liberty, or property? So if there is no Person B in the equation, how can government pass a law saying that something Person A does is a crime?
Laws that criminalize what a person puts into their body are of this nature; there are no victims other than what society deems to be morally acceptable. Laws that deprive a person of their rights when there is no victim other than the feelings of society regarding the exercise of those rights are also of that nature. Restrictions on praying in public schools are of THIS nature, as it is not a crime to say or do something that other find offensive, and restrictions based upon our ability to worship our God whenever, and wherever we please, cannot be justified simply because others might find it offensive.
You see, freedom of speech is freedom of speech; either you have it or you don’t. It can’t be restricted or regulated based upon the fact that what you say or do offends someone, or hurts their feelings.
I get up every day, as do many others, and go to work to earn a living. The income I receive is what’s known as the fruits of my labor. I work, I sweat, and I sometimes bleed in the performance of acquiring that income; therefore it is MY property and cannot be taken from me by government and then given to others, or used for programs and wars that I do not consent to.
You see, that’s one word people fail to understand; consent. Consent is defined as giving permission for something to happen, or for someone to do something. We give our consent to government to do things, not the other way around. They cannot take it upon themselves to deny us the freedom to enjoy our lives, our property, and our liberty without our consent.
Yet they do…all the damned time; and the people take it up the ass without ever questioning the justification for it.
It’s almost as if people think that government created man so that they would have someone to rule over and to plunder, when the exact opposite is true. Man creates government, not to plunder his wealth or deprive him of his freedom, but to better secure to him the full enjoyment of those things; and when government no longer serves that function it becomes oppressive, and a real freedom loving individual would not give their consent to its continued existence.
If I were to ask you who consented to this system of government that we have today, how would you respond? You might say, “The people living in 1789 consented to it.” However that isn’t even true; at least not completely. The ONLY people who consented to this system of government are those who gave the Constitution a YES voted in the State Ratifying Assemblies.
Those who voted against the ratification certainly couldn’t be said to have given their consent to it, could they? What about the remaining people; those who did not attend the State Ratifying Assemblies; did they give their formal consent to be governed by the entity established by the Constitution?
There is a Latin proverb that states, “Qui tacet consentire videtur”, which roughly translated means, “Your silence implies consent.” So if the people living in 1789 did not speak out in opposition to the Constitution it can, therefore, be implied that they consented to the government it established.
But that brings another question to mind. As those who lived in 1789 have long ago passed away, can you tell me who among us has given their formal consent to the government we live, and suffer under? Have you, either by a verbal or written statement, formally consented to this system of government?
Now there may be all kinds of legal principles that declare that by doing certain things it grants your consent to being governed by this government; such as registering your child at birth, or applying for a Social Security Number; but that’s now what I’m asking. Have you ever raised your right hand and sworn an oath, giving your consent for this system of government?
Then by what authority does this government even exist, let alone do things that violate the very purpose governments are supposed to be established to serve?
Maybe if you’re currently serving in the armed forces, or employed as a law enforcement officer you can be said to have given your consent; for the all take oaths to support and defend the document that established our system of government. But as for everyone who is not currently serving in those capacities, not a one of them has formally given their consent for this system of government.
I want you to read something now, and think long and hard about what it says. This was written almost 150 years ago by a man named Lysander Spooner, and it strikes at the heart of what I’m trying to say, “And yet we have what purports, or professes, or is claimed, to be a contract—the Constitution—made eighty years ago, by men who are now all dead, and who never had any power to bind us, but which (it is claimed) has nevertheless bound three generations of men, consisting of many millions, and which (it is claimed) will be binding upon all the millions that are to come; but which nobody ever signed, sealed, delivered, witnessed, or acknowledged; and which few persons, compared with the whole number that are claimed to be bound by it, have ever read, or even seen, or ever will read, or see.”
You may not give it much thought, but by voting you are consenting to the idea that we have a system of government that was established in 1789 by men who have long since passed away; men who had no authority at all to bind their posterity to the system they were establishing.
Think about it, if each and every one of us truly is free, then each and every one of us is free to either consent to this system of government, or withhold, and in some instance, revoke our consent to it should we believe it no longer serves the purpose all governments are instituted among men to serve – namely the preservation of our freedom.
You might be saying that the government has been in existence for all this time and who are we to suddenly change that by abolishing it? I would then ask you, by what authority did those living in 1789 bind all of posterity to a system which they had no hand in creating? In a letter to James Madison, dated September 6, 1787, Thomas Jefferson hinted at the fact that he believed they had no authority to do so, “The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water. Yet it is a question of such consequences as not only to merit decision, but place also, among the fundamental principles of every government.”
Jefferson wasn’t alone in expressing such sentiments. In 1791 Thomas Paine wrote, “There never did, there never will, and there never can, exist a Parliament, or any description of men, or any generation of men, in any country, possessed of the right or the power of binding and controlling posterity to the “end of time,” or of commanding for ever how the world shall be governed, or who shall govern it…”
One of the most ridiculous things I hear people say is that if one does not vote they lose their right to complain, as they are not making any effort to bring about a change in the system.
By voting you are giving your consent, not so much to specific candidates, but to the idea that you consent to a system in which there may be times when people whose beliefs and ideologies get elected that you disagree with; but because they are part of the system, whatever laws they enact you are obligated to obey because they are passed by the authority of THE SYSTEM.
I do not vote. I withhold my vote not because I do not like any of the candidates seeking office, I withhold it because I do not consent to the idea that this system we live under has any authority over me, my property, or my rights.
I recognize that the system exists, and that in the name of self-preservation I must abide by the laws it imposes upon me; but I do not consent to its authority, and I will oppose every action it takes to my last dying breath.
You see, you people who say by not voting we lose our right to complain are trapped in the two party paradigm; where your complete political perspective is based upon the platform of either the Republicans or the Democrats. The idea that you should vote for people to do less for you, or vote for people who will not violate the rights of those you oppose, or plunder the wealth of others to fund programs you support, is beyond your ability to comprehend.
You believe that the only solutions we have lie in choosing between a group of career criminals belonging to warring crime families; when it is the entire system that needs to be dismantled and torn to the ground.
All this talk of draining the swamp is both humorous and pathetic. If you really want to drain the swamp you’d begin by abolishing Congress. Then you could move on to the Judiciary by abolishing the Supreme Court. Finally, you could do away with every agency under the authority and control of the Executive Branch – then, and only then, would the swamp truly be drained. I can’t believe that Republicans fell for that nonsense. At least the Democrats are honest with who and what they are, Republicans call themselves conservatives then fall for bullshit like this.
In Thoreau’s book, Civil Disobedience, he opens by saying he supports the belief that, “That government is best which governs least.” If that be the case then the reverse must be true as well, “That government is worst which governs the most.”
I do not vote because I know, without any doubt, that we cannot fix this system; that it was broken from the moment it was put into operation back in 1789. The only thing this system of government has done effectively is to continually accrue more power and restrict more of our freedom as time passes.
Voting is not going to change that, no matter how well intentioned the voters, or the candidates for that matter, might be. The system is broken, corrupt, and dare I say, EVIL; and that cannot be fixed at the ballot box.
All you do by voting is show those in power that you still put your trust and faith in the SYSTEM; that you have not yet awakened to the fact that the SYSTEM exists not to serve you, but to make you its servants. I am not saying I’m any freer than you are, I’m only saying that I know the nature of my enemy, and I choose not to participate in choosing my own slave masters – so I don’t vote.
The moment I realized that I was a slave to a system I did not consent to, I decided to become a virus. As a virus my only concern is to infect as many as I can with the same love of liberty and freedom that burns in my breast. If I can do that, then I can go to my grave a happy man.
You see the truth of the matter is this; not only are your bodies slaves to the system you consent to by voting, your minds are also slaves to the lies and bullshit the system taught you in school. I’m simply trying to free your mind from that garbage so that it is uncluttered by it and capable of seeing the truth:
THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND, IT IS YOUR ENEMY
Freeing your mind is the first step in regaining the freedom we have lost. Once you do that, the rest becomes easy.