Assume government?
When someone asks what government ("The State") "thinks" on some issue-- what the "law" says or what the general statist thinking [sic] is-- my first thought is always along the lines of "Who gives a ...?"
And I'm not only talking about whether or not something is "illegal".
So many people assume government. I assume liberty.
They can't imagine liberty, so they obsess over this or that justification for governing others. They feel the need to know what George Washington said about some subject before they can form an opinion about it. They worry over what the Constitution says. They can't consider anything outside the box of what some long-dead statist molester believed.
They act as though they believe government is to be considered first. Anything else comes later, if there's still room. They pretend discussing government is the adult thing to do. They are misguided.
Reminder: I could really use some help.
Thank you for helping support KentforLiberty.com.
Donations and subscriptions are always appreciated!
I didn't sign it.
Lysander Spooner crushed every argument for Constitutional authority about 150 years ago.
Those arguments are just a thin layer of decorative garnish on top of a huge pile of guns.
I think this is where we need to make a distinction with lawful matters and legal matters. Legal can be what someone wrote on a law/congress, but it does not mean it is correct. lawful though, to me means that something is aligned with laws of Nature.
I also don't care about what it legally says. My concern is, is it lawful? Does respect private property and is it the reasonable choice?
Many of those who choose government over all odds turn out to be those who made up government!
Posted using Partiko Android