 |
|
|
 THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE Number 825, June 14, 2015 Political Power: Too much of every day life consists of defying it, avoiding it, or evading it, simply to live.
Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise I have, in the past, been a critic of the US Constitution, for largely the same reasons that Spooner disdained it. But because it doesn't work (from the peons' point of view anyway), does it follow that it is useless? No. Now, before we get into this I will add a disclaimer. Just because the current US Constitution, and all the state constitutions, and (apparently) every other country's constitution does not work from the point of view of the peons, it does not imply that there can never be a constitution that works. It's at least theoretically possible to have a constitution that does work, if crafted properly. But this article is about the current US Constitution. What use can it have, if it doesn't work? Here it is: the very fact of its not working, provides a strong incentive toward rebellion. Think about it. As time goes on, it becomes more and more obvious that the ruling class uses the Constitution as toilet paper. They are getting to the stage now where they are blatant about it. Who for example, now believes that the NSA has stopped spying on Americans? Is there even a single person in the country that naive? Has it escaped notice that the government now wants to regulate free speech about firearms, and wants to muzzle commentary in blogs about judicial excesses? Those who revere the Constitution know that it's being ignored. Those who buy arguments about social contracts know the other party is not holding up their side of the "deal". Now, what is the normal response when one side of an agreement reneges? Of course, the other side does also, and the deal is off. In this case, "legitimacy" disappears. Can a government of no legitimacy, generally recognized, exist for long? I believe the proper response to someone who brings up the Constitution in an argument is not, "You idiot parchment-worshipper," (I'm slapping my own face on this one), but "Dude, they've broken the social contract. The deal is off. Just when are you going to rebel?" I think "restorationists" are already pretty much there, even if their view of what the future should look like might need some work. Oddly enough, a non-functional Constitution still has utility. It cries out for rebellion. No, not explicitly of course. It must be there in one of those "penumbras" the judges are always going on about—or maybe buried in the 9th Amendment somewhere. But it's there....
This site may receive compensation if a product is purchased
|
|
|
|
Previous
Contents
Next
