Governed by consent or submission?

[SteveA]

Here's an article I read that seems to follow along some lines of thought I'd previously had and ties a lot of other things together:

Are we ruled by our tacit consent or submission? In order words, is government a construction that most people participate voluntarily and have accepted the consequences or something they simply comply with to avoid being harmed?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff26.html

Here's an excerpt of one section that I'd already had a lot of thoughts about but apparently someone else has tied a lot of them together:

...

" 1.

The war waged by the North showed definitively that the U.S. government does not rest on the consent of the governed, as theory might have it, but on compulsion and force.
2.

The Constitution at its inception was consented to by only a small number of people living in the country.
3.

The consent of that small number could not extend to future persons.
4.

When persons voted subsequently, that cannot be construed as consent. Voters, being forced to pay taxes and being ruled in other ways, being "under peril of weighty punishments" if they rebel, will vote in order to try to relieve their condition. This in no way indicates that they consent to it.
5.

In the century after the U.S.A. began, only a small fraction of the people were allowed to vote and still fewer actually voted, thereby limiting greatly any consent to the Constitution, the government, or the laws promulgated by that government and limiting the legitimacy of all of these with respect to the nonvoters.
6.

The payment of taxes can’t be construed as consent because taxes are compulsory.
7.

There is nothing for a voter to consent to anyway, since the Constitution is not and never was a valid agreement or contract.
8.

The voters cannot possibly be providing consent when the Constitution’s powers are so vast that the lives, properties, and liberties of the people are delivered up to the State by this document.
9.

Government power can’t be legitimated or justified by consent of the strongest party or by consent of the majority.
10.

Voting amounts to a situation in which a fraction of the population appoints agents who will administer the government under the Constitution’s name. This however cannot legally bind those others who do not so vote. And even that authority is undermined by the fact that the principals (the voters) are unknown and unnamed, their ballots are cast in secret, and they can have no responsibility for the acts of their agents. The agents (elected officials) do not know who their principals are either.
"

...

[Osborn F Enready]

One more reason I observe, understand and exercise my rights regularly.

The Constitution "enumerates" our rights, but I am responsible for defending and exercising my own.

Remember the term "the buck stops here"? Every citizen needs to understand that "the buck" stops with them. The amount of rights you lose, depends on the amount you let be taken from you.
In the end, you have only yourself to blame, and that is why I try to be honest to myself, my ambitions and my expectations. A man who isn't honest with himself, can't be honest to anyone, since he does not understand the value of honesty, nor does he respect its virtues.

Regardless of how the laws change, how the system changes, or how the power structure changes, I will always reserve the right to live a free man, or die in that pursuit.

Great post Steve, and I wish more people would take it to heart, as well as start to question just where all of this is leading.

[Autolykos]

The tragic thing, Osborn, is that those in the government really have no qualms about killing you (or me, or anyone else) if you stand in their way, as long as the majority continue to tacitly submit.

- Rob

[Osborn F Enready]

Autolykos said:
The tragic thing, Osborn, is that those in the government really have no qualms about killing you (or me, or anyone else) if you stand in their way, as long as the majority continue to tacitly submit.

I say:
Oh, I most certainly agree. I believe their point has been being made quite clearly since before Ruby Ridge, and even moreso since Waco.

That is why I believe in the old adage...."practice makes perfect". As Cmdr. Marcinko would say, "the more thou bleedeth in training, the less thou bleedeth when the "merde hits the ventilliteure".

I take it as my responsibility to be able to arm myself with a chance, through knowledge and practical application practice. Luckily, in our previously free society, information has been readily available to enhance, and further our knowledge of everything from tactics to tools of the trade.

From the "Anarchists Cookbook" to the "U.S. Army Tactics and Training" official field manuals, people have the opprotunity to best educate themselves as they see fit. I understand the machine that is my biggest enemy, and I specialized my training in short circuiting that very machine, as well as protecting my and my loved ones well being through the use of superior tactics, and overwhelming force.

Rights are all we have, and I would be a fool not to use them to help me protect my loved ones, and the rights I so value. That is what the forefathers intended, and I would really love to chew the fat with George Washington about the advantages of the .308 vs. the .223, but alas, no time machine yet exists.

Regardless, it is our own duty individually to prepare ourselves for our battles we see as most likely, most threatening to come within our lives, or the lives of our children.

I am 90% prepared for emergency, the question is, are you?

[Boetie]

You have a leader with a little box taped to his back. The little box is stuck, it keeps saying, "stay the course." Meanwhile, the submissive people keep saying, "follow the president no matter what." And they all fall off the edge of the cliff.

[Osborn F Enready]

Sheeple, lemmings, whatever it takes.

[Critter]

I say we all pool our money, buy a nice big chunk of land somewhere, and start our own damn country.

Who's with me?

(And can someone loan me about $100,000 to do so?)

[Osborn F Enready]

I have similar ideas, but not within a nation currently.

Probably would have to be an uninhabited island somewhere in the South Pacific, that is only claimed as a protectorate, and could be bargained off.

[Critter]

Sounds good to me!

[SteveA]

Quote by: Critter Sounds good to me!

Must admit it sounds fun to me too. :)

It's hard to give up a convenient infrastructure though. I don't make much use of most the amenities here though. With an average of a few hundred watts solar power, some water and area to grow (my wife's got a green thumb. We've got hundreds of pounds of bananas hanging outside our front window ) ... some electonics to mess with (and a few cans of chili ), I'd be stylin'.

Hmm... maybe I should head back to work and say a few more bucks

[Spozguy]

I'm all for it. Reminds me of that simpsons Episode where Homer decides to live under the sea :)

Crazy freaking world we live in. LET'S GO TO MARS!