Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
No we are not too large. The problem is in the message. The message we get from TV, Hollywood, Radio, MSM newsprint and the educational institutions are obfuscations of truth. Republics are strong local governance, weaker State governance, and very weak Federal governance. It can be enforced. The tools are all in place. Simply force elected officials to obey their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution as they swear to do.
Somehow, somewhere, along the line elected officials got it into their head that they are supposed to "protect" us and claim immunity for themselves. That is not true. The protection designed in the Constitution is the law not security forces. Security protection is not the job of government unless it is legitimate defense against an aggressor.
Excellent question. So here is how I see it:
If a state decides (by whatever method it chooses) that the federal government is more trouble than it is worth, it simply announces that it is seceeding. It would then be relieved of the obligation to follow Federal law or pay taxes, and in turn would not get anybenefits from the Federal goernment including no defense. The people within the state that seceeds would also automatically be outside Federal law. The state could remain on its own or join another Federation.
Now suppose a county within the state decided it didn't want to be part of the state, it could announce its secession. It would then not be bound by State law nor get the benefits provided by the state. It could join another state or remain on its own. Same for a city or neighborhood.
Even an individual could simply say "My property is no longer part of the state (county, city, or whatever)". the result would be that they no longer follow the law or pay taxes to the jurisdiction they withdraw from. But they also get none of the benefits - no access to courts, no law enforcement, etc. If a person seceeded from every community, he would essentially be what was once called an outlaw - not protected by any law.
So it is likely that MOST people would find that the benefits of joining together with others for mutual defense of property etc. would be worth paying a small fee. But if the fee got too large or the government got too intrusive, they could opt out and join another community. This might be difficult for an individual located right in the middle of a large community, but it would be easy for folks on the border and as soon as those people started leaving, the community would probably fix the problem.
The proper concern of society is the preservation of individual freedom; the proper concern of the individual is the harmony of society.
"Who would be free, themselves must strike the blow." - Byron
"Who overcomes by force, hath overcome but half his foe." - Milton
If you read the CSA constitution, this is precisely what happened here 150 years ago.
And then 600,000 people died.
Secession is as much a fantasy as assuming that we can get back to a constitutional system. As long as we're all living in fantasyland, my fantasyland is the one where the state simply doesn't exist.
There are no crimes against people.
There are only crimes against the state.
And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.
All we have to do, if we want to self-govern, is enforce this: Article VI. Clause 3.
What is so difficult about that? They swear their allegiance to the Constitution. Our job is to hold their feet to the fire. It can be accomplished with bonds.The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;
Do you think the UN will protect the state or region that secedes from the US? Protect it from being invaded or bombed by the US government.
My personal take on the UN is that they are an illegitimate world government. They were not formed by representatives of the people, nations, or states, and a ratification process. They are more like the Mafia who simply claim authority they don't have because they have big bad weapons and an IMF.
A legitimate global government is desirable and preferable to the United Nations. The UN simply claims power because they have big weapons and an IMF. As you should be able to plainly see government is going to exist whether you like it or not.
Your choices are: Are they going to be legitimate government and respect the property rights and natural rights of people, or are they going to go around the world trampling on the rights of the people?
I thought I remembered you saying it a long time ago. It would be too far back for me to try and find it. But if I was wrong about that, I'm glad to hear it.
So, if you do believe in natural rights, I take it that when you talk about "legitimate government" you're talking about something that is based on these natural rights?
I have never said anything of the sort. Mises wrote,I agree with Mises."This is the function that the liberal doctrine assigns to the state: the protection of property, liberty, and peace.
I would probably prefer a government like this over the U.S. Constitution, but the Constitution is what we have and not the monster many people claim it is. The Federalists lost in 1787. They didn't get the powers they wanted. For sure the Supreme Court, the Administration, and Congress all assume power they don't have. But then they are not a legitimate government when they do that. That is why the original intent of the Constitution ought to be enforced.
A DECLARATION OF RIGHTS made by the representatives of the good people of Virginia, assembled in full and free convention which rights do pertain to them and their posterity, as the basis and foundation of government .
Section 1. That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
Section 2. That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants and at all times amenable to them.
Section 3. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration. And that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community has an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.
Section 4. That no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services; which, nor being descendible, neither ought the offices of magistrate, legislator, or judge to be hereditary.
Section 5. That the legislative and executive powers of the state should be separate and distinct from the judiciary; and that the members of the two first may be restrained from oppression, by feeling and participating the burdens of the people, they should, at fixed periods, be reduced to a private station, return into that body from which they were originally taken, and the vacancies be supplied by frequent, certain, and regular elections, in which all, or any part, of the former members, to be again eligible, or ineligible, as the laws shall direct.
Section 6. That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in assembly ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent or that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assembled for the public good.
Section 7. That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights and ought not to be exercised.
Section 8. That in all capital or criminal prosecutions a man has a right to demand the cause and nature of his accusation, to be confronted with the accusers and witnesses, to call for evidence in his favor, and to a speedy trial by an impartial jury of twelve men of his vicinage, without whose unanimous consent he cannot be found guilty; nor can he be compelled to give evidence against himself; that no man be deprived of his liberty except by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers.
Section 9. That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Section 10. That general warrants, whereby an officer or messenger may be commanded to search suspected places without evidence of a fact committed, or to seize any person or persons not named, or whose offense is not particularly described and supported by evidence, are grievous and oppressive and ought not to be granted.
Section 11. That in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the ancient trial by jury is preferable to any other and ought to be held sacred.
Section 12. That the freedom of the press is one of the great bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotic governments.
Section 13. That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Section 14. That the people have a right to uniform government; and, therefore, that no government separate from or independent of the government of Virginia ought to be erected or established within the limits thereof.
Section 15. That no free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.
Section 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practise Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.
In order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
Or, in other words, to ensure that the states do not fight and/or undermine each other, that the coastal state militias do not have to bear the burden of guarding our coasts and national waters alone, and that there is an ultimate arbiter accessible to citizens and states.
And if that was all it did, I'd be its greatest supporter and proponent. Because this nation is stronger united than any of the several states could possibly be alone.
Exactly. That is ultimately our responsibility. Nonetheless, laws are needed to protect the innocent from false testimony. Trespassing laws are needed to protect the rights of land owner. Standards are needed for contract law. Contract law is needed for commerce. Legitimate government is benign.
Illegitimate government is what we endure today because no one is forcing our elected officials to obey the Constitutions.John Locke
4.4 The Function Of Civil Government
Locke is now in a position to explain the function of a legitimate government and distinguish it from illegitimate government. The aim of such a legitimate government is to preserve, so far as possible, the rights to life, liberty, health and property of its citizens, and to prosecute and punish those of its citizens who violate the rights of others and to pursue the public good even where this may conflict with the rights of individuals. In doing this it provides something unavailable in the state of nature, an impartial judge to determine the severity of the crime, and to set a punishment proportionate to the crime. This is one of the main reasons why civil society is an improvement on the state of nature. An illegitimate government will fail to protect the rights to life, liberty, health and property of its subjects, and in the worst cases, such an illegitimate government will claim to be able to violate the rights of its subjects, that is it will claim to have despotic power over its subjects.
Getting out of a bad idea is always a good idea. The power to leave is an all powerfull human action.
Last edited by awake; 10-19-2012 at 02:17 PM.
I know it seems that way. Hegelian Dialect is everywhere. Ron Paul is the exception. Ron Paul's message today is the same message it was 40 years ago with few exceptions. Stefan muddies the waters. Lew Rockwell muddies the waters too. Certainly the TV, Hollywood, MSM and our educational systems are muddying the waters. Heck, the schools still are not teaching the virtues of sound money.
If we can get enough people to understand what sound money is, how it works, and why we must force our leaders to obey the rule of law, then we finally win our liberty, peace, and once again ... prosperity.
"Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul
Brother Jonathan
I subscribe to the Jeffersonian principle, as articulated in the Declaration of Independence, that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. That idea, when taken seriously, leads inevitably to the radical right of each individual and group of individuals to seceed from any government to which they do not consent. The only way to escape that result, arising from our own central founding principles, is to postulate some dishonest surrogate for consent.
The proper concern of society is the preservation of individual freedom; the proper concern of the individual is the harmony of society.
"Who would be free, themselves must strike the blow." - Byron
"Who overcomes by force, hath overcome but half his foe." - Milton
It is the ones currently in office who are not following the guidelines of the Constitution. The Constitution is not an instrument to restrain the people, it is an instrument to restrain the government. It is our duty to make sure that we hold them accountable. The people always had the power, they have been deliberately side tracked so while they were busy worrying what the Jones' have, and what sports game is on and other selfish things, these bastards hijacked our government.
It all took place while we were sleeping. It is time to wake up and take back what is ours.
“The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner
It's actually way past time, and they aren't going to give it back willingly.It all took place while we were sleeping. It is time to wake up and take back what is ours.
"The Patriarch"
Not to derail the thread, but wasn't part of the problem that the south wanted a place for the slaves to go, instead of just dumping them into the ditch just outside the property line? And wasn't that fought against by the northern states, as in "Let the slaves go free, but keep them in your own yard"?
"When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law
"nothing evil grows in alcohol" ~ @presence
"I mean can you imagine what it would be like if firemen acted like police officers? They would only go into a burning house only if there's a 100% chance they won't get any burns. I mean, you've got to fully protect thy self first." ~ juleswin
“The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner
Connect With Us