Monday, September 16, 2013
The Worst Holiday of the Year
Skyler Collins
Tomorrow, September 17th, is Constitution Day in the United States. Many
will either gather to or independently pay homage to the
United
States Constitution. This document ostensibly created and gave the
necessary authority to the Federal government. It was believed that its
predecessor, the
Articles
of Confederation, created a federal government that was too weak to
accomplish anything meaningful. Though the drafters of the Constitution
were originally tasked with amending the Articles, and proceeded instead
to replace it entirely, that the Constitution went through a ratification
process ensured everyone that it did indeed give the requisite authority
to the newly formed government. But did it really? Did the new government
have proper authority to exercise its delegated powers over the then
territorial boundary of the thirteen colonies? After considering a few
important facts, I think its claim to authority is just that, a claim,
but one which no one is really bound to honor.
No Authority
Every libertarian and voluntaryist knows that
majority rule is invalid as a governing principle. Some people, no matter
how numerous, can't simply vote away the liberties of others.
Unless you've
committed a crime, an act of aggression, I have no right to restrict
your actions on or to take your property by the use of force. And because
I have no right to such, I and a group of others haven't that right
either. This is a very basic principle in political philosophy. After the
Constitution was drafted, it went through a ratification process. At
every point leading up to this, majority vote decided the outcome.
Majority vote chose the convention delegates and the ratifiers, and
majority vote in many of the colonies decided ratification. Clearly,
based on the above principle, none of this was valid. Again, majorities
can't take away (through voting) the liberties of others, and both the
newly formed State governments and Federal government did just that.
Dissenters at every level retained there liberties to act as if their
governments didn't exist.
Criminals, Most of Them
That those who drafted and ratified the
Constitution lacked the authority to do so is easy to show using the
above analysis, but let's go further. In 18th century America, most
people were not allowed to participate in elections. Men without landed
property, women, children, and slaves were all excluded from the
political process. Only white men with land had
the privilege of voting for or becoming
delegates (drafters) and
ratifiers.
The wealthy, in other words. That they were wealthy there is no doubt,
but what was the source of that wealth? Most were slaveholders, meaning,
they forcibly exploited others to build their wealth. Under the
libertarian theory of justice, the rightful owners to that wealth were
actually the slaves themselves*. Their masters were
mala in se
criminals. What are the implications of that?
Do criminals have the right to use their stolen wealth as evidence of
their "right" to participate in a political system that
restricts participation to the wealthy? Do criminals have the right to
draft a new Constitution, thereby creating a new federal government with
the powers of taxation, regulation, and monopoly dispute adjudication? Do
criminals have the right to ratify the new Constitution, thereby
delegating to it said powers over the rest of society within a given
territorial boundary? Do criminals have the right to vote away the
liberties of noncriminals? I can't think of a single reason why
criminals, whose crimes are the forceful kidnapping, imprisonment, and
subjugation of innocent people, would have the right to do any of these
things.
Final Thoughts
It's simple, really. The Constitution has no
authority, nor does the Federal government that it created. The powers it
exercises are an usurpation of the rights and liberties of all Americans.
Likewise every other government within and without the United States.
Though every government commits acts of aggression against its own
people, the United States has a sordid history of both
domestic and
foreign aggression. Constitution Day is really a celebration of one
of the greatest crimes in the history of the world, and of the criminals
who committed it. I can't in good conscience observe what is arguably the
worst holiday of the year.
* Either as the real creators of that wealth, or as it was owed to them
as reparations for generations of slavery.
http://www.everything-voluntary.com/2013/09/the-worst-holiday-of-year.html#.UjiRL2xe19u
-- --
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
