The Constitution, What Has Gone Wrong? By Jack Kettler
For those who have loved the freedoms we have enjoyed in this great nation, it may be painful to consider the following thoughts on the Constitution from Lyander Spooner.
Who is Lysander Spooner?
Lysander Spooner was an 19th Century American individualist, political philosopher and business entrepreneur. The two following quotes from Spooner come from his book titled; No Treason The Constitution of No Authority by Lysander Spooner.
Lysander Spooner observed:
But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.
It is obvious that almost all of the checks and balances put into the constitution, have broken down. It is also becoming apparent that there is in reality on one political party in Washington and that is the “giant government party.” For the most part, the politicians are bought and paid for. The supreme court in recent decisions has manifested itself to be nothing more than a rubber stamp court twisting the plain language of the constitution out of all logical context, making a mockery of the English Language. Therefore, it appears beyond dispute that Spooner is correct in the above quote.
Spooner continued his devastating critique of the constitution:
And yet we have what purports, or professes, or is claimed, to be a contract—the Constitution—made eighty years ago, by men who are now all dead, and who never had any power to bind us, but which (it is claimed) has nevertheless bound three generations of men, consisting of many millions, and which (it is claimed) will be binding upon all the millions that are to come; but which nobody ever signed, sealed, delivered, witnessed, or acknowledged; and which few persons, compared with the whole number that are claimed to be bound by it, have ever read, or even seen, or ever will read, or see.
Our constitutions purport to be established by 'the people,' and, in theory, 'all the people' consent to such government as the constitutions authorize. But this consent of 'the people' exists only in theory. It has no existence in fact. Government is in reality established by the few; and these few assume the consent of all the rest, without any such consent being actually given.
What about this supposed social contract, is it binding? Consider the following from author Robert Higgs:
In regard to the so-called social contract, I have often had occasion to protest that I haven't even seen the contract, much less been asked to consent to it. A valid contract requires voluntary offer, acceptance, and consideration. I've never received an offer from my rulers, so I certainly have not accepted one; and rather than consideration, I have received nothing but contempt from the rulers, who, notwithstanding the absence of any agreement, have indubitably threatened me with grave harm in the event that I fail to comply with their edicts.
Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe elaborates more on this supposed contract:
No, the state is anything but the result of a contract! No one with even just an ounce of common sense would agree to such a contract. I have a lot of contracts in my files, but nowhere is there one like this. The state is the result of aggressive force and subjugation. It has evolved without contractual foundation, just like a gang of protection racketeers. And concerning the struggle of all against all: that is a myth.
James Madison was keenly aware of the dangers of the government being created. Madison said:
It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be to-morrow.
In the book Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent by Harvey Silvergate is in agreement with Madison's concerns:
We are in danger of becoming a society in which prosecutors alone become judges, juries and executioners because the threat of high sentences makes it too costly for even innocent people to resist the prosecutorial pressure. That is why nearly all criminal defendants today plead guilty to “reduced” charges rather than risk a trial with draconian sentences in the event of a conviction.
It is only a slight exaggeration to say that the average busy professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, takes care of personal and family obligations, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she likely committed several federal crimes that day.
Most freedom loving patriots today know that something has gone horribly wrong. John Adam's insight on what could go wrong and why is spot on:
We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
Noah Webster concurs with Adams:
The Christian religion, in its purity, is the basis, or rather the source of all genuine freedom in government. . . . and I am persuaded that no civil government of a republican form can exist and be durable in which the principles of that religion have not a controlling influence.
Both Adams and Webster hit the nail on the head regarding what has gone wrong with our constitutional system of government. Most readers are well aware that our American constitutional republican form of government has been subverted into a democracy, an evil form of government!
How is democracy evil?
Democracy forces you to be in conformity with the demands of the “will of the people,” regardless of what economic realism, common sense, or what biblical law says.
Democracy obligates you to relinquish your freedom and your assets including property for the so-called “general welfare” Article 1, Section 8, today a grossly misinterpreted term. Democracy in the end, destroys freedom and property. It is consumed by the parasites who vote for the political prostitutes who promise to give away the fruits of stolen capital from the productive sector of society.
At first, democracy is very particular on who is allowed into the country. There are strictly enforced immigration laws only allowing in people who have something to contribute along with secure boarders.
In the late stages before a democracy collapses, the politicians who promise people free things to get elected, find that many people are starting to recognize the voting scam for what it is. In order to keep the scam of democracy going, the politicians need more stupid people who cannot not recognize the political lies. In the case of the U.S. the corrupt vote buying political prostitutes (most politicians) create an open boarder disaster and start flooding the country with millions of stupid people who fall victim to specious promises of the vote buying prostitutes. The new wave of immigrant law breakers are coming for government handouts, taken from people who are producers and given to non-producing bums and parasites.
Consider professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe's thoughts on democracy:
What is true, just, and beautiful is not determined by popular vote. The masses everywhere are ignorant, short-sighted, motivated by envy, and easy to fool. Democratic politicians must appeal to these masses in order to be elected. Whoever is the best demagogue will win. Almost by necessity, then, democracy will lead to the perversion of truth, justice and beauty.
One-man-one-vote combined with “free entry” into government-democracy--implies that every person and his personal property comes within reach of-and is up for grabs by everyone else: a 'tragedy of the commons” is created.
Democracy allows for A and B to band together to rip off C. This is not justice, but a moral outrage.
Adams and Webster would put the root cause of failure of the Republic as a result of an immoral people. I would agree.
This brings us to another point well made by Spooner concerning the operation and legitimacy of the state.
Where we are at today? Spooner's analysis get right to the point:
The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life...The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber...Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful 'sovereign,' on account of the 'protection' he affords you.
In his article "Forget the Constitution" at LewRockwell.com, John Keller notes:
Our patriots fought for individual, God given rights, instead of aetheistic utopian groups rights. Still, the men who founded our current Republic by writing and ratifying the Constitution understood the dangerous path they were taking. Students of antiquity, they tried to avoid following the Roman path of Kingdom, then Republic, then Empire, by writing everything down. It turns out in practice that the "social contract" cannot bind the politician or the entrenched bureaucrat, any more than the Soviet Union could make the New Soviet Man. In hindsight we can see that a piece of paper is no match for the linguistic gymnastics of our permanent caste of lawyer kings.
When things do change in this country, it will not be because the bureaucrats, professional liars, and assorted utopians come to work one day and say "Gee, we failed in our job. The private market would be so much better at this." It will be because the people have finally figured out that Ben Franklin was right all along, liberty can’t be traded for security, and it looks like Rothbard, Spooner, and Patrick Henry were right about the Constitution.
Kevin Craig makes the following comment about what has happened:
And the Congress has effectively destroyed Constitutional government in America, replacing it with “The Administrative State” by delegating unconstitutional authority to swarms of bureaucrats.
The following description of our current form of government is hard to beat:
What is this oozing behemoth, this fibrous tumor, this monster of power and expense hatched from the simple human desire for civic order? How did an allegedly free people spawn a vast, rampant cuttlefish of dominion with its tentacles in every orifice of the body politic? - P. J. O'Rourke, Parliament of Whores
It is hard to disagree with the following sentiments:
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. - H.L. Mencken
In closing it can be said, the original Constitutional construction of government no longer exists. In fact, the Constitution has been destroyed by a powerful centralized federal government.
We must again take seriously what is set forth in the following article:
“And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.” - Isaiah 49:23 (KJV).
“The orthodox churches believe also, and do willingly acknowledge, that every lawful magistrate, being by God himself constituted the keeper and defender of both tables of the law, may and ought first and chiefly to take care of God's glory, and (according to his place, or in his manner and way) to preserve religion when pure, and to restore it when decayed and corrupted: and also to provide a learned and godly ministry, schools also and synods, as likewise to restrain and punish as well atheists, blasphemers, heretics and schismatics, as the violators of justice and civil peace.” - George Gillespie, Works, 1:12.
“Moreover, to kings, princes, rulers, and magistrates, we affirm that chiefly and most principally the conservation and purgation of the religion appertains; so that not only they are appointed for civil policy, but also for maintenance of the true religion, and for suppressing of idolatry and superstition whatsoever: as in David, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, and others, highly commended for their zeal in that case, may be espied.” The Scottish Confession of Faith (written by John Knox and others), Chapter 24, 1560. “Yet civil government has as its appointed end, so long as we live among men, to cherish and protect the outward worship of God, to defend sound doctrine of piety and the position of the church, to adjust our life to the society of men, to form our social behavior to civil righteousness, to reconcile us with one another, and to promote general peace and tranquility.” - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 4:20:2.
“Reformation is desperately needed in our languishing nations. In the past, not only did biblical reformation sweep the church in doctrine, worship, and government, but also reformation of biblical Christianity was promoted and accelerated by Christian magistrates who wholeheartedly supported and defended the ministry of the reformed churches. Reformation is never easy. The truth is no more fashionable today than it was at the time of our reformed and covenanted forefathers. If we would see reformation we must return to the old paths of our God and of our forefathers. What is presented in the following pages is not a novel view of civil magistracy, but one which is believed to be both biblical and representative of our reformed and presbyterian forefathers from the covenanted reformation at the time of the Westminster Assembly. Civil magistracy is a blessed ordinance of the living God, given to the human family in order that it might reflect the order in which God so much delights ("For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace" 1 Cor. 14:33). This ordinance should be so cherished by God's people that when the ruling civil magistrate cannot be owned as "the ordinance of God" within a nation, the hearts of God's people both sadly bemoan that fact and earnestly pray that God would in His mercy remove His righteous anger from the land and grant nursing fathers to the church. May God be pleased to open the eyes of His people to the need for reformation in the divine ordinance of civil magistracy.” - Greg Price, Biblical Civil Government Versus the Beast; and, The Basis For Civil Resistance, free online at http://www.swrb.com/newslett/actualNLs/bibcg_gp.htm.
“Maybe now you can understand why the national reformations that took place in the OT always included the recognition and national confession of the sins of the fathers — for those sins brought God's wrath upon the nation (2 Chr. 34:21, 2 Chr. 29:6-7, 2 Chron. 30:7-9, Ezra 9:6-10:2, Neh. 9:2-37)”. Previous attainments and obligations continue to bind the national moral person (for more on the “moral person” of nations and churches see Scott's Distinctive Principles of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, pp. 61,70,195f.,285f. and Robert's The Reformed Presbyterian Catechism, p. 150). Moreover, these teachings formed the biblical basis as to why the Reformers (especially during the second Reformation) where always eager to seek out the causes of God's wrath, and repent of these, whether individual, ecclesiastical or national. The best Reformers did not try to gather together all manner of infidels, idolaters, sectarians, etc. and form some kind of general, moralistic, conservative crusade to uplift the nation — never! (Cf. Gillespie's “Another Most Useful Case of Conscience Discussed and Resolved, Concerning Associations and Confederacies With Idolaters, Infidels, Heretics, or Any Other Know Enemies of Truth and Godliness” in his “Treatise of Miscellany Questions”, Works, volume two). They aimed at purifying and unifying the church, state and family on the basis of a covenanted uniformity — always seeking to be faithful to Christ's Crown and Covenant and shunning all suggestions of humanly based solutions to the problems of the day! They looked first to God's mercy and grace (after recognition and confession of sin of course) in their individual lives; and they weren't about to start to build on a resurrected covenant of works, after having faithfully begun building on the covenant of grace, in the civil or ecclesiastical realms either — when dealing with the reformation of church and state. This is why the Reformations under Asa, Hezekiah, Josiah, Ezra and Nehemiah all involved the biblical aspects listed below. They sought to: 1. Nationally eradicate idolatry and false religion (with iconoclastic zeal) (cf. 2 Chron. 34:3-7; 2 Chron. 31:1; 2 Chron. 15:8; 2 Chron. 15:16, etc.). 2. Nationally promote the true worship, discipline, and doctrine of the church of Christ (2 Chron. 29:11-30:6; 2 Chron. 30:12-27; Ezra 10:10vv.; Neh. 10:31-32, etc.). 3. Nationally establish the one true religion and church (cf. 2 Chron. 34:8- 17; 2 Chron. 29:3-5; 2 Chron. 31:2-3; 2 Chron. 31:20-21; 2 Chron. 32:12, etc.). 4. Nationally confess their own sins and the sins of their fathers (2 Chron. 34:21; 2 Chron. 29:6-7; 2 Chron. 30:7-9; Ezra 9:6-10:2; Neh. 9:2-37, etc.). 5. Nationally publish the truth (2 Chron. 34:30; Ezra 10:7-8, etc.). 6. Nationally renew covenant with God (with specific regard to the present testimony) and set the state upon a fully covenanted biblical pattern, agreeing to nationally obey the law of God (2 Chron. 34:31; 2 Chron. 29:10; 2 Chron. 15:12-15; Ezra 10:3-4; Neh. 9:38-10:31, etc.). 7. Nationally cause (by civil power) the inhabitants of the nation to stand to the covenant (2 Chron. 34:32-33; 2 Chron. 15:12-13; Ezra 10:5, etc.).” - Dr. Reg Barrow, A Contemporary Covenanting Debate; Or, Covenanting Redivivus (Reg Barrow Debates Joe Bell), free online at http://www.swrb.com/newslett/actualNLs/covdebrb.htm.
“There is not a single square inch of the entire cosmos of which Christ the sovereign Lord of all does not say, 'This is mine.'” - Abraham Kuyper
Mr. Kettler is the owner of www.Undergroundnotes.com web site where his theological, philosophical and political articles can be read.