NavigationBanners
Active forum topicsRecent blog postsUser loginWho's new
Who's onlineThere are currently 0 users and 342 guests online.
|
Add new commentA Declaration of Individual IndependenceSubmitted by Bill St. Clair on Thu, 2003-06-26 13:05.
by Oliver Klozovat
[copied from here] When in the lives of free men, it becomes necessary to dissolve the political bonds of self and state, it is altogether fitting and proper that the causes which impel them to separation be stated in open declaration. I hold this truth to be objective and rationally sustainable, that all men are morally entitled by right, to act in accordance with the dictates of their own will, provided their actions do not infringe upon the equal ability of others to do likewise. I recognize this principle as the foundation upon which my right to self-determination is morally established. In an effort to secure this right, the government of the United States was instituted, deriving its limited power from the consent of the governed. But as ultimately befalls all governments, the United States has become destructive to this end. It has claimed unto itself powers not granted. It has perverted the understanding of rights and liberty. It has asserted democracy and state as ends in themselves, rather than means to the morally justifiable end of defense of individual rights. It has systematically destroyed the autonomy of its subjects by regulation, subjugation, theft, coercion, and violence. I have petitioned the government for fair redress of these grievances, and have done so in good faith. I have asked that government desist in its theft of my property for redistribution to those it deems more worthy. I have requested that government cease its intrusive and violent regulation of my otherwise peaceful actions. I have protested the extortion of funds by government, for the execution of foreign intrigue and military adventurism. But my objection to an ever-growing trend of abuses has fallen upon deaf ears. Under these circumstances, it is unreasonable to assume any intent for government, other than to reduce men to serfdom, toiling under absolute despotism for the advancement of collectivist ideals. It is therefore consistent with my right of self-determination to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for my future security. In accordance with my principles, I recognize my right to alter or to abolish my association with government, and to institute direct control of my own life in such form as to most likely secure my safety and happiness. While I did not offer my consent initially, it is generally assumed that consent to be governed is inherent in my choice to continue living within the geographical confines of the United States. I reject such an assertion, but am nevertheless compelled to state my intent clearly. I hereby formally withdraw my consent to be governed by agents of the government of the United States, and will henceforth seek to sever any contribution to its advancement. I declare myself a free and sovereign individual. I commit to living in peace with my fellow men and will foreswear the initiation of force or fraud in accordance with my principles.
In Liberty, add new comment | quote | 2377 reads
Reply |
BlogrollLewRockwell.comQuotesEvery man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. -- L. Neil Smith Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings. -- L. Neil Smith Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. -- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report (PDF) on gun control laws Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap") "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." -- L. Neil Smith Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP" Why Did It Have to be... Guns? Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put. If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you. If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims. What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him? -- L. Neil Smith "Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you." -- Mike Vanderboegh The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war. -- Bill St. Clair Monthly ArchivesTTLB |
Recent comments
6 days 4 hours ago
1 week 1 day ago
1 week 6 days ago
2 weeks 10 hours ago
2 weeks 1 day ago
2 weeks 1 day ago
2 weeks 1 day ago
2 weeks 3 days ago
2 weeks 3 days ago
2 weeks 3 days ago