Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bbeljefe" data-source="post: 8163499" data-attributes="member: 655960">The mere fact that you're agitating for the legitimacy of a document that allows a minority to inflict it's will on the majority is collectivist. What you're saying in your argument against democracy and for your ideal republic (which, by the way, I never endorsed) is that a majority shouldn't be allowed to rule over a minority but, an elite minority should be allowed to rule over a majority.I am a voluntarist or, individualist if you like, which means that I do not seek to inflict my will on anyone who does no harm to another individual. Collectivists, on the other hand, would impose sanctions on the liberties of those who do not meet their particular idea of "right". This is why we have laws against victimless crimes and, it is why you would impose a litany of rules and regulations on every individual in order that that individual be afforded the "right" to make some (lame) attempt at affecting how his own property is managed through the act of voting. Which, by the by, is no different than gambling, regardless of whether you attach the labels "republic" or "democracy" to the wager.Moreover, what your republic has achieved is, in no uncertain terms, the largest and most successful power grab in mankind's history. And here's why... when the US constitution was ratified by a minority of property owning men, it was indeed the smallest and least intrusive government known to man. However, the liberty afforded by that small government also caused the largest and most remarkable increase in wealth and technological advancement mankind had ever seen. And what happened as a result? The minority the constitution gives ruling authority to immediately began to conceive of ways to hoard that wealth for themselves.Thus, the US government has gone from the smallest and least intrusive government in history to the largest and most intrusive government in history... in less than 300 years.Hell.... at least the Magna Carta kept the British Monarchy at bay for ~800 years. And it probably would have been much longer, had the US empire not begun.In the end, you cannot give any man authority over his fellow man and call yourself obtaining liberty for either. And when you do, you have established a collectivist society, regardless what you label it.William Allen White said in short and simple terms... "Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others."Your constitution exists for the sole purpose of restricting the liberties of others and thus, it restricts the liberties of all who fall prey to its dictums. Even those who rule by them.</blockquote>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list