“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed . . .”
The most fundamental concept of our republic is the idea that government exists to secure the rights of the people and must be based on the consent of the governed. Today, the quote above from the U.S. Declaration of Independence is considered a maxim of the ideal form of government.
Where does the consent of the governed still apply in regards to the U.S. government?
It doesn’t. Consent ends where “governing” begins. It “defies logic to say, “I give my consent for you to be robbed.” Yet that is the basis of the cult of “democracy”: the notion that a majority can give consent on behalf of a minority. That is not “consent of the governed”; it is forcible control of the governed, with the “consent” of a third party.”
The entire notion of “a government of the people, by the people, and for the people,” while it makes nice feel-good political rhetoric, is a logical impossibility. A ruling class cannot serve or represent those it rules any more than a slave owner can serve or represent his slaves.
Some of us realize the self-evident truth that no election, no constitution, no legislation, and no other pseudo-religious political ritual can bestow upon anyone the right to rule another. Nothing can make a man into a rightful master; nothing can make a man into a rightful slave.
But history shows that most human beings would literally rather die than objectively reconsider the belief systems they were brought up in. The average man who reads or hears in the media about war, oppression and injustice will wonder why such pain and suffering exists, and will wish for it to end. However, if it is suggested to him that his own beliefs are contributing to the misery, he will almost certainly dismiss such a suggestion without a second thought, and may even attack the one making the suggestion.
While some might claim that consent exists in the vote, in reality this is simply a facade for a covert oligarchy: since limited consent, is no consent, being subject to the final authority of the limiting power, and thus only presenting the illusion of voluntary agreement,— which is in truth coerced; since there is no power of the People to refuse, i.e. to overrule government, only to make token changes.
“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force. Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” –George Washington
The government then destroyed consent, by declaring secession illegal, and thereby subjecting the People in every state to supreme federal rule. After this, it didn’t matter that everyone got the vote, since it was limited to electing officials in government, rather than having the right to overrule them– i.e. to alter or abolish government itself. And “limited consent” is an oxymoron.
The ugly truth of the matter is, like it or not, we, the governed, consent as long as we are not rebelling. That is, when we refuse to be governed, then we will become ungovernable. Until then, we are consenting.
Now available on Amazon… “A Republic, if you can keep it.” https://www.amazon.com/Republic-If-You-Can-Keep/dp/1717513069/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1529950655&sr=8-4&keywords=a+republic+if+you+can+keep+it
Follow me on Twitter @OzarksAuthor
This page and its links contain opinion. As with all opinion, it should not be relied upon without independent verification. Think for yourself. Fair Use is relied upon for all content. For educational purposes only. No claims are made to the properties of third parties.
(c) 2018 Uriel Press