Categories
Philosophy Political Video Link

The Conditions of Political Consent

I’ve been thinking a lot about the concept of consent from a political perspective. It’s easy to simply call every bit of the state evil and coercive, but it doesn’t seem to convince a lot of people.

So, the thing I’m trying to understand is, what does the average person–not a hardcore anarchist–think of when they envision political consent? Where is the line between a voluntary government and a coercive state? Where is the line between dissidence and withdrawal of consent?

In the video above, I consider a few examples that I’ve seen in popular culture as well as a few of my own devising and try to reach some conclusions.

See my notes for this video here.

This video is available on Odysee and BitChute.

Categories
Political

The Background of the American Revolution

A friend of mine recommended this episode of the Dangerous History Podcast, and I thought it was really interesting. It’s the first in a mini-series talking about the American Revolution.

One point made by Prof. CJ is that there was a peculiar strain of religious belief, held more by the common people of the colonies than the aristocratic founders, that helped move the revolution forward.

Basically, the belief developed that the failure to defend one’s natural rights was a betrayal of God’s grace, as manifested in oneself. There is a lot of good info in the podcast, but this point was something I hadn’t heard before.

There are a few episodes in the mini-series, but I’ve only listened to this one so far. Worth a listen.

Categories
Political

Why Covenants Cannot Be Constant

In my recent piece over at the Tenther Blog, it wasn’t the focus of the essay, but I state:

“even with the best intentions, the interpretation of a long-term compact like a constitution will drift over time, as its interpreters change and as the language changes”

It would have made the essay too long to include the detailed reasoning behind that conclusion, so I thought a small supplemental post, explaining the reasoning, might be helpful.

I will quickly cover three reasons why long-term covenants are never going to hold the same exact meaning over time:

  1. Even without the malicious influence of power-seekers, language changes over time and all such covenants and contracts must be interpreted by currently-living people.
  2. In the same way that Friedrich Hayek observed that economic knowledge is spread out over multiple people and there are so many details that it would be impossible to give them all to a central planner, the understanding of a covenant is distributed. Even if a judge wanted to pass on his understanding of the contract to a successor, the knowledge passed on could be incomplete.
  3. In John Hasnas’s paper The Myth of the Rule of Law, he observes that large bodies of law may contain self-contradictions, and precedents are never perfectly applicable, such that two reasonably similar precedents may conflict when applied to a third case. As any judge of a covenant must rely on some combination of his own understanding of the covenant and precedent, it is impossible to guarantee that such interpretations will always be consistent.

These three reasons mean that long-term covenants, which are expected to last longer than a person’s lifetime, will always shift somewhat in how they are interpreted. In fact, these changes are often significant over the life of a single person. Therefore, it is impossible to guarantee that anyone who joined a covenant will not find fault with some later interpretation and disagree with it.

Therefore, covenants must either recognize the ability of members to leave at-will or provide terms for exiting the covenant. Failing to provide terms implies that the covenant is at-will.

Categories
Essay Philosophy Political

The Founders and the Supreme Power of the People

I wrote a short piece about the basis of power in the American constitutional system, and the Tenth Amendment Center was kind enough to publish it on their Tenther Blog!

Click here to read it!

Categories
Essay Political

The Lockean Delusion

The modern U.S. federal government cannot serve the purposes for which it was created. It has interceded in too many issues, and now it is only an instrument of tyranny to be passed back and forth by elites to subjugate you while providing a veneer of freedom.

Check out my latest at the Libertarian Institute.

Categories
Essay Political

Five Faulty Arguments Against Secession

Secession is the smart and peaceful solution to irreconcilable political differences. I wrote a short essay about five especially bad arguments you often hear against secession, and the Libertarian Institute published it!

Check it out here, and if you liked it, you’ll surely like more of their content! They publish greats like Scott Horton, Ron Paul, Jim Bovard, Sheldon Richman, and more! Support them if you can!

Categories
Book Review Political Video Link

Book Review: Breaking Away, by Ryan McMaken

It seems like everyone is talking about secession these days. Whether they call it that, or national divorce, or some other euphemism, they all have opinions about it and most of them are woefully misinformed. Setting aside the ideologues who only want to tighten their grip on their fellow man for their own benefit, there are plenty of people who argue against secession from a practical perspective, but even these people often argue from a position of ignorance, and in this case, their ignorance is definitely not our bliss.

Categories
Philosophy Political Site News

Facile Arguments Against Secession

And, right on schedule, barely a week after I say something nice about James Lindsay regarding his evaluation of Marxist offshoots as cults and his studies into Gnosticism and its modern incarnations, he decides to spout off ignorantly about secession, parroting the most absurdly weak arguments all the while maintaining a childishly mocking tone against any and all opposing voices.

So, I’m finally cracking open my copy of Ryan McMaken’s Breaking Away, and getting to work on something about secession, because apparently even reasonably intelligent people are unable to understand how the principles of secession and radical decentralization are the most promising hope we have for peace and diminution of the state’s powers.

Expect a few essays/videos soon, including a review of Breaking Away.

…This comes right as I had had a great idea for something on the absurdity of taxing unrealized economic gains that looks like it might get put on the back burner, at least for a bit. Oh, well.

Categories
Political Uncategorized Video Link

Secession, Inertia, and Liberty

I’m frankly surprised that this is becoming a viable topic. Secession is a hugely important part of liberty–it’s the ability of a person or a group to separate itself from a government that is not serving its purpose.

Yet at the same time, we need to be aware of inertia as a political force. If secession occurs in the U.S., we can expect that change to encourage some of the worst in government to seize as much power as possible.

Therefore, we need to support secession consistently (meaning even after a hypothetical U.S. national divorce) and work to avoid rapid polarization.

Anyway, this video is a short discussion on that topic.

Available on Odysee and Bitchute.