Self-Contradictory Constitution and Bureaucrats’ Illegitimate Monopolies
by Scott Lazarowitz: The
Supreme Bureaucrats’ Decision on ObamaCare
In my previous
column I included some ways to protect ourselves from the tyrannically
intrusive ObamaCare monstrosity, via the U.S. Constitution. However,
in the same piece I questioned the Constitution’s legitimacy and
contains a self-contradictory structure that monopolist government
bureaucrats and the police have been ignoring for many decades.
In fact, it
is the very Constitutionally mandated monopolies that bureaucrats
illegitimately have that violate our God-given rights.
Here are some
examples of the Constitution’s inconsistency: Part of the Constitution’s
Amendment states that "(no person) shall be compelled in
any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived
of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…"
Note how it
does not stipulate, "except during a war," or "except
during the U.S. government’s War on Terror." That is because
the Founders believed that there should be no exceptions to this
And also, the
Fifth Amendment specifies "in any criminal case," but
not in other cases in which police (or military) or other private
civilians could very well not be investigating any criminal case,
but could just be on a Gestapo-like fishing expedition.
The right to
presumption of innocence is part of our natural, inalienable rights,
and history has shown that government power-grabbers are not particularly
concerned for the people’s right to presumption of innocence.
A century of
government central planning has created generations of shortsighted,
irresponsible rulers in America. With rule by emotion and not reason,
we have police, legislative and court bureaucrats who do not seem
able to see things form the point of view of an individual being
victimized by agents
of the State.
The Fifth Amendment
also states, "nor shall private property be taken for public
use, without just compensation." It does not forbid the government
from taking private property – it only states that when covetous
government bureaucrats do take your property, with or without your
consent, they are supposed to compensate you for it.
There is no
provision in the Constitution
that protects one’s person and private property from a criminal
intrusion. There is a hint of that in the Fourth
Amendment, with the phrase, "The right of the people to
be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…"
But federal, state and local governments have repeatedly committed
person- and property-invasion crimes against innocent civilians,
and courts have repeatedly defended those State crimes.
I, Section 8 of the Constitution is loaded with monopoly powers
assigned to government that violate individuals’ God-given, inalienable
rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It gives so
much monopolistic, centralized power to the federal government that
many of the Founders
knew that such powers would be misused and become the Leviathan
tyranny the federal government now is.
I, Section 8, Congress is given the power "To regulate Commerce
with foreign Nations, and among the several States." But who
the hell is a government bureaucrat to interfere with or intrude
into an individual’s private
violates the individual’s right to establish voluntary contracts
with others. Contracts among individuals are the sole business of
the parties to such contracts, and not the business of government
bureaucrats. My philosophy is that if it’s none of the neighbors’
business, it’s none of the government’s business.
A federal government
with its artificial authority over an entire territory implies that
the government owns the territory, and that the bureaucrats
employed by the government have some sort of territorial ownership
rights of control, a very communistic
structure if there ever was one.
And who the
hell are government bureaucrats to "coin money"? That’s
also part of Article I, Section 8. Money is an important commodity
and it is the individual’s right to choose by what means one wants
to trade with others. Giving government control of the people’s
money gives the government the
power to steal from the people.
the market would be efficient in the "regulation" of various
media of exchange, that is, were the market freed from monopolistic,
governmental bureaucratic intrusions.
explains the myth of "efficient
the origin and stability of the State, and noted
the absurdity of a society with government monopolies and the absence
of a contract between the people and the State.
The truth is,
there’s really no need for a "Constitution" to maintain
peace and civility in a free society. Just follow the rule
of law, by forbidding the initiation of physical aggression, forbidding
theft and fraud, and forbidding trespass.
monopoly power to an institution – government – in which the people
are compelled by law to use, with threats of violence to enforce
such a relationship, is immoral and criminal in nature, and violates
the individual’s right to choose which services one wants to use.
In a free,
civilized society, no one should be above the law, and no one has
any legitimate authority over anyone else without voluntary consent.
any actual need for a centralized government with power and authority
over the entire territory, I have addressed that here,
in a society, particularly one as large as the United States, really
must be controlled locally.
There are those
who agree with localization, but worry about "national defense."
But in reality, the original purpose of the federal government’s
Constitutionally mandated territorial security monopoly has long
been forgotten. The bigger and more powerful the federal government
had become, the more each temporary ruler has used such powers to
against foreigners, the more they have done nothing but provoke
foreigners to act against the people of the United States. I have
addressed the federal government’s central planning monopoly in
territorial protection here,
(And for more, see this,
[.pdf], and this.)
Hans Hoppe analyzes the association between democracies and
And we have
been seeing, day after day, how the local governments’ monopoly
in community policing and security not only gives the government-monopolized
police the power to be above the law, but many times now government
police have been getting away with crimes of murder, assault, theft,
rape, property destruction, and terrorizing innocent civilians.
(Just see any of these
LRC articles by Will Grigg to find many examples.)
of the power of local and state governments, as well as the federal
government, to artificially make just about every civilian behavior
a crime, no matter how harmless and innocent, the police are arresting
people really for no good reason (except mainly to raise revenue
to fund local and state bureaucrats’ six-figure salaries that they
probably would not be getting in a freed market). This is what America
has come to: lawlessness and criminality mainly committed by the
agents of the State.
In a community
in which policing were done by voluntary groups and individuals,
and by competitive firms, all individuals would have to live under
the rule of law, all individuals would be equal under
the law, and no one would be allowed to be above the law.
(And that would also apply to George
Zimmerman, whose initial act of stalking Trayvon Martin was
questionable at best.)
many government-monopolized police do not obey the rule of law because
they have monopoly status in which they are above the law.
The truth is that such an unequal, artificial relationship between
civilians and armed government bureaucrats seems to naturally lead
to a system of institutionalized criminality.
And now, thanks
to the passive, sheeple-like compliance and submissiveness on the
part of the American people, these local government bureaucrats
(as well as the federal bureaucrats) have more and more armed power,
and our liberty and security are going down
the drain (along with our economic prosperity that we used to
have, thanks to the monetary
monopolists in Washington).
are not accountable. No "Constitution" holds monopolists
accountable – that’s a fantasy, a dream that can never come true,
because of human
nature, and because no human being is an
artificial armed power and authority over others has been the Founders’
biggest mistake. But can we reverse this? Well, where
there’s a will, there’s a way, that’s for sure.
Americans will have to face these truths and stop kicking the can
down the road toward the necessary restructuring. And better sooner
And no, there
can be no Perestroika, or "reform," of government
monopolies and central planning. It all needs
to be abolished, as the Soviets did, and decentralization and
localization must occur.
to take back their freedom, not just with their right to self-defense
and their right to bear arms, but by removing monopolies from government
Lazarowitz [send him
mail] is a commentator and cartoonist, visit his
© 2012 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in
part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Best of Scott Lazarowitz