Does Voting & The U.S. Constitution Have Any Legitimacy?

The following conversation took place at my Discord server.
https://discord.gg/3rhghRX

The forward ( > ) symbol indicates “responded to”.
Example: Freddy > Jason (Freddy responded to Jason)

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > ⒶMP3083
The US Constitution did not establish rulers, the language in it is clear. The only reference to “the people” in it (besides the Preamble and their power to elect in Art 1 sec 2), is the protections FROM govt set out in the Bill of Rights. As I explained before, people began demanding rulers around the turn of the 20th century. I know these facts do not fit your narrative, anger or beliefs but, the truth is – the Constitution did not establish RULERS.

Unfortunately, your lack of voting is interpreted as you don’t care what happens. In other words, you’re OK with however it turns out.

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
US Constitution is one of the most libertarian documents around. Maybe not perfect, but ahead of its time.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > Bernie Sandfrög
It was the first of its kind in human history. Where else on planet Earth do people have the right, secured by a Constitution, to own guns to overthrow the govt if needed?

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
many places, but afaik, they’re all based on the US Constitution

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
Name one please. Guatemala, Mexico do. Although Mexicans have a right to buy a gun, bureaucratic hurdles, long delays, and narrow restrictions make it extremely difficult to do so.

Guatemalans who want to purchase a gun for private security purposes need approval from the government. They are also limited in how much ammunition they can own, and they must re-apply and re-qualify for their firearm licenses every one to three years, according to GunPolicy.org.

BastardChris > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
Although “Mexicans” have a right to defend themselves, the mafia that dominates them prohibits their victims from selling defensive products… leading to unarmed slaves that have to bend over for daddy whenever he comes home drunk.

ⒶMP3083 > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
My usage of the term “rulers” doesn’t fit your narrative either. But if that’s the case, then I think it’s safe to agree to disagree, though I never do that when the Truth is at stake, but since it’s just words then so be it.

My lack of voting means that I think it’s ok with however things turn out? Well, you’re putting words in my mouth but you are entitled to your opinion.

bbblackwell > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
If the words ”Congress shall have power to…” implies exclusivity (i.e. the individual does not have the same power), then the Constitution establishes an inequality of rights whereby some men have authority over others, AKA rulers.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > bbblackwell
OR, it could be like an employer saying to an employee, “You shall have the power to weld these pieces of metal together as part of your job description.”

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > ⒶMP3083
Yeah, I guess we may differ in our term “ruler”.

Given that you have the power to cast a vote, one way or the other and don’t, it is not illogical to assume you care not about the outcome. Politicians love this speculation. Of course, I would rather see an option for neither or none of the above for an accurate expression of one’s position.

bbblackwell > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
I don’t understand. How do you mean?

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > bbblackwell
OK. I’ll try to clarify via an analogy.

Who is saying, “Congress shall have power to…[perform certain duties]”? Well, it is The People who hire them and can fire them for poor performance. Therefore, it is The People (employer) individually and collectively, who have the exclusive power to empower their employees (Congress) to perform specific job duties. And just like with any employees, the employers maintain exclusive power over the employees, their job, and duties. Any inequality of “rights” is to the benefit of the employers who maintain authority over the employee. I guess it could be said that the Constitution establishes an inequality whereby some men (The People) have authority over others (Congress), AKA rulers.

bbblackwell > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
Ah, ok thanks. The problem is that “The People” is not a body of voluntarily participatory individuals. One portion of the The People decides to do something in a very large geographically area, then applies it to everyone currently existing in that area (whether they agree to the initiative or not), and to everyone entering that area by birth or travel, in perpetuity.

Also, a group of employers cannot delegate any “powers” to their employees that they do not have themselves. This portion of The People who wrote the Constitution (as well as those supporting it to this day) do not have any justifiable claim over the territory to which they are applying this system, nor a valid claim over any property within it except that which they created, purchased, or inherited directly, nor any valid authority over any person within that territory who is not committing aggression against another person.

The entire thing is made up out of whole cloth with no opt-out. A valid opt-out cannot require any action on the part of the person refusing participation. I can’t say, ”Tomorrow I’m destroying every car in this neighborhood. Of course, you may opt-out… just drive 30 miles to my office and personally deliver a notarized statement declaring your refusal.”

This is an act of aggression—an attempt at slavery. I am saying that you must do something or be subject to some action by me. It’s coercion. It’s an invalid imposition of obligation, which is definitively immoral.

Plus, under the best of circumstances, those who vote for the “winner” become the rulers over those who don’t. Those who vote for the losing candidate effectually have zero input over a massive system of violent domination that controls every aspect of their lives. If that ain’t having rulers, I don’t know what is. And the Constitution—even as originally written—had within it the seed, the loophole, for everything that has come since.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > bbblackwell
Thank you for sharing your political philosophy. However, in the US the reigning political philosophy is a form of majoritarianism called constitutional republic. And under this philosophy people have the power to give govt even more power over their lives – as was demonstrated by the grassroots demand for govt intervention in the form of regulation of food, medicine, working conditions, “robber barons” (big business), education of children, etc. around the turn of the 20th century. The People created, actually demanded, the “loopholes” to which you refer. The main “loophole” was the power of The People to choose.

BTW, most, if not all, of planet Earth operates on the concept of Sovereignty and sovereign power, your opinions notwithstanding.

If you viewed the video I presented, you may note that my community “govt” is one of no rulers based on compromise and cooperation. Sometimes people “win” their issue and sometimes they don’t. We recently voted down a tax increase for a certain project. The people who wanted the project and higher taxes “lost”. Those who do not like our system can try to change it in an orderly fashion or opt-out by leaving our community for some place more to their liking. We have the right to operate our community as we see fit.

The bottom line is, The People in the US could vote to reverse all the “loopholes” and “everything that has come since”. After all, The People in the past voted them all in, your feelings of immorality notwithstanding.

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
dictatorship of the majority
deception at its finest

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > Bernie Sandfrög
To the contrary – it’s quite transparent.

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
yes, that’s why unaknowledged projects exist, that’s why the Deep State exists, that’s why the industrial military complex exists and does govern, and that’s why everyone is just nuts and “cOnSPiRAcy tHeOriSTs” except the government. everything is so transparent you cannot even see it

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > Bernie Sandfrög
To the contrary, most people are aware of the existence of all those things and have been at since the 1950s. Much has been written about them.

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
then please admit that it’s pure deception
democracy doesn’t work
it’s pure deception, hypocrisy, and power abuse
oh, and manipulation
CIA mind control programs, mainstream media control, etc.
failure
failed system
democracy is a failed system

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > Bernie Sandfrög
We who grew up in the 50s and 60s were made aware of such things as unacknowledged projects, “deep state”, the military industrial complex, et al. through our education. They actually taught about those things back then. I was in college in the 60s when students were demonstrating against them. Today’s students are actually demonstrating for MORE govt controls. What a turnabout!

Yes, I agree that direct democracy is a failure but, that is what is being pushed today in the US. Humans are imperfect and their institutions are imperfect. However, it’s weird that millions of people from around the world are trying to get to the US where they think it is better than where they live. They’re trying to opt-out of their present situation.

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
petro-dollar
that’s why you get immigrants
not because “democracy works”

bbblackwell > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
I know, but this doesn’t address the fact that this belief in voting magically creating enforceable obligations is a fairy tale. The bottom line is that it’s violence, dolled up so that both abuser and abused can feel better about it.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > bbblackwell
I expected your stance on voting would mirror your political philosophy. However, some humans have found, through centuries of trial and error, that voting is a civil non-violent way to decide a course of action when there are differing opinions. Since rarely, if ever, 100% of people will agree on any one issue, voting is a compromise for cooperation to move forward. Of course, humans aren’t perfect and voting may reflect that.

You have the luxury of comparing the US political system to your idea of perfection. However, it’s interesting to note that millions of people from around the world are trying to get to the US – where you live – because they believe it is better than where they presently live. They’re trying to opt-out of their present situation. What is your plan of action?

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
You’re going in circles while ignoring what is said to you.

People don’t want to go to the USA because “it is better”, they want to go to the USA because the petro-dollar ruins all economies around the world except the USA and few other “allies”.

Also, nobody here is against voting. Just don’t push your voted bullshit on me if I didn’t sign any contract saying that I submit my will to what is voted, or those who enforce what was voted.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > ⒶMP3083
Have you seen this video that is a fair representation of how my community operates?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzXXFsfg-x4

ⒶMP3083 > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
K, saw the video. I’d like to know what your thoughts on it in regards to voting. Correct me if I’m wrong. Does that town in the video have taxation?

If their system of voting doesn’t require the minority to be forced under the preferences of the majority, then there shouldn’t be any problem.

For the record: I’m not against all voting in general.

If the government makes a vote regarding if weed should be legal or illegal, and the majority wins with illegal, and that would mean that I’m not allowed to consume weed or else I’d go to jail, then this is the kind of voting system I’m against. Besides, I would have already been against this vote from the get-go since it is being decided under legality.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > ⒶMP3083
Yes it does. As stated in the video, the project they were discussing was one that would cost money – a likely rise in taxes. One person even made the argument that the project would only benefit some and one made the argument that it would benefit all in the long run. You keep referring to these neighbors as govt instead of just people – a kind of reification.

Everyone who was born or moved there and continued to live there, are all aware of the established way the town operates regarding voting. Sometimes people are “winners” and sometimes “losers”. My community, like many others comprised of humans, have found through centuries of trial and error, that voting is a civil non-violent way to decide a course of action when there are differing opinions. Since rarely, if ever, 100% of people will agree on any one issue, voting is a compromise for cooperation to move forward. Of course, humans aren’t perfect and voting may reflect that to a small degree. Those who do not like our system can try to change it in an orderly fashion or opt-out by leaving our community for some place more to their liking. We have the right to operate our community as we see fit. With regards to your weed issue, there are actually communities that are still dry to this day.

So, I guess until a new way of addressing community issues is adopted by humans – voting will be used. And if you are against that kind of voting system, you are free to convince others to change the system, to change your location or take your chances with ignoring the decision. I wish you good luck in finding your “perfect” place to live.

Bernie Sandfrög
Nobody’s against voting. Just don’t impose your stupid voted decisions upon me. Everything must be opt-in. If I want to pay taxes, fine, if I don’t then fine too – the majority already voted for it, so they’re gonna pay.

“Oh but you’ll benefit from it too!” Yes, just like you too are gonna benefit from the shit I vote for when I’m majority, chill out, authoritarian.

“Oh, but that’s not how it works!”, Yes, that’s how it works in capitalism, and capitalism works pretty well.

Companies benefit each others, intentionally or not, they cooperate, they create healthy environments for their businesses. It’s self-regulated. If you’re too dumb to understand this, it’s not my fault.

Abdul > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
The scale and actual level of participation of governance is an important consideration imo. In your community, it sounds like you are welcome in your own little community parliament, and can discuss issues, vote on things as a community etc.

In large scale countries, we “the people” don’t have any of this capacity. In our democracies, we don’t even have the power to vote on particular issues, at most we are only allowed to vote for a select group of people who will make all these decisions for us. It’s apples to oranges.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > Abdul
Yes, in my community my neighbors and I are the governing body. We choose what will be done and who will oversee the execution of our plans. I chose my community based on these factors among others. I chose to leave large scale communities for reasons such as you describe.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > Bernie Sandfrög
Everything must be opt-in. If I want to pay taxes, fine, if I don’t then fine too. I’m glad you’ve found a place where that works for you.

Bernie Sandfrög > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
That’s what this server is about. Creating more of such places. and to be honest, the only thing preventing most people from living such wonderful anarchist life in most places is just dogmas – “you must be a good citizen and pay your taxes”

not everywhere people are punished for not paying taxes like in the USA. in many places if you don’t pay taxes you’re just excluded from certain “benefits” like bank credits (which are a scam anyway), or you cannot work in some companies that want you to pay taxes. fuck them. they are part of the system, they don’t deserve my work. Mainstream mentality. That’s what holds most people back. Bloody bunch of NPC’s repeating ad eternum centuries old memes.

bbblackwell
Here’s the key concept that statists don’t understand: If you devise or advocate for a system whereby people receive “services” before paying for them, and without ever requesting or agreeing to receive them, then the burden for its upkeep is on you, not the “freeloaders” you’re trying to extort payment from.

You’re either an immoral miscreant, or just not good at thinking things through, but either way, it’s more of a you thing, so stop dumping the consequences of your dysfunction on everyone else.

Bernie Sandfrög > bbblackwell
Like freaking “YoU MuSt be A GoOD cITIZEn and pay yOUR TaXES”. not to mention that often the thinking 2% had the right solution for the problem, but it was “too complicated” for the dictatorial majority and their little npc brains.

Reason #1 why capitalism won and communism keeps losing everywhere. Capitalism lets the thinking 2% experiment and do things that the majority finds absurd at first.

bbblackwell > Bernie Sandfrög
Exactly. Just because it was your first idea doesn’t mean it was your best. If your system doesn’t work without robbing everyone, here’s a thought: Come up with another system.

Bernie Sandfrög > bbblackwell
Consensus should be fluid, not static and monopolistic. Democracy is the stagnation of consensus, it kills politics, it’s corrupt in its very essence.

“Now it’s MYYY turn to monpolize consensus, SUCK IT!”

Isn’t this what democracy is all about? Isn’t it the ultimate “divide and conquer” system? Divide and conquer “consensus”.

Anarcraft
Don’t forget “Argumentum ad populum”

ⒶMP3083 > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
Sound good to me. I must reiterate, for the record, that I am not against all forms of voting.

Example: Ten roommates in one house. They all have a vote. Burgers for dinner or pizza? Pizza wins by 8 votes. If I was one of the two who lost, I’d be fine with this as long as I am not being forced by the majority’s preferences. I also understand that I chose to participate in the vote, so I accept the loss as is. If I can’t have the burger, fine. If I can’t have the pizza since I lost, fine. Up to that point, the problem of me not eating is simply my problem.

Also, I was not referring to thsoe neighbors as government. I referred to them as “the town” earlier in my comment. The only time I used the word “government” is when I used the “weed” example, but this was not in reference to the video you shared with me.

bbblackwell
I’m against voting. Hahaha

Not rigidly, but I think it short-circuits more creative solutions. Its a democratic mentality, even when voluntary. It shoots straight for ”Let’s all do what most people want” without spending enough time on ”How can we most closely achieve everyone getting what they want?”

ⒶMP3083 > bbblackwell
In my previous example about the roommates, I have a “let nature take its course” attitude. Who knows? Maybe they will actually throw me some of their scraps. haha I’ve had experiences where I didn’t get what I want, and even though I did not like how it turned out, I never fought back or got mad at anyone. I let go and let things be. Then someone comes along and offers me something that I like. I don’t know how else to explain it. It’s a strange phenomena. I think Watts has explained something like this before.

It’s like trying to remember the title of a movie that I saw years ago. If I try too hard to think of it, it’s likely that it won’t come to me. But if I just leave it alone and let go, all of a sudden, out of nowhere, the title pops up in my head. Something like that.

Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass > ⒶMP3083
“It’s like trying to remember the title of a movie that I saw years ago. If I try too hard to think of it, it’s likely that it won’t come to me.”

My grandkids tell me it’s because I’m old. See what you have to look forward to?

ⒶMP3083 > Juan Galt Legal Bad Ass
Yeah, I think maybe old age can get in the way? I wouldn’t know, I’m not there yet. haha

bbblackwell > ⒶMP3083
Oh, fughettaboudit… That’s absolutely the way it works when you’re in the flow of letting go and not being attached to outcomes. Some of the things I’ve had happen are so surreal it actually feels like a dream when it happens.

ⒶMP3083
Ikr! But I’m sure we can agree that voting is not done out of pure Love since it doesn’t aim to achieve how all parties get their needs met.

Join our Discord community!
https://discord.gg/3rhghRX
Let’s have a LIVE chat!

1st BITCHUTEhttps://www.bitchute.com/channel/amp3083/
2nd BITCHUTEhttps://www.bitchute.com/channel/amp3783/
FACEBOOKhttp://www.facebook.com/ampthirtyeightythree

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s