Let’s begin today’s rant with some definitions. I draw a clear line between the concepts of “Nation” and “country”. A Nation is a stack of papers held in a garrison called a “capital” or “capitol”, where indoctrinated cultists stand ready to slaughter anyone who defies their edicts and decrees. A country is a group of humans, defined primarily by culture, but also by shared principles and geography, who support and defend their natural and organic way of life against all threats.

The Nation is an artificial construct administered by bureaucrats and legal systems. The country is a society built on mutual trust and values, who feel “at home” in each other’s company with shared experiences and tastes. A Nation is defined by force and rule, while a country is defined by common interests, shared experiences, and mutual trust.

The United State of America is a Nation. Merka is a country.

Lysander Spooner was a 19th-century American philosopher, abolitionist, and political theorist, best known for his staunch individualist and anti-authoritarian principles. If you haven’t read The Constitution of No Authority, you’ve missed a profound educational experience. He was particularly critical of the State’s coercive powers, arguing that gummint authority derived from anything other than voluntary consent was inherently illegitimate.

Spooner believed that unjust authority—particularly gummint overreach—was the greatest threat to personal liberty and societal well-being. He was right.

If we apply Spooner’s principles to the present moment, several major threats are identified as significant challenges to Merkaa, primarily related to gummint overreach, erosion of individual liberties, and State-driven coercion at the point of a gun.

From Spooner’s perspective, the expansion of gummint surveillance, eternal war, the suppression of free speech, and restrictions on personal autonomy would represent significant, even existential threats. In recent years, debates over the scope of gummint power in areas like data privacy (e.g., NSA surveillance, tech companies sharing personal data) and freedom of speech (e.g., censorship on digital platforms), not to mention bodily sovereignty (e.g. mandated medical interventions) have plowed through any personal boundaries of individual liberty, bordering on violent rape of every individual at a core mental and physical level.

Spooner would argue that these actions violate the natural rights and dignity of individuals, as they are forms of State overreach (rape) that occur without explicit voluntary consent. He would see the increasing use of gummint surveillance and laws that restrict freedom of speech and property as a direct affront to personal sovereignty and security.

Another threat that Spooner would identify is the extreme centralization of feral (federal) power. Spooner was a proponent of decentralization, favoring localism and voluntary associations, over centralized militant force. In modern terms, the growing power of the feral gummint, through regulations, executive orders, and large bureaucratic systems, would appall Spooner, as it distances decision-making and responsibility from the individual to a brutal and abusive Our Democracy® that cares little about humans, self-determination and peaceful co-existance.

Spooner would argue that the Feral Reserve’s control over currency, or the vast scope of feral agencies (IRS, FBI, FEMA, FAA) infringe on personal liberty and economic freedom. He criticized monopolistic control over services, whether it was the post office, or monetary controls.

Spooner was an advocate of free markets and voluntary transactions. He opposed taxation and State intervention in the economy, believing that individuals should be free to engage in commerce without gummint interference. Modern forms of economic intervention, such as corporate bailouts, massive gummint spending, and inflationary monetary policies, would be viewed as direct, life-threatening attacks on humans.

Spooner would argue that such interventions distort the natural functioning of the economy and benefit certain interests at the expense of others, especially taxpayers who do not directly consent to these policies.

Ask anyone in North Carolina at the moment what they think of gummint interference.

Spooner’s opposition to slavery was rooted in his broader anti-coercion stance, and by extension, he would oppose the coercion involved in conscription and unjust wars. Spooner would rail against the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) and perpetual foreign conflicts, which demand large budgets, increased gummint control, and loss of individual freedoms through taxes and forced military service. He would label the current nation-state as abject slavery under a rapacious and dominating authoritarianism.

The USA’s involvement in endless military engagements, the growth of military spending, and the erosion of human liberties in the name of “national” security would be seen as manifestations of unjust State power, and slavery in it’s most horrific form — essentially rape at its most fundamental definition.

We humans have turned over so much of our personal freedoms to bloated and avaricious bureaucrats that we can not simply end it. The shock would be like someone using steroids who suddenly stops before the body has resumed its natural functions. However, we need to begin serious and focused tapering. We need elected representatives who will start cutting deep into the gangrenous flesh of governance. Entire agencies need to be exised and budgets slashed to the core.

And soon.

Read the Whole Article

The post Just a Spooner Full of Sugar appeared first on LewRockwell.