What is limited Government? This may just be the most surprising question you have had all day.

Limited government is an oxymoron.

You are really asking “At what point would I find it acceptable for the government to intrude on my natural rights?”

I don’t find murder, theft, or prohibition of natural rights acceptable. So how does that fit into government?

  1. Government creates a rule that decides to enforce upon me.
  2. If I decide to no abide by that rule, government reserves the right to commit violence on me, for the purpose of putting me into compliance.
    1. This violence, or the threat there of, may also include taking, or forcing me to relinquish my some or all of my property.
  3. My self-defense against such violence can be, and will be used as further provocation for more theft and or violence.

Don’t sound shocked. Look at the tax laws. As they are written, we are subject to this now.

  1. The government has decided that they own enough of you, that they get to lay claim to a percentage of your wages.
    1. This is slavery by the way. You are now property of your country, state, county (perish), and city.
  2. Because of this ownership, the government has decided, with or without your consent, that they can arbitrarily decide what percentage of your wages they can lay claim to.
    1. Did you know that before 1913 you got to keep 100% of your income? For me that is one heck of a pay raise. I would be out of debt, and be on my way to pay off my share of the federal debt in a few years.
  3. Also because of this ownership, the government claims that disobedience to their claim is tantamount to a slave disobeying his master, and is subject to punishment.
    1. Tell me how this isn’t slavery. This is exactly slavery.

So what is limited government? It is the same as limited slavery. It just doesn’t exist. What is an alternative? Free market, and real Volunteerism.

Free market

There is a problem, and there is a means to create equitable exchange between both parties, they resolve the problem by exchange.

Volunteerism

There is a problem, and there is not a means to create an equitable exchange between both parties, the weaker of the parties are assisted by means of a free market version of altruism.

Yes, Free Market Altruism sounds like an oxymoron, but it doesn’t have to be.

I need work experience, no one will hire me for cash, but I strike a deal with a MFR for them to provide room and board for one year, and I gain experience. After one year, we renegotiate.

If I fail to uphold my end of the bargain, they let me go, or renegotiate the terms. Mutual agreement.

If they fail to uphold their end of the bargain, then I leave, or renegotiate the terms. Mutual agreement.

If they try to enslave me, then we get to the 2nd part of volunteerism. If people are volunteering to do business, and they don’t agree with the practice of enslavement, then they bankrupt the employer. Possibly buying out the enslaved person to free him.

Warning: Massive segue here on Liberty does not allow slavery, nor does it allow a war that supposedly ended slavery.

No, I am not pro-slavery. I am pro-liberty. I am also pro-history. Based on this, let’s look at the states that ended slavery before the civil war.

Year Free states Slave states
1789 New Hampshire Vermont Republic New York
Massachusetts New Jersey
Rhode Island Delaware
Connecticut Maryland
Pennsylvania Virginia
Northwest Ordinance(Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin) North Carolina
South Carolina Georgia (Which was much bigger then)
Year Free states Slave states
1800 New Hampshire New Jersey
Vermont Delaware
Massachusetts Maryland
Rhode Island Virginia
Connecticut Kentucky
Pennsylvania Tennessee
Northwest Territory (Ohio and part of Michigan) North Carolina
Indiana Territory (Indiana, Illinois, Part of Michigan, Wisconsin) South Carolina
New York Georgia (Modern Georgia Territory)
Mississippi Territory (Alabama, Mississippi & Louisiana)
Year Free states Slave states
1821 Maine Delaware
New Hampshire Maryland
Vermont Virginia
Massachusetts District of Columbia
Rhode Island Kentucky
New Jersey Tennessee
Connecticut North Carolina
Pennsylvania South Carolina
Ohio Georgia
Indiana Florida Territory
Illinois Alabama
Michigan Territory (Includes Wisconsin) Mississippi
Missouri Compromise Louisiana
Oregon Country Arkansaw Territory (Yes, back then Arkansaw was spelled with a W.) 1838 it became Arkansas and now forever mispronounces as if that 2nd “s” was a “w”.
New York Missouri
Year Free states Slave states
1837 Maine Delaware
New Hampshire Maryland
Vermont Virginia
Massachusetts District of Columbia
Rhode Island Kentucky
New Jersey Tennessee
Connecticut North Carolina
Pennsylvania South Carolina
Ohio Georgia
Indiana Florida Territory
Illinois Alabama
Michigan Mississippi
Wisconsin Territory Louisiana
Missouri Compromise Arkansas
Oregon Country Missouri
New York
Year Free states Slave states
1846 Maine Delaware
New Hampshire Maryland
Vermont Virginia
Massachusetts District of Columbia
Rhode Island Kentucky
New Jersey Tennessee
Connecticut North Carolina
Pennsylvania South Carolina
Ohio Georgia
Indiana Florida Territory
Illinois Alabama
Michigan Mississippi
Wisconsin Territory Louisiana
Missouri Compromise Arkansas
Oregon Country Missouri
Wilmot Proviso. Proposed the slavery be prohibited from territory stolen from the country of Mexico. (What is the term conquered, but when a government steals from another.) Texas
New York
Year Free states Slave states
1860- Maine Delaware
1861 New Hampshire Maryland
The Vermont Virginia
Start Massachusetts District of Columbia
Of Rhode Island Kentucky
The New Jersey Tennessee
Civil Connecticut North Carolina
War Pennsylvania South Carolina
Ohio Georgia
Indiana Florida Territory
Illinois Alabama
Michigan Mississippi
Wisconsin Louisiana
Missouri Compromise Arkansas
Oregon Missouri
California Texas
Washington Territory Utah Territory
Nebraska Territory New Mexico Territory (Including what is now Arizona)
Kansas & Kansas Territory Indian Territory (Oklahoma)
Iowa
Minnesota
New York

By looking at this, we can see that we started as a massive slave state, but we migrated to a mostly free state by the beginning of the civil war. Has the south been allowed to succeed from the union, we would have had two, maybe three countries. A free north, a slave south, and maybe a free west. Read up on California history. If it wasn’t for the pony express, California wouldn’t have been part of the US.

As people became more and more aware of the evil nature of slavery, I suspect that the remainder of the south would have moved away from it. There were already states that had such a notably reduced slave population that the change in slave status didn’t affect the demographics for the majority of the state. Kentucky is my favorite example. The big Ohio River trade routes had the most slaves, but the rest of the state was mostly managed and built on by large families. You can still see that today when you drive through the state. The bloodlines run back hundreds of years, and the towns look very German or English in many areas.

I am going to be clear on one more topic, I am not a secessionist by the civil war era standard. The Texas stance on succession was abhorrent to me in every aspect.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

And again:

That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

My God, how can you claim a person to not be of equal civil rights by the color of their skin? This is sickening. Fortunately, this was a growing sentiment in both the free and the slave states.

But, let’s look at one claim regarding the south as to the reasons for its succession:

The Southern nation was by turns a guileless people attacked by a voracious neighbor, an ‘established’ nation in some temporary difficulty, a collection of bucolic aristocrats making a romantic stand against the banalities of industrial democracy, a cabal of commercial farmers seeking to make a pawn of King Cotton, an apotheosis of nineteenth-century nationalism and revolutionary liberalism, or the ultimate statement of social and economic reaction

They claimed that they were Guileless, and attacked by a voracious neighbor. Decades ago, when I was in school in Greensboro, NC, they explained this as the north was trying to tax, without proper representation, the South’s cotton production, to make up for the North’s failure to draw up taxable funds from its industry. I speculate that since I have not found sufficient evidence of this, or against it, that the truth lies somewhere between. This would also explain the use of the term voracious, which is used to describe an appetite that cannot be appeased. We see this today.

Let’s get a few uncommon terms out of the way:

  • Bucolic: meaning country life, or someone living a very rural life.
  • Aristocrats: a noble, person with tastes and manners, member of an aristocracy.
  • Banalities: boring ordinariness.
  • Cabal: a group of people united in some close design together.

So the author of the paragraph above was stating that “Some country aristocrats were making a loud stand against the boring industrial democracy, a united collection of free market farmers looking to use cotton as a pawn.” This is self-evident, that when you break it down, it is meant to be a derogatory statement against farmers of the time.

Let’s look at a couple more words:

  • Apotheosis: To deify, or to make divine.
  • Liberalism: Note that this is classic liberalism, not 20th century liberalism. They are referring to removal of bondage, or to give liberty.

So we read the last section: “an elevation to greatness of 19th century nationalism and revolutionary liberalism, or the ultimate statement of social and economic reaction.” Really this paragraph uses so many words, to say such a simple thing. So the farmers of the south were united in a stance of nationalism versus liberty.

Here are some other links to reasons the south seceded from the north. Please take with a grain of salt. I really wish I had time to verify everything, but since I don’t, I will need you, my reader to provide feedback. Thank you in advanced.

If the case is Nationalism vs. Liberty, then we are there again. They are opposing forces. They are not compatible. You either give up liberty, for the existence of nationalism, or you give up nationalism, for the purpose of liberty. Believe it or not, allowing the state to practice slavery is as abhorrent as using military force to stop it. One way to enslave people, the other way, you kill people to prove that they don’t have the rights to make their own decisions. Had this been resolved by economics, meaning don’t do business with slave owners, and let them bankrupt, the problem could have been resolve peaceably. “Could” is the unproven term here. Sorry, my history is not strong enough to prove or disprove the “could”.

I don’t want to hear the question “If slavery was so bad why wasn’t there a mass uprising?” Why don’t we have one now, here in the US against our elected slave holders? They are given enough to be satiated, and punished when they are out of line, that they kept their fight hidden. Look into the Underground Railroad, and the history of slave songs. These people were amazing, and though they lived generations before me, I still look at them with respect and awe. Those who still fight today, against the modern slave masters, I still look at them with respect and awe.

End of massive Segue.

So where are we now? I don’t want to lose you in all this history and concepts.

  1. Government is forced enslavement
  2. The history of slavery is well disguised in this country
    1. Slavery by law
    2. Slavery by race (An extension of slavery by law)
    3. Slavery by war (Also an extension of slavery by law)
  3. The fighters for liberty seem to get slandered with rhetoric.
    1. Of course, history has shown that a good many of these people deserved it because they didn’t fully embrace liberty.
    2. Liberty for some, and enslavement for others, is still not true liberty.
  4. Even the guys who should have been promoting liberty can also be the villains.
    1. This is most prevalent when those people promoting liberty are also a government body.

So free market altruism is not war, it isn’t police force, it isn’t force. It is a free expression of ideas that are freely adopted with no force of government. If I have done nothing above, I have displayed how even when trying to do good, government chooses to do evil.

“But God supports government doesn’t he?”

Great words from a Sunday Christian. If you know nothing of the fullness of the words of God, then you know nothing of His meaning.

  • Romans 13:1-7 ESV – Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.
    • If there is no authority but from God, then all other governing authorities must not be from God. Otherwise, when the devil rules, then it would be of God, and that just cannot be true.
    • Let’s try that again. Did the Apostle Paul obey government, or God? Did Jesus Christ obey government of God? I see a trend here.
    • I have to suspect that this isn’t obedience to a government of man, but to God, and a friendly passing not to man. Why else would Paul and Jesus have been in such hot water with government all the time.
  • 1 Peter 2:13-17 ESV – Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.
    • “Be subject for”, based on the examples given, I have to assume that this is really “be subject for judgment for”, this could also be referring to “be answerable for”. Again, the apostles obeyed God, and were held accountable for their actions. The last two sentences here “Fear God” and “Honor the emperor” are very decisive.
    • The scriptures are clear as to our living status even, “Live as people who are free…”. We are not to live as slaves, but as free. How can you live free if you are living as a slave? Trust me, the scriptures cover that too. The scriptures do cover that a slave should serve his master as unto the lord, so that it may be well with him. I have to admit, this still troubles me today, but I will also note that the reference to serve an employer as one would the lord, or one another as one would to the lord, are also prevalent. So this cannot be live in opposition to the knowledge of God, blindly following every evil deed and order, otherwise God would be telling us to live good except when told to live evil.
  • Romans 13:7 ESV – Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
    • Unlike our predecessors we do not have an emperor. We do not have a king. We do not have an authority that by declaration is greater than the people themselves. As such, the taxes owed are not rightfully owed to the government. However, revenue owed is referring to daily wages.

Did you know that there are more verses that support government than there are against? The key though isn’t that we are to worship them, but just live unto God, and let him take care of the government. But that doesn’t stop God from being clear early on in the bible his original stance on government. The precursor here is that the exodus from Egypt has already happened, but the people have already forgotten God.

1 Samuel 8 King James Version (KJV)

  1. And it came to pass, when Samuel was old, that he made his sons judges over Israel.
  2. Now the name of his firstborn was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah: they were judges in Beersheba.
  3. And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment.
  4. Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,
  5. And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
  6. But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord.
  7. And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
  8. According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
  9. Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.
  10. And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.
  11. And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.
  12. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.
  13. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
  14. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
  15. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.
  16. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.
  17. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.
  18. And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.

And look what the people did after the warning.

  1. Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;
  2. That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.
  3. And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the Lord.
  4. And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.

So where do we stand?

I am arbitrarily wrapping this up here, because I need to break for sleep. A 6 hour blog gets too close to a full lecture. What is more, is that these are more notes than an actual thought process, so they are not consistent enough for me to invest the time needed to make a full chapter or chapters out of them for a full publication.

Let’s just summarize with:

  • We are currently, by the measurement of our flesh, slaves.
  • Limited government is still enslavement.
  • Using war to create liberty is a serious real oxymoron.
  • The bible is clear that we are to respect our government, but we are also to live as free people.
    • That is, if they are not acting as criminals and thugs, then no problem.
    • If they are, then live as if they don’t matter, but when they call you to answer, then be answerable to your position.
    • Don’t sin, just because your boss (emperor, president, king, dictator, Don, etc) orders you to.

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.