State Juristiction: A commentary

Well is seems there has been quite a clamor for Ed Brown. Let me just say right now I support Ed Brown 100 percent in this ordeal. This matter, I believe, will create a catalyst for discussion and introspection. According to the sources, Mr. brown and his spouse Elaine haven't paid income taxes since 1996. They wholeheartedly believe the Feds do not have jurisdiction in their state or property. Well, they are correct.

All across the nation men/women like Ed Brown are becoming active in militia groups in response to the growing menace of Leviathan. It seems there is growing consensus, among these groups that the Federal government has no power over them or the constitution needs to be upheld to its original intent. Ed brown himself is a spokesman for the Constitution Defense Militia. The militias are fighting for individual liberty, property rights, states rights, and the constitution. In my belief all these beliefs are noble and I only can place doubt on one of them.

The Constitution is a document authorized by the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and its purpose was to be the extent of the powers of the Federal government. There was arguing on all sides of the issue and there was a compromise reached between the Federalists and the anti-Federalists. The first authorized document was the Articles of Confederation, it wasn't very popular and that's why there was a meeting to discuss a new document of power.Originally the anti-Federalists felt that having a strong central government was a detriment to liberty and in the ensuing compromise a Bill of Rights was introduced.

Now lets put it in a new perspective. A group of elite men were gathered to decide the fate of a country and its people from the inception of that meeting. If anyone has ever had a business meeting or even a community meeting, this can be brought into a reasonable comparison. Now with a business, the meeting involves the ideas, perspectives, and analysis within that particular organization. That business can only control matters with in its own organization and has no say in regards to what John Doe and his family are doing. In a communitarian aspect, the local group of what ever proportionate size decides the outcome and dictates within their own organization and cannot dictate the ideas and thoughts over to a section of New Delhi, India. So is it possible for a group of affluent landowners to decide the outcome of around 3 million people at the time and to this day 300 million people? Was everyone in the country asked to give consent. The answer is NO. Government doesn't act direct permission in contrast to any other organization.

Now let me be clear from the onset, many of the ideas expressed in the constitution are ideals i feel is necessary for establishing harmony on Earth. Then on the other hand the Constitution speaks of ideas that are in a sense detrimental to the "natural order". Its sort of like how Bruce Lee viewed the martial arts world, pick the the things that work and trash the others that don't. That's how I approach the constitution. In fact, all the Constitution is is just a piece of paper. It can't hold back the tide of Statist power; it doesn't even have real authority. So if the Federal government is the logical outcome of the Constitution, then the logical conclusion is that the Federal government has no real authority. In fact no government, great or small, has any real authority. Its animation, like Mickey Mouse.

Real authority is established through property rights. Even then its in a sense a voluntary endeavor. I have a friend named Michael , we have a lot of disagreement in many respects. Now considering all these different ideas, one thing that is a surety among us is property. In his house he decides the rules of conduct and what is permitted and what is not. So in essence I'm under his jurisdiction, it wasn't forced but I walked into the house and agreed to the general outlines. Now he is not a hard ass by any stretch of the imagination but of course he doesn't want me to trash his abode. This is the way true jurisdiction works. Based on property rights. It would make no sense for a a million men in Turkey to decide the outcome of a farm in Kansas. Or even for a city or town next door to decide the fate of an individual farm.

My basic outline is this, jurisdiction of any sort can only come through A) Voluntary consensus(leave freely or enter freely) and/or B) Property Rights. The State has never in any sense had true jurisdiction over anyone any time or place. One of my inspirations for this article was from Lysander Spooner who wrote No Treason. In it he outlines how the State never had any real authority in the first place. It was people like him and later Ed Brown to really put a dent in the armor of legitimization that the State has brought about. Although with many disagreements Ive had with the militia I feel they are on the right page and I will support them 100 percent. Now its up to all of you to unveil the mask and relinquish your liberty.

For more on property rights read Hans Herman Hoppe. For more on de-legitimization of the State read Per Bylund. For more on Lysander Spooner read this website. For more on militias and various other fringe groups check out Kieth Preston's site.