But what happens when there are power vacuums, historically speaking? Other tyrannies come in to fill in those gaps, especially in the Middle East. That should not happen but it does happen. I like anarchy but we do not have anarchy or we don't have certain types of anarchy. Destabilization messes things up. Globalists divide and conquer. Hypothetically, self-government is better like you said. But the world is too dangerous for that. Therefore, I suggest the balancing of the four branches of governments, which is what the United States is founded on, with an emphasis on the tenth amendment which too many people do not talk at all or enough about.
What is a "power vacuum," and how does the historical predation of governments prove anything? How have attempts to balance government and restrain it worked out this far?
What exactly do you want to do? You should be as practical as possible. You have goals and objectives. But how do you get there? How do you get the ball rolling?
Good questions. How does participation in politics get the ball rolling, and what goals or objectives can be achieved by joining that zero-sum game of false choices?
You said,
I push to make government more local and smaller too
Is this really a practical objective or goal? How do you get there? How do you get the ball rolling? And how will this achieve greater liberty? My experience with local government is hardly inspiring. They are vindictive, petty, and able to make their predations personal.
Whiskey Rebellion. Shay's Rebellion. Alien and Sedition acts. The government has been trampling liberty since before the ink was dry on the Bill of Rights, and the 9th and 10th amendment have never been deemed worthy of consideration as any sort of restraint on power. The Constitutional experiment failed long ago. Have you not read Lysander Spooner's No Treason or Letter to Grover Cleveland?
Self-government and voluntary associations are distinct concepts from imposed government, regardless of scale.
But what happens when there are power vacuums, historically speaking? Other tyrannies come in to fill in those gaps, especially in the Middle East. That should not happen but it does happen. I like anarchy but we do not have anarchy or we don't have certain types of anarchy. Destabilization messes things up. Globalists divide and conquer. Hypothetically, self-government is better like you said. But the world is too dangerous for that. Therefore, I suggest the balancing of the four branches of governments, which is what the United States is founded on, with an emphasis on the tenth amendment which too many people do not talk at all or enough about.
What is a "power vacuum," and how does the historical predation of governments prove anything? How have attempts to balance government and restrain it worked out this far?
What exactly do you want to do? You should be as practical as possible. You have goals and objectives. But how do you get there? How do you get the ball rolling?
Good questions. How does participation in politics get the ball rolling, and what goals or objectives can be achieved by joining that zero-sum game of false choices?
You said,
Is this really a practical objective or goal? How do you get there? How do you get the ball rolling? And how will this achieve greater liberty? My experience with local government is hardly inspiring. They are vindictive, petty, and able to make their predations personal.
America has been there. America was founded on principles of self-government. That is the value behind the tenth amendment.
Whiskey Rebellion. Shay's Rebellion. Alien and Sedition acts. The government has been trampling liberty since before the ink was dry on the Bill of Rights, and the 9th and 10th amendment have never been deemed worthy of consideration as any sort of restraint on power. The Constitutional experiment failed long ago. Have you not read Lysander Spooner's No Treason or Letter to Grover Cleveland?