An introduction to "Who We Are"

In the blog entry titled "Now there are eleven", I prefaced Michael Boldin's piece with some commentary on the purpose, and place, federal and state government hold relative to the people.  What I like to call who's who in the zoo (If you think back to your last reading of "Animal Farm", you'll know why I like the "who's who in the zoo" thing).

It seems that each time I advance the idea that the people are NOT subordinate to the states, and that the states are NOT subordinate to the federal government, the idea is almost universally rejected.  Really!  Most Americans have subscribed to the "reality" advanced by the media and the public schools - a reality where the federal government is supreme, the states subordinate subdivisions of this supremacy, and the American people are each individually known to, and answerable to, the aforementioned supremacy.  That is, of course, complete nonsense.


The notion that every American is individually known and responsible to the general government is alien to our history and our founding documents.  In fact, that notion is exactly opposite the truth.  Consider this from the Declaration of Independance:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,
that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness..."

The colonies declared their independence supported by several "self-evident truths":

1. that all men are created equal
2. that they have certain unalienable rights, bestowed upon them by their creator, that include (but are not limited to) life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness
3. that governments are created and empowered by the people, for the express pupose of securing the rights of the people
4. that when a government evolves to where it no longer serves to secure the rights of the governed, the people can alter or abolish it

The above truths should serve as evidence to all that the early Americans sought to throw off a supreme authority to which every individual person answered.  They had suffered this form of government, a monarchy, for generations.  Why on earth would they have declared independence from one monarchy only to form another?

The early American's efforts to preserve individual liberty continued as they worked to create and strengthen their union.  The Preamble to the Constitution states quite plainly the purpose of the document.

"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America."

Of course the preamble is not law, but it does serve to establish why the Constitution was created.  The document itself is a description of the structure and workings of the general government and a list of the powers agreed to be ceded to the same by each of the Union states.  There is little mention of the rights of the people beyond voting and intellectual property, and there didn't need to be.  The rights of the people were well understood by Americans in 1789 and the preamble tells us that they wished to secure liberty not just to themselves, but also to their descendants - and for all time.

In short order the people and their states feared that the government might easily overstep its bounds.  To prevent this, ten amendments to the Constitution were proposed, and later ratified, as the Bill of Rights.  These ten amendments granted no new rights to Americans.  Instead, they served as series of prohibitions on the federal government to further assure the preservation of liberty.  Consider the preamble:

"THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution..."

No further disussion of the preamble is needed to establish the purpose
of the Bill of Rights.  Just read the amendments.  Eight of the ten tell the government directly what it is that it shall not do (I, II, III, IV, V, VII, VIII, IX). The remaining  2 tell the government how things shall be done (VI, X).  That language ought to tell you (and the government) who's in charge here.

Hopefully this information has made you think about who you are and your role in American society.  If you're thinking, "hey, I'm the boss", you're right. Actually, you're the King - and as Michael Badnarik says, [it's] "GoodTo Be King!"  Knowing that you're the "King" is a prerequisite to exercising your rights and properly employing the 3 Boxes of Liberty.  Thank you, Your Majesty, for your attention.  Please come back soon!

A quick note on the language of liberty. Terms like Constitutional Rights, Civil Rights and First
Amendment Rights, have become common in contemporary lexicon, and sneak into everyday conversation. We would be wise to banish these terms from our vocabularies, as our rights are long antecedent the founding of our Union - not granted to us because of our Union. Stay tuned for more on the language of liberty and banished terms.