28 Principles of Liberty: Principle 22 - A Free People Should be Governed by Law and Not the Whims of Man

Principle 22

"A Free People Should be Governed by Law and Not the Whims of Man"

by: Charity Angel

If mankind are governed by the whims of men they are subjected to every changing inclination of sudden illogical changes of mind, ideas, or actions of those in power. This is ruler's law at its worst. In this kind of society, no rights are secure and nothing is dependable; things are in a constant state of flux. Nothing is fixed nor predictable for the future.

The Founders defined law as a 'rule of action', which was binding on the ruler as it was upon the people. It was designed to give society a stable frame of reference so the people could feel secure in making plans for the future. John Locke said:

Freedom of men under government is to have a standing rule to live by, common to everyone of that society. and made by the legislative power erected in it.

Under established law, every person's rights and duties are defined. Such a society gives the people a feeling of liberty, liberty under the law. The American Founders believed that without the protection of law there can be no liberty.

John Locke also pointed out that unless a society can provide a person with a code of fixed and enforceable laws, he might as well have stayed in the jungle.

To this end it is that men give up all their natural power to the society that they enter into, and the community put the legislative power into such hands as they see fit, with this trust, that they shall be governed by declared laws, or else their peace, quiet, and property will still be at the same uncertainty as it was in the state of Nature.

John Adams also agreed when he said:

No man will contend that a nation can be free that is not governed by fixed laws. All other government that that of permanent known laws is the government of mere will and pleasure.

Aristotle said:

Even the best of men in authority are liable to be corrupted by passion. We may conclude then that the law is reason without passion, and it is therefore preferable to any individual.

And from this we can see that Aristotle disagreed with his mentor Plato, who believed that that the ideal society should be governed by a few who would rule according to scientific principles and make on the spot decisions and force the people to do what is good for them. He said that if there was not a man with this scientific knowledge, then law would be required, but it was only the second best thing.

the difference appears to be perspective. Rather then looking at law as a merely a code of negative restraints and prohibitions, the Founders considered it to be a system of positive rules by which they could be assured of enjoying their rights and the protection of themselves, their families and their property. John Locke said it best:

The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings, capable of laws, where there is no law there is no freedom. For liberty is to be free from restraint and violence from others, which cannot be when there is no law.

The Founders were sensitive to the fact that people only have confidence in laws that they can understand, as well as feel that it is of relative permanence, which will not be continually changed. James Madison said this so well:

It will be of little avail to the people that the law are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be revealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known and less fixed?

Thomas Jefferson resigned from the congress in 1776 in order to return to Virginia to make certain that the state laws were rewritten so that when independence had been won, the people would have a model system of legal principles which they could both understand and support. The complex codes and laws of our day could be similarly improved with such a great housecleaning as Jefferson did for Virginia. Imagine what James Madison would think of our legislature and senate who pass bills that are so large that they have not read them when they vote on them, that vote on bills that are not yet even written!

The principles of Liberty can be found at http://www.28principlesofliberty.blogspot.com and are brought to you by http://fragrantsmoke.com

--
Visit
http://www.fragrantsmoke.com

Learn the 28 Principles of Liberty
http://www.theprinciplesofliberty.com

2009: A Year in Review

The past year has been very politically active for a non-(major)-election year; although I realize there were 2 Gubernatorial elections and a highly publicized special election in New York's 23rd Congressional District.

The year began much the same as 2008 ended: with increased federal spending, thanks, in part, to bank & car company bailouts. Both of which were highly criticized by an overwhelming majority of the American public. It was no surprise (to me, anyways) that a group advocated a February 1st “tea party” - which asked people to mail a tea bag and a note to each member of “their” Congressional delegation (two Senators and Representative) and the President. This “event” was endorsed by the Boston Tea Party, a libertarian party formed in 2006 with a one sentence platform that supports, “reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.” However, there is no word as to the number of people that participated.

Not long after this “virtual” “tea party” Rick Santelli made a statement on CNBC advocating a “tea party” against Obama's planned “mortgage bailout.” This statement was quickly dubbed the “Shout Heard 'Round the World” and led to many people planning “Tax-Day TEA (Taxed Enough Already) parties” across the country. There is still debate about whether or not these groups were legitimate grass-roots or if it was “astro-turf”. Many of these groups joined together in a loose-knit association and held a protest in Washington DC in September in an event sponsored by Glenn Beck's “9/12” organization.
I did attend one of these “TEA party” events shortly after moving to Myrtle Beach, SC only to find that the attendees and speakers were largely in favor of the “Fair Tax” and military intervention. I tried speaking to people about abolishing the IRS and Federal Reserve and was mostly ignored or put off, even by the “Fair Taxers” - who don't seem to mind the spending so much as the form of taxation.
On a side note; Ron Paul had a best-seller with “End The Fed!” and Dr. Thomas Woods had a bes-seller with “Meltdown: A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse.” Also, two grass-roots tributes to the Ron Paul Presidential campaign were released. “Songs of Freedom: Tales From the R(3VOL)ution” - a collection of poems, short stories and essays – was released in the spring, was chosen as August Book of the Month by the Freedom Book Club and has been submitted for several book awards, including the Ben Franklin Awards & Eric Hoffer Awards. “For Liberty: How the Ron Paul R(3VOL)ution Watered the Withering Tree of Liberty”, a feature length documentary was released in September and has been entered into several film awards festivals.

For the second consecutive year I participated in”Operation Stop Thief!” The objective of Operation Stop Thief is to educate people about the scam known as the Internal Revenue Service. For instance, what would you say if I told you that the Grace Commission in 1984 issued a report that in part stated “100 percent of what is collected (by the IRS) is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt...all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services taxpayers expect from their Government.”? Wouldn't you feel betrayed? Of course you would. How about if you found out that 56.14% of the 2007 Federal expenditures were outside constitutional authorization? I know, most people don't care...that is exactly why you should!

Not to be forgotten is the crew of “The Motorhome Diaries.” A pair of freedom movement activists (accompanied by a “fellow-traveler”) that set out on a journey to “find freedom in America” only to find the “Police State” alive and well in Jones County, Mississippi. This along with the “Sam Dodson incident” and the MIAC report put a big black eye on the year and inspired me to form a publishing company (Free Patriot Press) with the purpose of “ensuring a FREE PRESS for the FREEDOM MOVEMENT.” After all, without a FREE PRESS there is no FREEDOM; without FREEDOM there is no LIBERTY!

The year was supposed to bring “hope” and “change”, but as we celebrate the beginning of 2010 we are left “hoping for change.” For the record, “change” does NOT mean a higher “national debt” (owed by the government, not the people), increased military presence in foreign countries, an increased money supply, more government involvement in “health care”, renewal of the PATRIOT Act or any other program that increases the size or scope of the government.

Top 11 Assaults on Liberty of the Decade!

Top 11 Assaults on Liberty of the Decade! #10-6 Countdown


Top 11 Assaults on Liberty of the Decade! #5-0 Countdown

What Next for Flyers, Underwear Checks?

by Ron Holland

The latest terrorist assault on air travel again shows the futility and incompetence of most government security measures to protect the flying public. The TSA initial reaction has been to ban going to the WC for the last hour of flying time because this is when the alleged terrorist went to the bathroom and prepared his low-tech firecracker bomb. So, what does this really mean as a deterrent? What a joke, the terrorist simply goes to the WC 1:15 minutes earlier to do the dirty deed.

Once again, as with the shoe bomber, airline passengers in reality are the best defense against terror attacks, not overpaid airport and homeland security personnel going through the motions and watching the clock until their shift is over. I fear most airline security is simply a government make-work project designed to reduce public fears of flying rather than safeguard the passengers. This became very clear to me in a recent trip to Vancouver, BC.

First, I always fly with a carry-on because I dress casual when flying and have temporarily lost too many bags when I needed to be dressed for an event or business meeting. Second, once home from a trip I never think about my bag until the hour before I leave when I always find myself in a mad scramble to get packed as my wife looks on and says, "I told you to do this ahead of time."


Read the Rest of the article