Why do we live under a monopoly? by George for Barbarous Relic
The World Wide Web gives us eyes. With these eyes we can see past the usual gatekeepers and read commentaries exposing government for its never-ending egregious actions. We see in these articles a hint of the nightmare world of 1984
, with a suggestion that we could end up there if we do nothing but read.
But I find one thing wrong with these accounts: For all their insights, there is rarely a mention of government’s inherent criminality. Instead, the authors elaborate on the latest government atrocities and leave it at that, with an occasional comment that if we returned to our constitutional roots none of this would happen.
But we were once at our constitutional roots and these things are happening. It is the roots that are flawed. As Lysander Spooner wrote
But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain — that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.
Thus, for example, we read about the FED’s current monetary stance, whether it’s good or bad for the economy. Have we lost the concept of monetary freedom? That in a free world there would be no FED and no monetary policy? That the easily-inflatable digits forced on us as a medium of exchange serves the interests of a privileged elite at our expense? That the FED’s inflationary prowess has augmented the funding of foreign “adventures” that leave endless wreckage and death in their wake, while stuffing the bank accounts of warmongers? That it’s equated saving with self-immolation? That the counterfeiting FED is made possible by a government that’s criminal by design?
Flawed from the start
Governments as they exist are built on a criminal framework: a legal monopoly on violence over the territory they claim to rule. Such institutions are called states. Governments and states are not necessarily the same, but today’s governments are
states. They are not free market entities. We cannot deal with a state under which we live as we might deal with a private company. If Apple’s iPhone upsets me, I can go to Samsung; if not Samsung, LG or Huawei. If they all upset me, I can do without a smartphone. I have choices. If the state’s institutionalized thief
upsets me, tough; if I resist the only outcomes are fines, prison or death. States are the antithesis of civilization.