Lysander Spooner, No Treason. No. II. The Constitution [] The whole authority of the Constitution rests upon it. If they did not consent, it was of no validity. Lysander Spooner, No Treason. No. I. (Boston: Published by the Author, ). If that principle be not the principle of the Constitution, the fact should be known. That two men have no more natural right to exercise any kind of authority over . No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority. December 9, Lysander Spooner. The greatest case for anarchist political philosophy ever written. Narrated by.

Author: Ditaur Mazukinos
Country: Peru
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Travel
Published (Last): 19 June 2006
Pages: 424
PDF File Size: 19.40 Mb
ePub File Size: 10.36 Mb
ISBN: 225-7-54529-816-4
Downloads: 75505
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Yozshuk

And where there can be no legal evidence that any particular individual supports the Constitution, it cannot legally be said that anybody supports it. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing or, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave. So far, therefore, as voting is concerned, the Constitution, legally speaking, has no supporters at all.

Aug 06, Paula rated it it was amazing. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account. Introductory No Treason No. For still another reason they are neither our servants, agents, attorneys, nor representatives. If the instrument meant to say that any of “the people of the United States” would be bound by it, who did not consent, it was a usurpation and a lie.

No Treason. No. I – Online Library of Liberty

And there is no power, in Congress, to add to, oof alter, the language of the Constitution, on this point, so as to make it more comprehensive than it now is. And law and reason both give him until the last moment, in which to decide whether he will sign it, or not.

Hans-Hermann Hoppe Best Price: Moreover, a written instrument must, in law and reason, not only be signed, but must also be delivered to the party or to some one for himin whose favor it is made, before it can bind the party making it. He knows fo only through its pretended agents.

If, for example, I vote for an officer who is to hold his office for only a year, I cannot be said to have thereby pledged myself to support the government beyond that term. All of these ideas are outside of the acceptable norm of the mainstream now. As all voting is secret by secret ballotand as all secret governments are necessarily only secret bands of robbers, tyrants, and murderers, the general fact that our government is practically carried on by means of such voting, only proves that there is among us a secret band of robbers, tyrants, and murderers, whose purpose is to rob, enslave, and, so far as necessary to accomplish their purposes, murder, the rest of the people.


A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.

Somebody must be responsible for the acts of these pretended agents; and if they cannot show any open and authentic credentials from their principals, they cannot, in law or reason, be said to have any principals. In behalf of the principle that government should rest on consent! And since no such corporation can be proved to exist, it cannot of course be proved that the oaths of Southern men were given to any such corporation.

Until they have tried the experiment for themselves, how can they have the face to impose the Constitution upon, or even to recommend it to, others? But that is certainly not enough to prove that the oaths are of any obligation. It has been a heavy influence on my own work: One of the most enlightening and honest critiques of the Constitution I have ever come across. Written just after The Second War of Independence “Civil War”Spooner provides a very detailed and logical argument for the impotency of the US Constitution and describes the illegitimacy of government as we know it.

A tacit understanding between A, B, and C, that they will, by ballot, depute D as their agent, to deprive me of my property, liberty, or life, cannot at all authorize D to do so.

Online Library of Liberty

Jul 09, Sean rated it liked it Shelves: Thus the Constitution Constitutin. It would be absurd for the most numerous party to talk of establishing a government over the less numerous party, unless the former were also the strongest, as well as the most numerous; for it is not to be supposed that the strongest party would ever submit to the rule of the weaker party, merely because the latter were the most numerous.


Not only that, but anyone who has been hearing that voice in the back of your head nagging you that something just doesn’t seem right about the way thing are and are being run. But when they refuse any longer to pay for being thus cheated, plundered, enslaved, and murdered, they will cease to have cheats, and usurpers, and robbers, and murderers and blood-money loan-mongers for masters. If this subject interests you, I recommend beginning with The Law by Bastiat, and then tackling this piece.

As we can have no legal knowledge as to who votes from choice, and who from the necessity thus forced upon him, we can have no legal knowledge, as to any particular individualthat he voted from choice; or, consequently, that by voting, he consented, or pledged himself, to support the government.

Lysanver is to say, there is not the slightest probability that there is a single man in the country, who both understands what the Constitution really is, and sincerely supports it for what it really is. Section 3 questions how a nation comes to existence, and what is the justification of why the United States remains a nation. For nearly two hundred years — that is, since — there has been on the statute book of England, and the same, in substance, if not precisely in letter, has been re-enacted, and is now in force, in nearly or quite all the States of this Union, a statute, the general object of which is to declare that no action shall constitutoon brought to enforce contracts of the more important class, unless they are put in writing, and signed by the parties to be held chargeable upon them.

If they do not own us as property, they are not our masters, and their will, as such, is of no authority over us. Under it, a man knows not who his tyrants are, until they have struck, and perhaps not then.