The Grievances of the Human Race

We're making a list and checking it twice… (DN 4.XY)

Those of us who cherish and value freedom tend to hold the American Declaration of Independence in high regard. This is certainly true for freedom-loving Americans, but even among many beyond these shores, there is a reverence for the document.

In many ways, the Declaration was the apotheosis of the classical-liberal journey—the moment when all the ideas, philosophies, and struggles were made manifest in a single glorious statement of human liberty. And, unlike the United States Constitution, it was not bogged down by the political encumbrances of governance. It was a relatively pure statement, which makes it all the more attractive.

The authors’ purpose, as we know, was to announce to the world: we are declaring independence, and here’s why. The first part is a statement of philosophical principles. The second enumerates specific grievances against the government. The third makes the official pronouncement: these colonies are no longer a part of Great Britain.

Of course, the authors of the Declaration did not get consent from everyone in those colonies before making such a pronouncement, nor were the able to ask the consent of the generations since. That is a problem that will have to be solved in any future arrangements. Nonetheless, this was a watershed moment in freedom’s story.

The grievances matter

In the nineteenth century, statism (largely though not exclusively embodied in leftism) became ascendant, and the twentieth century became the century of the modern mega-state. In the process, we lost track of the philosophical gains of the 17th and 18th century.

As such, we tend today to most revere the philosophical portion of the document, and most especially the 55 words that begin, “We hold these truths….” We cherish what we feel we have lost.

That was not the part that most interested the audience of 1776, however.

For them, living at the philosophical zenith of classical liberalism, the philosophical principles were somewhat taken as given. They wanted to hear the list of grievances. Specifically, they wanted to judge for themselves whether or not those grievances rose to a level of “abuses and usurpations” that would justify the extreme step of revolution.

Our declarations

Today, we are in a difficult situation.

1. The natural principles of human liberty remain obscure to most people, and are treated as anachronistic by the modern high priests of academia, the media, and the rest of the mainstream edifice,

2. Said principles are violated by all our respective governments, and

3. We have a new and growing list of grievances, in our respective countries and as a whole species.

We are the victims of ongoing and egregious violations of our rights as human persons, and on the current the trajectory, things will get worse before they get better.

Yet things generally do not get better unless people act to make them better. Someone needs to do something, and it might as well be us.

Eventually, we will make three declarations.

• First, we need some sort of declaration of personal independence: a short statement of individual sovereignty to which each of us can cleave.

• Next, we must issue an expanded version of that declaration—a human declaration that puts the governments (and shadowy power-players) of the world on notice: we are not a herd to be corralled, controlled, or culled.

• Finally, once our (distributed) nation is sufficiently on its feet, we will issue its declaration of full independence.

The first two of these can happen right away, and work is already underway on both. The last is likely going to have to wait for quite some time. We will be playing the long game there.

Declarations of independence, sovereignty, and rights are rooted in grievances. There is no need to make a declaration if everything is okay. Everything is clearly not okay.

We have a lot to complain about. Written out, mankind’s jeremiad against our oppressors would be an unbroken list of grievances to the moon and back. And every one of them is righteous.

And yet, in the final analysis, if all we do is complain, then all we do is wallow in our misery. We fix nothing. Ultimately, we have to figure out what we can actually do about it. Nonetheless, enumerating the grievances is part of that process. It just needs to be followed up with action.

Ideally, our declarations will be short and to the point. Thus, I envision a separate enumeration of grievances.

Further, I believe there are clear categories of grievances. We can envision at least three:

• Universal
  Categorical complaints that can be applied to all forms of involuntary governance.

• Perennial
  Specific issues that frequently arise in many places at many different times.

• Contextual
  Grievances that are specific to a time and place.

Each of these has value. The universal and perennial must be included in any proper enumeration of human grievances, and there may be reason to include some that are contextually specific to a time and a place as well.

Examples

The American Founders personified their oppressing in King George III, and thus started each grievance with “He,” e.g.,

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. […]

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

In truth, they were menaced by the king, parliament, Lord North and other cabinet ministers, soldiers, the navy, and the whole apparatus of the British government. “They” would thus have been more accurate than “He.”

I am sure they had good political reasons for fixing all of their oppression in the person of King George. We, however, we will definitely be using “They.”

For indeed, we are menaced by every part of the system—from top leadership and politicians to bureaucrats and enforcers to every single government employee deriving his sustenance from the sweat of our brows.

Thus, for example, we might offer a universal grievance that goes to the very heart of why involuntary governance is evil and morally impermissible:

THEY have arrogated an authority that is morally forbidden to the rest of us: to tax, exploit, control, and rule.

We could think of different wording, or we could add clauses to clarify, but that, in a nutshell, is why all involuntary governance is morally indefensible. You do not have a moral (or legal) right to put a gun to someone’s ribs and say,

I am now in charge of you…

Pay me protection money or I will take your stuff…

Pay for my cousin’s medical care or I will lock you in my basement…

Resist any of this and I will hurt or kill you.

Yet this is exactly what people calling themselves agents of government do every day. There is no alchemy by which what is immoral can be made moral simply because government officials do it. We also cannot delegate this authority to them, because none of us have it, and one cannot delegate something one does not have.

Yet they tell us not only that they have this authority, but that it is ‘legitimate,’ that no one is allowed to compete with them, and that we ‘consented’ to the whole arrangement, when we clearly did not. (There are several more grievances in all of that.)

We might issue a perennial grievance, such as…

THEY have repeatedly, in many times and places, sought to deny and menace our natural right to defend ourselves, and to possess, carry, and use the weapons necessary to effectively discharge this right.

Or contextual ones, such as…

THEY have frozen and stolen the assets of (Canadian) truckers and others who have peacefully protested their many predations and oppressions.

or

THEY have brought among us people who have assaulted our daughters, sisters, wives, and mothers, and prevented us from defending ourselves or speaking the truth of this perfidy. (UK, Europe)

Again, we can refine wording as we go. This is just to get the ball rolling.

I could do this all day. Indeed, I am already developing a body of notes and examples. But before I begin listing those, I want to involve you. Our grievances are species-wide, so it makes sense to include others members of the species in the process.

Don’t worry too much about wording—it doesn’t have to be perfect. Indeed, do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good—just let it fly! We can improve things later.

Feel free to offer universal, perennial, and contextual grievances. (Or any other category you can think of.) And feel free to offer as many as you want. The more, the merrier.

I will collect, collate, edit, and categorize your entries, and my own. I will collapse duplicates into single entries. I will then periodically repost this (or perhaps a separate document) with our list as it grows. It will be an ongoing process.

The plan is to create a “complete” enumeration of the grievances of humankind. Ambitious? Yes. But righteous and very much needed.

And if not now, then when—and if not us, then who?

---

Note: We will deem this another ancillary installment of The Distributed Nation.

Cover page | Preface | Introduction 1 | Introduction 2 | Introduction 3 |

(Part I) Why: 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 1.10 | 1.11 | 1.12 | 1.13 | 1.14 | 1.15 | 1.16 | 1.17 | 1.18 | 1.19 | 1.20 | 1.21 |1.22

(Part II) What: 2.0 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.5 | 2.6 | 2.7 | 2.8 | 2.9 | 2.10 I 2.11 | 2.12 | 2.13 | 2.14 | 2.15 | 2.16 | 2.17 | 2.XX | 2.18 | 2.19 | 2.20 | 2.21 | | Where: 3.0 | 3.1 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 3.4 | 3.5 | 3.6 | 3.7 | 3.8 | 3.9 | 3.10 | 3.11 | 3.12 | 3.13 || Who: 4.0 | 4.1 | 4.2 | 4.3 | 4.4 | 4.5 | 4.XX | 4.XY

Chapter 4.XY
Grievances 1