Bravo!!!!! Indeed, no victim, no crime, yet government creates victimless crimes as a way to siphon, extract, harvest, steal from its slaves...slaves who "mostly" unknowingly and/or unconsciously consented to be ruled by tyrants. I just wrote about the B.S. of Voting but you nailed this much better than me. Exceptional work!
Voting really is BS. It took me a long time to fully accept that reality.
And it took a long time before the logic of anarchism finally dragged me kicking and screaming to the truth. But once you have seen truth, you can never un-see it!
Voting is a power. It may or may not be efficacious, but it remains a power available to us; why wouldn't I use it? What other powers do I have available to me? Persuasion on my neighbors, direct appeal to government, participation in government. Any or all may be ineffective, and will be more so if I am effective at persuasion and appeal to government.
I can rebel, and accept the consequences. I can comply as little as possible and attempt to set up a parallel society or economy (actually quite doable).
As a Christian, I have an obligation to government, subordinated to God. Anarchy really provides no solution that I have seen.
"Anarchy really provides no solution that I have seen."
—Anarchism is not easy to understand and accept at first. I didn't. But the more I studied, the more I realized it is not only doable, but it may be the only moral choice.
I don't see that anarchy is a philosophy that can survive in the wild. Men are not angels and can neither be trusted with unchecked power nor with unchecked liberty. Governance is a necessary condition and will always be imposed, with or without the consent of the governed. A system of checked power and checked liberty is the only system that offers any hope of civil society and the governed are the only real check on the governors. Imperfect and unstable to be sure.
I understand your view, and I used to share it. Then I began studying and disabused myself of my preconceptions about what anarchists are actually talking about when they refer to "anarchy."
It is not chaos. It is not unchecked power. The checks on power exist; they simply do not come from a single entity claiming an inescapable and unchallengeable monopoly of authority and then imposing that by force on a given territory and people. There are other ways to do it, but until one researches those ways a little bit, all one has is the mythology that our only choices are government or chaos. That is a false binary.
There is another set of mythological views that it was hard for me, as a patriotic conservative, to see through, but eventually the logic got to be too much. Think about it for a moment…
IS what we have checked power? We talk about "checks and balances" and our "separation of powers" and "limited government" but ask yourself—how well is any of that actually working out? For 200 years, we've been telling ourselves that we just need to elect the right people. That we can one day elect the right slate of officials who will enact the right combination of policies to get us "back" to some mythological state of limited government. The Founders "original vision." (It's not being done "the right way, or by the right people." Isn't that what commies always say?)
It's all mythology. With the exception of ending slavery and a few policies, government has been on a one way slide since 1789. Getting bigger. More centralized. More up in everyone's business. Higher taxes. Fiat currency. The end of true federalism. The end of any semblance of the notion that the states created the union and can leave it. Think about it—can we REALLY "alter or abolish" the government and set up "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"? Or would we get Waco'ed or Ruby Ridged the instant we tried?
The Constitution as not as right-protective a document as our mythology tells us. (The Bill of Rights was added by the Anti-Federalists, who hated the Constitution). The General Welfare and Necessary and Proper clauses have been trashed. The 9th and 10th amendments have been completely ignored. The Commerce Clause allows the Federal government to do whatever they want. Emergency powers can be invoked anytime, for any reason. (Witness what happened here, and in every so-called "representative democracy" across the Western world, during 'covid.')
As Spooner said, the Constitution "has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it." Either way, it has failed.
Does anything we have seem remotely like limited government?
Search your feelings, Luke—do you see any REAL prospect of getting back to some mythological condition of limited government that existed as much in our imagination as in reality? (The Sedition Acts were passed before 1800, for goodness sake!)
Unfortunately, our tricorne hat-wearing patriotism has played right into the hand of those who really run the show. And clinging to it just makes them stronger. I know how hard it is to break out of the mythology. I know that our vision of what was, and what can be again, feels like a rock in the storm. But it is a vision, nothing more.
The principles that (many, though not all of) the Founders held were the correct principles. But the system we ended up with does not actuate those principles. Until we let go of the mythology, we will never actually actuate those principles.
I believe John Adams was correct when he noted that the Constitution is suited only for a religious and moral people and completely inadequate for any other. The Constitution is merely sheets of paper, providing no protections of any kind beyond the integrity of those who signed it and their heirs. I have no illusion that ours is a magic formula, only that it was a reasonable framework for self government for those willing to do the hard work of governing themselves.
Anarchy, however one defines it, will fare no better. Nor will any other system devised by man. A righteous king has always been the most desirable system but righteous kings are hard to find and harder to propagate.
Small bands may be successful at establishing stable self government from time to time but even those are unsustainable as history suggests. It leaves us with the one time tested system, "Treat others as you would be treated." And this one comes with no guarantee of reciprocity.
The biggest issue that I had to overcome to arrive at the same conclusion was Authority. Being raised in the Bible-Belt, we were taught that Authority comes from God & to obey the "laws of the land", so to speak, because well, God said so. Last year, when I came across a presentation explaining Occult Psychological Operations, authority was listed as an operation. I had a visereal reaction! I couldn't believe it at first. It was life-altering for me. In about a month I went from a Statist to an Anarchist! It was explained to me that voting was participation in electing my own slave-master, so I decided to quit. That was a major decision that did not come lightly but extremely greatful I made it! Thanks for writing about theses things! I've wanted to contribute but I'm no where as skilled as you!
"It was explained to me that voting was participation in electing my own slave-master, so I decided to quit."
—it is a powerful realization! It bowled me over when it finally fully sunk in.
In fact, I was just telling a friend that I did not get here all that willingly. I dragged my feet. The logic of anarchism was there, in plain sight, for several years, but I resisted really truly looking at it. But then, finally, the logic dragged me kicking and screaming and threw me down right in front of that truth. And there it was, right in front of me. And I finally really truly saw it.
Yes, indeed, and let's talk about what is happening to Trump today, regardless of what you think about him.
New York State is seizing 450 millions dollars of his assets today. Why?
Let's examine this for a moment.
He was convicted of over-inflating the value of his properties in applications of loans from banks (which have already been paid off.)
As a former real estate appraiser, I can tell you that the value of a property is what a buyer would be willing to spend to purchase said property.
Therefore, without a willing buyer, and for purposes of appraisal, the value is a SUBJECTIVE figure based on an educated GUESS as to what that figure might be.
In other words, on a loan application that requires collateral, the lendee estimates what they believe their collateral is worth. The lender, the bank is free to conduct their own appraisal which may or may not agree with what the lendee BELIEVES is the value of the property.
In both cases, the lender and lendee are making a SUBJECTIVE assessment of that value, and without a willing buyer, it is nothing more than an educated guess. Markets change and flow, and that number can vary wildly based on many, many factors in a very short period of time.
What we have in NY state is the state Attorney General and a Judge conspiring to criminalize this process, and in fact charged and convicted Trump with felonies based on these subjective assessments, and then fining his Corporation for something that THEY CANNOT PROVE. They cannot prove that the property value was inflated. Only that the bank involved came up with a different figure.
So, number one, what happens between two willing parties, a lender and lendee is none of the State's business, lacking criminal intent.
Number two, the fact that these government entities are seizing assets based on this conviction amounts to election interference of a leading candidate for President.
And number three, if they can do this to Trump at this time, they can do this to anyone for any reason.
This is all very concerning, again, regardless of what one might think of Trump.
As Aquinas noted, laws that fail to comport with natural law are not laws at all, but violence. He didn't fully appreciate the implications, but that really does mean that no law that an involuntary government imposes can be considered legitimate.
But then, beyond that, it is also a matter of degree: some laws are further from natural law than others. And what you just described is pretty danged far!
Not much different than Civil Asset Forfeiture, in which the Police or State simply seizes your assets, and then requires you to petition for their return, based on nothing more than the idea that you cannot PROVE that they did not come to you through criminal activities.
Another very interesting twist to this tyranny is both Latricia James and Judge Engoron recently refinanced properties in New York which I would say had inflated estimated values by them.
As slowly as this started, we are now on a fast water slide to communism. For nearly 2 centuries communist elites have pushed this collective idea that they had figured out utopia. Basically todays version of tyrannical communism is Klaus Schwab and his statement you will own nothing and be happy. Of coarse similar to our elite tyrants, (the entire American government) this statement does not in any way apply to them, of coarse, only to us slaves that will watch little by little all of our possessions be taken from us, just ask Donald Trump. Notice the fucking fools who cheer on the tyrants stripping a hard working man’s life achievements by a group of people that have built nothing their whole life, not unlike Germans backing the Nazis. To watch people like Merrick Garland who’s family was a product of czarist Russias Pale Settlement jail people for political reasons is disgraceful to say the least. Religious persecution is political persecution because it always politicians doing the persecuting. Leticia James and Fani Willis are spokes in this new American communist wheel. There’s a sub stack writer named Greg Reese. Recently his business partner was jailed. In December, he posted, he moved from Florida to Moscow to live in a freer place fearing a jail cell for himself. We are now certainly living in a police state. I fear my government which is the very definition of Tyranny. J.Goodrich
Wonderful Christopher! You have an amazing aptitude to write complex thinking simply and coherently. I believe you can access certain Metaphasic Truths.
The separation of money and state via crypto opens a path to take the foregoing ".. understanding out to its logical conclusion." Network States as envisaged by Balaji Srinivasen provide a framework that outlines a potential structure. We're in much better shape than we think; much of our timidity has been incentivized by *perceived* dependencies upon the state issued fiat that our current system runs on - it incentivizes consumption over saving, pulling future productivity, via debt, into our present expenditures. Fiat payment rails keep us under surveillance ensuring mass compliance. Crypto flips the script - incentivizing saving and an equity based currency system and , if done intelligently, with privacy. Inspiring article Mr. Cook. Let's Go!
Yes to all of that. Indeed, I have been formulating my own plan for a couple of years, and I intend to start discussing that here very soon.
Re crypto—I have high hopes. But the online/electronic nature of it does still make me a bit nervous. I would like to see goldbacks also playing a big role in our future. Not either/or, but all of the above!
Looking forward to your crypto initiatives; i was very early to digital gold ('99) and stayed until your tyrannical overlords in D.C. / DOJ seized the gold (again). There's a lesson in there; took me ~ 2yrs ('10-'12) to intellectually get comfy w/ the new 'digital gold' but that's where I am and content to be so. I also engage/work with gold backed cypto but only as 1 of multiple stores of value.
Most laws are created to protect the rich (top 10% perhaps) to their advantage at the expense of the bottom 90%, or slave class. Most laws are silly nonsense crated by silly organizations. Being mostly backed by an agenda, laws are remade and remade to the point of being useless.
And the only true law is natural law anyway. So, level 1 is realizing that things are rigged in favor of the rich, the connected, the state. Level 2 is realizing that no one is (morally) allowed to make up whatever laws they like and impose them on anyone!
The most difficult part of being an anarchist is the neverending obligation to explain yourself to the "but who will pay for the roads?" and the "If you don't vote you can't complain" people. They do not in any way feel the need to justify their belief in the system because it is the norm. I cannot count the number of times I have had to correct people on the very basic definition of the word Anarchism and what an anarchist actually is.
I was just looking for a meme I saw yesterday, but I did not find it. Something like, "I am going to completely dismiss this topic that I have done absolutely no research on."
Brilliant! Up here in Canada, some of us learned just how unfree we really are during the Trucker protest. That event revealed the truth to me - that we are indeed slaves, the folly of voting etc. - and you have explained it here perfectly. Great work! Thank you!
I don't think we'll find much traditional/biblical support for the argument that all secular authority is null. I bet there are some great nuances in his take on Romans 12 though
But that that point in history, >could< Scripture have held that all secular authority is null? Some things really are, and must, products of their times. Which is why I noted the concept of "upgrades" in the piece.
Well, back then the word "secular" just meant "not directly run by the church." So a Chrisian monarchy would have been considered secular. There really was no word for what a secular humanist would want to call government, so they had to yoink that one.
Bravo!!!!! Indeed, no victim, no crime, yet government creates victimless crimes as a way to siphon, extract, harvest, steal from its slaves...slaves who "mostly" unknowingly and/or unconsciously consented to be ruled by tyrants. I just wrote about the B.S. of Voting but you nailed this much better than me. Exceptional work!
Thank you, and thank you also for your support!
Voting really is BS. It took me a long time to fully accept that reality.
And it took a long time before the logic of anarchism finally dragged me kicking and screaming to the truth. But once you have seen truth, you can never un-see it!
Voting is a power. It may or may not be efficacious, but it remains a power available to us; why wouldn't I use it? What other powers do I have available to me? Persuasion on my neighbors, direct appeal to government, participation in government. Any or all may be ineffective, and will be more so if I am effective at persuasion and appeal to government.
I can rebel, and accept the consequences. I can comply as little as possible and attempt to set up a parallel society or economy (actually quite doable).
As a Christian, I have an obligation to government, subordinated to God. Anarchy really provides no solution that I have seen.
"Anarchy really provides no solution that I have seen."
—Anarchism is not easy to understand and accept at first. I didn't. But the more I studied, the more I realized it is not only doable, but it may be the only moral choice.
Helpful reading list at this post: https://christophercook.substack.com/p/no-way-i-can-convince-you-anarchism. (Please ignore the slightly irritated tone at the beginning—you have no idea how rude people can get on the subject of anarchism!)
But also, if you just stick around here, you will get tons of helpful anarchist apologetics.
"As a Christian, I have an obligation to government, subordinated to God."
—We had a very interesting discussion about this quite recently:
https://christophercook.substack.com/p/still-follow-romans-13
"I can comply as little as possible and attempt to set up a parallel society or economy (actually quite doable)."
—yes, THAT is where the greatest hope lies.
I understand what you are saying on all fronts. At some point in the past, I agreed with large portions of it.
How I feel about voting is summed up here
https://christophercook.substack.com/p/should-you-vote
and here
https://christophercook.substack.com/p/vote-or-not-vote
I hate to answer with links to reading, but I would just be repeating myself by typing it all here :-)
I don't see that anarchy is a philosophy that can survive in the wild. Men are not angels and can neither be trusted with unchecked power nor with unchecked liberty. Governance is a necessary condition and will always be imposed, with or without the consent of the governed. A system of checked power and checked liberty is the only system that offers any hope of civil society and the governed are the only real check on the governors. Imperfect and unstable to be sure.
I understand your view, and I used to share it. Then I began studying and disabused myself of my preconceptions about what anarchists are actually talking about when they refer to "anarchy."
It is not chaos. It is not unchecked power. The checks on power exist; they simply do not come from a single entity claiming an inescapable and unchallengeable monopoly of authority and then imposing that by force on a given territory and people. There are other ways to do it, but until one researches those ways a little bit, all one has is the mythology that our only choices are government or chaos. That is a false binary.
There is another set of mythological views that it was hard for me, as a patriotic conservative, to see through, but eventually the logic got to be too much. Think about it for a moment…
IS what we have checked power? We talk about "checks and balances" and our "separation of powers" and "limited government" but ask yourself—how well is any of that actually working out? For 200 years, we've been telling ourselves that we just need to elect the right people. That we can one day elect the right slate of officials who will enact the right combination of policies to get us "back" to some mythological state of limited government. The Founders "original vision." (It's not being done "the right way, or by the right people." Isn't that what commies always say?)
It's all mythology. With the exception of ending slavery and a few policies, government has been on a one way slide since 1789. Getting bigger. More centralized. More up in everyone's business. Higher taxes. Fiat currency. The end of true federalism. The end of any semblance of the notion that the states created the union and can leave it. Think about it—can we REALLY "alter or abolish" the government and set up "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"? Or would we get Waco'ed or Ruby Ridged the instant we tried?
The Constitution as not as right-protective a document as our mythology tells us. (The Bill of Rights was added by the Anti-Federalists, who hated the Constitution). The General Welfare and Necessary and Proper clauses have been trashed. The 9th and 10th amendments have been completely ignored. The Commerce Clause allows the Federal government to do whatever they want. Emergency powers can be invoked anytime, for any reason. (Witness what happened here, and in every so-called "representative democracy" across the Western world, during 'covid.')
As Spooner said, the Constitution "has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it." Either way, it has failed.
Does anything we have seem remotely like limited government?
Search your feelings, Luke—do you see any REAL prospect of getting back to some mythological condition of limited government that existed as much in our imagination as in reality? (The Sedition Acts were passed before 1800, for goodness sake!)
Unfortunately, our tricorne hat-wearing patriotism has played right into the hand of those who really run the show. And clinging to it just makes them stronger. I know how hard it is to break out of the mythology. I know that our vision of what was, and what can be again, feels like a rock in the storm. But it is a vision, nothing more.
The principles that (many, though not all of) the Founders held were the correct principles. But the system we ended up with does not actuate those principles. Until we let go of the mythology, we will never actually actuate those principles.
I believe John Adams was correct when he noted that the Constitution is suited only for a religious and moral people and completely inadequate for any other. The Constitution is merely sheets of paper, providing no protections of any kind beyond the integrity of those who signed it and their heirs. I have no illusion that ours is a magic formula, only that it was a reasonable framework for self government for those willing to do the hard work of governing themselves.
Anarchy, however one defines it, will fare no better. Nor will any other system devised by man. A righteous king has always been the most desirable system but righteous kings are hard to find and harder to propagate.
Small bands may be successful at establishing stable self government from time to time but even those are unsustainable as history suggests. It leaves us with the one time tested system, "Treat others as you would be treated." And this one comes with no guarantee of reciprocity.
The biggest issue that I had to overcome to arrive at the same conclusion was Authority. Being raised in the Bible-Belt, we were taught that Authority comes from God & to obey the "laws of the land", so to speak, because well, God said so. Last year, when I came across a presentation explaining Occult Psychological Operations, authority was listed as an operation. I had a visereal reaction! I couldn't believe it at first. It was life-altering for me. In about a month I went from a Statist to an Anarchist! It was explained to me that voting was participation in electing my own slave-master, so I decided to quit. That was a major decision that did not come lightly but extremely greatful I made it! Thanks for writing about theses things! I've wanted to contribute but I'm no where as skilled as you!
You contribute in many ways!
"It was explained to me that voting was participation in electing my own slave-master, so I decided to quit."
—it is a powerful realization! It bowled me over when it finally fully sunk in.
In fact, I was just telling a friend that I did not get here all that willingly. I dragged my feet. The logic of anarchism was there, in plain sight, for several years, but I resisted really truly looking at it. But then, finally, the logic dragged me kicking and screaming and threw me down right in front of that truth. And there it was, right in front of me. And I finally really truly saw it.
Always vote no matter what. You never know. Too many died so you could at least vote.
Yes, indeed, and let's talk about what is happening to Trump today, regardless of what you think about him.
New York State is seizing 450 millions dollars of his assets today. Why?
Let's examine this for a moment.
He was convicted of over-inflating the value of his properties in applications of loans from banks (which have already been paid off.)
As a former real estate appraiser, I can tell you that the value of a property is what a buyer would be willing to spend to purchase said property.
Therefore, without a willing buyer, and for purposes of appraisal, the value is a SUBJECTIVE figure based on an educated GUESS as to what that figure might be.
In other words, on a loan application that requires collateral, the lendee estimates what they believe their collateral is worth. The lender, the bank is free to conduct their own appraisal which may or may not agree with what the lendee BELIEVES is the value of the property.
In both cases, the lender and lendee are making a SUBJECTIVE assessment of that value, and without a willing buyer, it is nothing more than an educated guess. Markets change and flow, and that number can vary wildly based on many, many factors in a very short period of time.
What we have in NY state is the state Attorney General and a Judge conspiring to criminalize this process, and in fact charged and convicted Trump with felonies based on these subjective assessments, and then fining his Corporation for something that THEY CANNOT PROVE. They cannot prove that the property value was inflated. Only that the bank involved came up with a different figure.
So, number one, what happens between two willing parties, a lender and lendee is none of the State's business, lacking criminal intent.
Number two, the fact that these government entities are seizing assets based on this conviction amounts to election interference of a leading candidate for President.
And number three, if they can do this to Trump at this time, they can do this to anyone for any reason.
This is all very concerning, again, regardless of what one might think of Trump.
It is all very concerning.
As Aquinas noted, laws that fail to comport with natural law are not laws at all, but violence. He didn't fully appreciate the implications, but that really does mean that no law that an involuntary government imposes can be considered legitimate.
But then, beyond that, it is also a matter of degree: some laws are further from natural law than others. And what you just described is pretty danged far!
Not much different than Civil Asset Forfeiture, in which the Police or State simply seizes your assets, and then requires you to petition for their return, based on nothing more than the idea that you cannot PROVE that they did not come to you through criminal activities.
It is a grift. NOTHING more.
Another very interesting twist to this tyranny is both Latricia James and Judge Engoron recently refinanced properties in New York which I would say had inflated estimated values by them.
As slowly as this started, we are now on a fast water slide to communism. For nearly 2 centuries communist elites have pushed this collective idea that they had figured out utopia. Basically todays version of tyrannical communism is Klaus Schwab and his statement you will own nothing and be happy. Of coarse similar to our elite tyrants, (the entire American government) this statement does not in any way apply to them, of coarse, only to us slaves that will watch little by little all of our possessions be taken from us, just ask Donald Trump. Notice the fucking fools who cheer on the tyrants stripping a hard working man’s life achievements by a group of people that have built nothing their whole life, not unlike Germans backing the Nazis. To watch people like Merrick Garland who’s family was a product of czarist Russias Pale Settlement jail people for political reasons is disgraceful to say the least. Religious persecution is political persecution because it always politicians doing the persecuting. Leticia James and Fani Willis are spokes in this new American communist wheel. There’s a sub stack writer named Greg Reese. Recently his business partner was jailed. In December, he posted, he moved from Florida to Moscow to live in a freer place fearing a jail cell for himself. We are now certainly living in a police state. I fear my government which is the very definition of Tyranny. J.Goodrich
Right there with you on all that!
Wonderful Christopher! You have an amazing aptitude to write complex thinking simply and coherently. I believe you can access certain Metaphasic Truths.
Thank you, Albert. "Metaphasic Truths"—as in truths that come from the inside of a sun? I certainly do try!
I see the definition equaling Divine Truths which are self-evident.
That is what I figured. But then I also remembered "metaphasic" from a Star Trek episode :-)
The separation of money and state via crypto opens a path to take the foregoing ".. understanding out to its logical conclusion." Network States as envisaged by Balaji Srinivasen provide a framework that outlines a potential structure. We're in much better shape than we think; much of our timidity has been incentivized by *perceived* dependencies upon the state issued fiat that our current system runs on - it incentivizes consumption over saving, pulling future productivity, via debt, into our present expenditures. Fiat payment rails keep us under surveillance ensuring mass compliance. Crypto flips the script - incentivizing saving and an equity based currency system and , if done intelligently, with privacy. Inspiring article Mr. Cook. Let's Go!
Let's gooooo!
Yes to all of that. Indeed, I have been formulating my own plan for a couple of years, and I intend to start discussing that here very soon.
Re crypto—I have high hopes. But the online/electronic nature of it does still make me a bit nervous. I would like to see goldbacks also playing a big role in our future. Not either/or, but all of the above!
Looking forward to your crypto initiatives; i was very early to digital gold ('99) and stayed until your tyrannical overlords in D.C. / DOJ seized the gold (again). There's a lesson in there; took me ~ 2yrs ('10-'12) to intellectually get comfy w/ the new 'digital gold' but that's where I am and content to be so. I also engage/work with gold backed cypto but only as 1 of multiple stores of value.
My initiative isn't about crypto, but rather a form of partial secession.
Why not just physical goldbacks? If they want to steal them, make 'em work for it!
Most laws are created to protect the rich (top 10% perhaps) to their advantage at the expense of the bottom 90%, or slave class. Most laws are silly nonsense crated by silly organizations. Being mostly backed by an agenda, laws are remade and remade to the point of being useless.
Indeed!
And the only true law is natural law anyway. So, level 1 is realizing that things are rigged in favor of the rich, the connected, the state. Level 2 is realizing that no one is (morally) allowed to make up whatever laws they like and impose them on anyone!
Natural law, the rest are just policies
Many of which are in violation of natural law!
The most difficult part of being an anarchist is the neverending obligation to explain yourself to the "but who will pay for the roads?" and the "If you don't vote you can't complain" people. They do not in any way feel the need to justify their belief in the system because it is the norm. I cannot count the number of times I have had to correct people on the very basic definition of the word Anarchism and what an anarchist actually is.
I was just looking for a meme I saw yesterday, but I did not find it. Something like, "I am going to completely dismiss this topic that I have done absolutely no research on."
100 percent.
Also, the "we're a constitutional republic, not a democracy" thing does get somewhat tiring after the 3,000th time.
Great post. I’m adding St. Thomas Aquinas to my list of badass saints right next to Boethius (he appeared in our Wheel of Fortune post a few weeks ago: https://open.substack.com/pub/thinkingman/p/wheel-of-fortune-is-way-more-interesting?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web )
Thanks—restacked!
Whatever labels people use, your reasoning here is philosophical in the best sense—principled, analytic, and oriented toward truth rather than tribe.
Thanks, JK.
I’ve been meaning to sit down and read Thomas Aquinas for a while now. This essay just moved him to the top of the list. Well done!
Thank you. There's a link to the Summa in the post!
Brilliant! Up here in Canada, some of us learned just how unfree we really are during the Trucker protest. That event revealed the truth to me - that we are indeed slaves, the folly of voting etc. - and you have explained it here perfectly. Great work! Thank you!
Thank you. Yes, it is time to evolve to the next level. I am doing it, you are doing it, more of us are doing it. Once we hit the hundredth monkey……..
Well, today is yet another day I wish I could get my hands on Aquinas' commentary on Romans.
What do you think it might say?
Seems like a lot of hints, at least, would be contained in the Summa.
I don't think we'll find much traditional/biblical support for the argument that all secular authority is null. I bet there are some great nuances in his take on Romans 12 though
But that that point in history, >could< Scripture have held that all secular authority is null? Some things really are, and must, products of their times. Which is why I noted the concept of "upgrades" in the piece.
Well, back then the word "secular" just meant "not directly run by the church." So a Chrisian monarchy would have been considered secular. There really was no word for what a secular humanist would want to call government, so they had to yoink that one.
So what, in your view, would their reaction have been to the kinds of governments/modern nation-states we have now?
All good followers of Christ are anarchists with a lazy attitude towards others. LOL
Letting people do their (peaceful) thing is the only way!
Excellent piece. I very much agree with your positions and liked your delivery style.
Thank you. Glad to have you here!