Sovereignism is my reality-based philosophy of life and politics. A sovereign is the person or entity that decides. Humans are born with a strong instinct to control. by SovereignJim
(libertarian)
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
The Political and Logical Implications of Sovereignism.
Sovereignism is my reality-based philosophy of life and politics. The people of the world have moved towards, fallen away from then moved toward its political aspects again and again throughout history. The most notable leap forward for this philosophy in the area of government was the establishment of the United States of America by former subjects of King George of England. The North American colonists rejected the sovereignty of King George replacing it with their own sovereignty as self-governing citizens of one of the thirteen new states. The citizens and the states then delegated some of that sovereignty to a newly created Federal Government in exchange for military protection, free trade between the states, honest money and peaceful settlement of disputes between them. Major forwarding events for sovereign individualism were; the beginning of Civilization in Greece, the end of Feudalism in Europe, the end of slavery in the US and western Europe, and the end of Serfdom in Russia.
A sovereign is the person or entity that decides. Humans are born with a strong instinct to control. Thus knowledge and agreement about who is the sovereign is essential to the peaceful settlement of disagreements and helps to avoid them. Sovereignty also implies responsibility. If you decide, then you are responsible for the consequences of your decision. Sovereignism demands that you refuse to make actionable decisions concerning things and individuals that you are not sovereign over. You may have opinions about anything, but deciding implies taking action to enforce that decision. Persuasion, without using force or coercion, is a legitimate means to gain control.
Money is the root of all evil. Wrong! The attempt to control by force or coercion without sovereignty over the object to be controled is the root of all evil. Money provides a means to gain sovereign control peacefully. One can purchase sovereignty over property. You may peacefully attempt to control the action of someone by offering an amount of money in exchange for doing as you request. If the recipient decides by his own free will to accept the money and then acts as you requested then all is well. This type of free exchange is often called a job or contract. You decided to offer the money, which is your property. Your act is moral if the purchased action concerns something that the seller has sovereignty over. If you try to sell something that you do not have sovereignty over it is an evil act on your part. Think of the words fraud and Brooklyn Bridge.
Sovereignism defines the relationship between sovereignty, subject and rights as follows. One needs rights only if one is a subject of a sovereign because otherwise one is a sovereign. A subject's right implies a constraint upon the behavior of a sovereign. A right may also describe a responsibility of the sovereign. This is best understood by examining the historical development of the "Rights of an Englishman". The "Magna Charta" of the year 1212 is the founding document of those rights. However there is meaningful history preceding the creation of that document. Earlier English Kings, all sovereigns, had to issue a document, after their coronation, defining the rules by which they would govern. These rules defined the constraints and responsibilities the King would apply to his governing behavior. Note that a set of governing behavior constraints is an essential part of a constitution. They are also the most difficult parts of a governing constitution to maintain. Also consider that traditions and the rules of common law are the constitution of a culture.
King John had not published a charter of ruling constraints. His rule was arbitrary. That is to say each decision he made was based on how he felt at the time. Many of his decisions angered the aristocracy, powerful subjects of his sovereignty. A large number of them came together to forcefully oppose King John's arbitrary rule. The opposing forces met on a battlefield named Runnymede. The King's forces were defeated. He was allowed to continue his reign after signing the "Magna Charta" because his subjects recognized the need for a sovereign to settle disputes and provide leadership for national protection. It contained 64 rules of responsibilities and constraints of governing that was created by the victors. These rules came to be called rights. Note that a King, if he is sovereign, needs no rights. There is nothing called the "Rights of a Sovereign King". However some rights are essential for the people subject to the decisions of a sovereign. Without them the sovereign can decide as he, she or it pleases at an unjust expense to the subjects.
Anarchy leads to chaos and rule by force. Thus sovereign citizens delegate sovereignty over some things needed for protection and to promote peaceful civilized behavior. Examples are; enforcement of contracts, criminal law---justice system, settlement of disputes and national defense. Citizens need rights defining constraints on behavior of the person or organization to which sovereignty is delegated. Our Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to our Constitution, defines some of these constraints. Remember that the subjects of a sovereign person or organization need rights to protect against arbitrary acts and decisions by the sovereign.
While the term "sovereignty" has acquired many, often inconsistent, definitions. Americans have historically understood it to mean our collective right to govern ourselves within our Constitutional framework. Its model, applied to governments, was accepted by European countries in the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, which assigned to individual nation-states the right and responsibility to manage their own affairs within their own borders without interference from other nations.
Aggressive violence, coercion and fraud are three negative/evil actions Sovereignism attempts to define and avoid. Using violence or threat as defense against aggression on; self, loved ones, village, State, Nation or innocents is legitimate and not evil. Being strong and able to inflict harm on potential aggressive enemies is a good and necessary capability for both individuals and protective elements of government. Turning the other cheek to aggression is not an option for Sovereignism. Eliminating or forcing unconditional surrender of aggressors is the expected response of Sovereignism. Peace by strength and resolve is a mantra of Sovereignism.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 1
thumb so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of SovereignJim only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
SovereignJim is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
