Thursday, October 20, 2005

commonwealth.

let me start by saying this. there is no common wealth in the commonwealth. the very name in itself is a digrace to the seal it claims to represent. wealth is inanimate. wealth is value, and common wealth is value that posseses the traits of nonrivalrous consumption and nonexclusion, such value perhaps vested in a park or another such venture. wealth can not govern. wealth can not infringe. wealth can not steal. wealth can not kill. our government is not an inanimate collection of wealth available for nonrivalrous consumption by the citizenry. our state is governed by those who claim the right to exclusive use of such wealth, given to them by a majority of a group selected by a majority of another group selected by a majority of some other group, all in all creating a very random group that claims to represent a majority that posseses the right to delegate the right to negate the consent of even the members that compose their majority. our state is governed by men who use this right so justifiably handed to them to create goods so exclusive in consumption that it is explicitly declared that the citizenry may not have access to such goods. they are the tools and agents of infringement, typically called arms and police. (or "agents of the state.") then the agents (executive) claim the right to infringe, using the common wealth, (taxes,) which has been vested in them by the majority (legislature) chosen by a few other majorities (gerrymandered voters or perhaps other legislatures), and proceed to infringe unrestrained outside the decided borders (see: war powers act,) and domestically, infringe to the extent another group of men (judges) chosen by their commander (president) orders them to. the responsibility for infringment is so spread out amongst so many agents that each one is fully capable of cognitive dissonance to the point where that the individual agents will even carry out infringements they themselves abhor. (see: vietnam.) which bring me to the reason i'm writing this. i was sentenced to a month in prison today for traversing land at a rate of 85 miles per hour. the majority of some random governing body decreed that i should only move at a rate of 65 miles per hour... not even the agents of the state themselves would move so slowly. i could not help but smile, when i looked above the man who delegated the task of infringing upon my person to some others and i read the words to myself, "sic semper tyrannis." the irony was too apparent to be unintentional. these men, under the auspices of bringing death to tyrants, were physically infringing upon me. had i infringed? was i a tyrant? this was doublethink at its finest. they certainly noticed i did not look at them, but only stared at the seal as my prison sentence was read. those who certainly thought it as ridiculous as i, proceeded to carry out the paperwork and escorting. but they made no eye contact and said nothing to me... only whispers filled the room. "did he say jail?" i slung my bag over my shoulder, filled with econ books detailing the loss of wealth wrought by government regulation, quietly whispered "may liberty bind you and justice find you," and walked out. now i query... shall i serve my sentence? or shall i take to the hills? a fateful choice indeed.

6 Comments