No Government, No Force


The NoRuler Guy

A Constitution for the Voluntary System 

Readers may be pleasantly surprised, as this article should be brief and to the point.? We need to set some basics intended to open the door to discussion.? I am not even certain that we want or need a Constitution for a Voluntary System, but probably few people can grasp how to function without a Constitution to cling to!

America’s existing Constitution has failed to protect the Liberty of the people, to such extent that over 232 years the government created thereby has been turned from our protector to a tyrant far beyond reach of the citizenry.? If you think otherwise, you have paid no attention to it’s being overtaken by the insane immorality of progressive non-thinking.

This is not something new, the Constitution has been destroyed, one word at a time, for all the years since it was enacted.? Enacted, yes, by noble men who said far too much and failed to make it clear and absolute.? People continue to argue about the “intent of the founders”; what a waste of time!? Intents were not written into the Constitution, they were just noise and can never be anything more.? If written in a way not clear and absolute to everyone, the door is open to play word games, and to spin anything from noble prose to devastating harm to the citizenry.? This is precisely what has happened to America.? Even before the Constitution could be ratified, it was necessary to Amend the thing 10 times, called the “Bill of Rights”.?? Since then, 17 more Amendments have been put in place.? Were America to somehow survive this collapse, this will continue ad nauseum.

The problem stems from a basic breach of principle:

RIGHTS: Artificial non-living Entities such as governments, organizations, corporations, etc. can neither claim to ?own? nor have any rightful power to negate or detract from those Natural Rights of any Man.? This one principle does, in itself, refute the entire justification for EVER AGAIN creating a Government of Force.

The ONLY proper objective was the formation of a Union of the several States, a joining for the express purpose of defending the Union from harmful intrusion by outsiders.? Having done just that, the founders should have signed off and gone home to sleep it off.

The key missing element from our present Constitution was banning Government Force.? If we fail to include that ban in very absolute terms, would we not doom the citizens to more of the same old thing?

Why the States would have ratified the thing is incomprehensible to me!? With and upon their ratification the States ceded all control of both the States and their citizens over to the new Union which went so far beyond the perhaps-proper bounds of any Nation.

So with this, the door is wide open to discussion and comments.

Please keep comments short and to a single point.

Long comment?? Write an article!


share save 120 16 Constitution


  1. Right now I am speechless, I would just like to know where you people have been all of my life? You plan to take over? I am on the verge of tears. I have to admit that I haven’t felt this moved in a very long time. I don’t know what I will be able to contribute, but I surely will try my best. Blessings to all!

  2. Dean, I did some research for part 2 of the “After the Fall” series. I checked out my states constitution (Pa). Here is on section:
    Political Powers Section 2.
    All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.

    At least in Pa, a large show of force by residents could easily abolish the current State govt. After all, it is written as a inherent right. This does however increase my thinking on how to abolish the Feds without any blood loss, during the fall. If, as I believe, most state constitutions are similar, by abolishing the State governments during this period, would provide the power to force the Feds to step down. If 35 states were taken down, and those that took them down said they will not abide by Federal edict, the Feds would have few responses.

    As the States have National Guardsman, the defense of the state could be established, thus forcing the Feds to do one of two things, order the U.S military to attack it’s citizens (which the military will not do), or give up their power. I would hope for the order to attack, which will be denied by the military, and the Feds would lose all credibility and power. Something to think about. I also have some ideas as to how thise would work, as far as a plan. Ultimately, it’s all up to getting the people to unite.

  3. ouch, looks as if the threading ends at level 3, so guess we continue at Level 1.

    Can someone write a paragraph for our Constitution, that which we need to ban Force? My view is that only each of us own our basic rights, and they are not available for distribution or revocation. Perhaps that should be included to make the paragraph crystal clear?

    I just extracted from the “dust” article a new page entitled “Essence”.
    If all of us are not together on the principle foundation, that’s where we must work for a bit. Otherwise, can everyone accept that as our basis for all which we might do here?

  4. I notice that the treading is not working just right. I’ll see if that can be fixed. This can leave things somewhat confusing to follow.

  5. My comment is way to long. But here are my original ideas as to rebuilding:

    1. Very good, gman; that’s the far better way than getting lost in what hopefully become a goodly string of comments.

  6. I believe any Constitution (or whatever name we give to the document) must clearly outline the boundaries of any association among the States. It must clearly define the limitations and restrictions on the association to prevent an expansion of authority over the States or the people. To do any less will leave the door open to the creeping expansion of government and we’d end up – at some point – at this place where we are now.

    1. Thank you for your thoughts.

      If we merely limit the Union to it?s main and only purpose, then would not the States, remaining autonomous, be free to work that out between themselves?

      At some point after the Union has been limited to Voluntary, I foresee that each State will come to examine the feasibility of Voluntary for itself. Why would it not come down that way?

      1. Well, if we leave any wiggle room we open ourselves to interpretation of what constitutes “rights,” much the same as we see now. Look at the basic differences in what a progressive says are rights versus what a conservative says.

        I guess I would feel more secure in my rights when I know just what the national government is firmly restricted to. And, I don’t see why that aspect wouldn’t trickle down to the States much as you give voice to voluntary trickling down.

        It would be great to trust to all that the principle wouldn’t be violated – yet violating principles where government is concerned has been occurring for thousands of years.

      2. Dean, We are not just go into D.C. and take over. These people will have to be removed, hopefully peacefully by overwhelming numbers of Patriots willing to go the next level. Unfortunately, this will have to occur at the State level as well, simutaniously. I will be writing the version of new state volunteers and how that will work. My third in the series will be a new Constitution draft.

      3. Exactly. Only in Collapse will the situation be such that not only the economy will collapse, but this overbearing GOVERNment will fall along with it. Since nobody can predict with certainty the circumstances during that time, the best we can do here is present the best possible Restart, and it’s our task to develop the pieces and then to make sure to spread the word far and wide. I see no common purpose which might make revolution come to fix anything. It’s all up to us. As we proceed, new members are joining in – which that could be faster, but so many still seem to read but not participate. It’s not easy, but possible.

    2. @plainlyspoken
      This is definitely a good beginning! I hope everyone will think NO GOVERNMENT, per se. Dean has stressed this numerous times, and I would like to see us consider removing the word ‘Govern’ from our working vocabularies so that we get out of the habit of thinking GOVERNment. We don’t yet know exactly what ideas will be put forth, but I shudder to think we may once again place ourselves under a government that can and will turn on its people, if not overtly, then covertly.

      Primarily, I beg everyone to please share all your ideas and thinking and please let’s all follow the KISS formula so that all of us are sure what exactly we are talking about. Along with the KISS formula, we should also be as direct and succinct as possible in order to eliminate misunderstandings in the future, as well as within our working group. It is my view that IF we opt for some type of overseer group, their duties and authority must be spelled out with NO ambiguity, and we must have a built-in capability of firing them immediately.

      1. Tasine, I am new here, and would like to ask what is the KISS formula?

Comments are closed. © 2017 Sharing and Reposting are welcome; we expect due credit to Author and Frontier Theme