Constitution of No Authority

I’ve always been a great adherent of the US Constitution just as, I imagine, most of you reading this are. I just stumbled over the writing of Lysander Spooner. If he is correct in his understanding, it would explain a lot.

The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. And the Constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any body but “the people” then existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to bind any body but themselves.

Read the entire 1870 dissertation …

      
Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial. Bookmark the permalink.
5 1 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

16 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bobby Joe
Bobby Joe
10 days ago

The constitution is as close to a Christ centered kingdom document you will ever find outside of the Bible.

Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby
10 days ago
Reply to  Bobby Joe

I am not so sure. Read more of Lysander as well as Royce’s https://www.abebooks.com/9781888766035/Hologram-Liberty-Constitutions-Shocking-Alliance-1888766034/plp
Are there unfair, unjust and immoral supported or fostered by the Constitution? Yes, not sure the Christ is down with any of the three.

Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby
10 days ago
Reply to  Ricky Bobby

laws, I meant to say.

DWEEZIL THE WEASEL
DWEEZIL THE WEASEL
10 days ago
Reply to  Ricky Bobby

Word. You might also want to add Charles Beard’s tome: AN ECONOMIC INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. And read also Thomas di Lorenzo’s book: HAMILTON’S CURSE. Royce hit the nail on the head. The fix was in at the convention. Lincoln, the Roosevelts and Wilson put the final nails in the coffin of the Republic.

Jack Lamberson
Jack Lamberson
10 days ago

That sounds like a lot of demoncraps hog wash. It is relevant today as it was when it was written. It is a contract between the citizens of this country and the government. As far as I know military inductees and police and politicians and many others still swear an oath to up hold it. My opinion anyway. Hope all are well. Take Care and Be Safe God Bless All

Nobody
Nobody
10 days ago

Shush! They might hear us.

DRenegade
Admin
10 days ago

You are on the path of becoming a Spoonerite.

Thomas D Dowling
Thomas D Dowling
10 days ago

Our Constitution is a contract/compact between the States.

DRenegade
Admin
10 days ago

It was a contract/compact. It was overthrown when Congress voted and approved an illegal president. A Republic can only stand when there is the rule of law. We are ruled by traitors who have emasculated and taken over the military. We have no justice, no borders, poor schools making our children into woke degenerates and no future.

Snotty Boy
Snotty Boy
10 days ago

So were the Articles of Confederation but more loosely written. I prefer them over the CONstitution.

DRenegade
Admin
10 days ago
Reply to  Roth Harbard

Let’s us the proper terminology: the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union. Under the existing government, any changes to the articles had to be unanimous. If you look at the structure of the meeting which later was called the Constitutional Convention, Rhode Island and the Providence Plantations did not even send any representatives. Other states sent representatives without any authorization to vote on anything.

And yet, here we are.

Snotty Boy
Snotty Boy
10 days ago

Much love for Mr. Spooner. He saw the charade the system had become as far back as the 1870s. Also, much love for Mr. Royce’s Hologram of Liberty book. I first read it in the 1990s.
Most older Muricans hold up the constitution as sacred scripture when in reality it is a flawed legal document written by lawyers. Under it, the monstrosity of the Beast government we labor under was allowed to flourish.
I wonder what would have happened if the founding lawyers had kept the Articles of Confederation instead of scrapping them in favor of the constitution.

kal kal
kal kal
10 days ago
Reply to  Snotty Boy

how many were lawyers? a question I can’t seem to find a straight answer on.

sawman
sawman
10 days ago

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain -- that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”Lysander Spooner
The consitution came about when a select group of those in power preplanned to usurp a convention soley intended to discuss possible amendments to the Articles of Confederation to usher in a different form of government. One reason I have always been against a Con-Con.
In fact whether the constitution failed the people or the people failed the consitution as Hillary stated, At this point what difference does it make. From it’s inception the federal government has worked to neuter and enslave the states culminating in Lincoln the tyrant flushing any vestige of a consitutional republic down the sewer.