For a function of government to be legitimate, the government itself must be legitimate. This should not be assumed, but investigated. By what authority does government have the right to rule? By delegation of the people?
For you to delegate the right to someone else to perform some function, you must first have the right to perform it yourself - do you agree? I cannot delegate the painting of your house to my brother, since I do not have the right to paint your house to begin with.
So how do you suppose that Congress has the right to lay and collect taxes? The people delegate it to them? Who among those people would claim the right to personally tax their next-door neighbor? Even the founders saw this flaw, as nowhere in the Constitution does it explain how this power is acquired. They just assert it. They “shall”... how very convenient.
Can I just “shall” anything I please? Of course not. So what gives? Both right and left buy into the fundamental lie - the validity of government authority - because they hope they can wield that power themselves, by proxy. It’s invalid, immoral, and always backfires because it leaves the people holding the bag.
I'm reminded of a booklet I read long ago, and which I just now found online—
The Proper Role of Government by Ezra Taft Benson.
He affirms, as you do, and I agree, that all legitimate government authority is derived from the authority of the governed. As individuals, we have a right to protect ourselves, our homes, our family, and our property, from the acts of criminals who would harm these things or deprive us thereof. Collectively, an organized society delegates this as a power of government, to be carried out by enacting and enforcing a system of laws aimed at protecting our rights,
We recognize the need for roads and other common infrastructure. Without government, I could, perhaps, buy some land, and some materials, and build a road thereon. You could do the same, as could our other neighbors. Hopefully, we would all build our roads in am organized manner, so that they connect to one another and create a usable system of roads. We could make deals with one another, were we give permission to the other neighbors to make use of our roads, in exchange for them giving us permission to use theirs. But what a clumsy mess this would all be, and what a nightmare to regulate. Much better, don't you think, for us to collectively delegate to government, the duty to construct a system of roads,and pay a tax to that government in order to pay the costs of doing so?
But what about welfare? If I observe that my neighbor, Mr. Smith, is struggling financially,and is unable to fully support himself and his family from his own earnings; while my other neighbor, Mr. Jones, is very wealthy, and has far more material resources than he needs; do I have the authority to take some of Mr,. Jones' wealth,and give it to Mr. Smith? No, I absolutely do not. Mr. Jones has the right to give any of his own wealth, to help a struggling neighbor, but I have no right to force him to do so, or to take it upon myself to transfer his wealth without his consent. Therefore, neither does government have this authority, for no idividual has this authority in order to delegate it to government.
Nice spinning.
