We have become a nation built under the false premise that we are a democracy; a nation evolved politically according to the latest greater good, instead of a free state evolved naturally according to necessity. Our votes were meant to bring our 17th century customs in line with the united States Constitution; while Article 6 of the Constitution was meant to preserve our individual freedom by restraining political power.

Stefan Molyneux: Bitcoin vs Political Power

Rothbard destroys a common statist argument.

A brilliant explanation of the natural rights of man, the free state, and the US Constitution's explicit intent to preserve individual rights.
——————————————————————————————————
NOTE: Today's capitalism is best described as “crony” capitalism and opposite in meaning from the free market or “laissez-faire” capitalism referred to in this video.

The meaning has shifted through misuse and is rarely recognized in its original context as the free market, or the “free pursuance of business and trade between individuals without government interference.”

Arguably, the Constitution grants the government no power to interfere.
——————————————————————————————————
If one wishes to advocate a free society — that is, capitalism — one must realize that its indispensable foundation is the principle of individual rights. If one wishes to uphold individual rights, one must realize that capitalism is the only system that can uphold and protect them.

“Rights” are a moral concept — the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual’s actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others. Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.

Every political system is based on some code of ethics. The dominant ethics of mankind’s history were variants of the altruist-collectivist doctrine which subordinated the individual to some higher authority, either mystical or social. Consequently, most political systems were variants of the same statist tyranny, differing only in degree, not in basic principle, limited only by the accidents of tradition, of chaos, of bloody strife and periodic collapse. Under all such systems, morality was a code applicable to the individual, but not to society. Society was placed outside the moral law, as its embodiment or source or exclusive interpreter.

Since there is no such entity as “society,” since society is only a number of individual men, this meant, in practice, that the rulers of society were exempt from moral law; subject only to traditional rituals, they held total power and exacted blind obedience — on the implicit principle of: “The good is that which is good for society (or for the tribe, the race, the nation,) and the ruler’s edicts are its voice on earth.”

This was true of all statist systems, under all variants of the altruist-collectivist ethics, mystical or social. As witness: the theocracy of Egypt, with the Pharaoh as an embodied god — the unlimited majority rule or democracy of Athens — the welfare state run by the Emperors of Rome — the Inquisition of the late Middle Ages — the gas chambers of Nazi Germany — the slaughterhouse of the Soviet Union.

All these political systems were expressions of the altruist-collectivist ethics — and their common characteristic is the fact that society stood above the moral law, as an omnipotent, sovereign whim worshiper.

The most profoundly revolutionary achievement of the United States of America was the subordination of society to moral law.

The principle of man’s individual rights represented the extension of morality into the social system — as a limitation on the power of the state, as man’s protection against the brute force of the collective, as the subordination of might to right.

All previous systems had regarded man as a sacrificial means to the ends of others, and society as an end in itself. The United States regarded man as an end in himself, and society as a means to the peaceful, orderly, voluntary coexistence of individuals. All previous systems had held that man’s life belongs to society, that society can dispose of him in any way it pleases, and that any freedom he enjoys is his only by favor, by the permission of society, which may be revoked at any time. The United States held that man’s life is his by right (which means: by moral principle and by his nature), that a right is the property of an individual, that society as such has no rights, and that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights . . .

A well regulated Militia has the minacious power to transpose the police state into the constitutional servants originally intended.
——————————————————————————————————
A well regulated Militia refers to “the Militia of the several states” and clarified as the state unorganized constitutional militia. The constitutional militia is not organized or funded by government interests, but self-assembled by citizen volunteers committed to the security of a free state. In times of disaster or coercion, these men and women: the Minutemen – may require the support of additional conscientious individuals from their local communities.

This constitutionally mandated institution reigns supreme in importance over all institutions, with the exception of “We The People,” in defense of individual rights: those rights that define a free state – as sanctioned by the U.S. Constitution and its charter, The Declaration of Independence. By this, the constitutional militia is said to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic.”

Political concerns are an individual matter that may or may not promote, yield, or maintain state respect for individual rights. Unlike politics, the constitutional militia should not be an instrument of division. Any militia intentionally organized on race, religion, politics, or participates in political persuasion, rallies, or protests – shall be seen as a civil threat and justly classified as an armed “extremist” group.

In contrast, the constitutional militia correctly screens potential candidates for such things as criminal behavior or extremism but is otherwise unconcerned with their race, religion or political preference. Its main challenge, however, is to overcome the institution’s unmerited association with alleged militia ‘nuts’ and lingering bad press that discourage membership.

As the free state is lost to the political corruption of a police state, responsible citizens shall face the propaganda for what it is, abandon politics for the Constitution, and take up arms for their commitment to the security of a free state.

With sizable rank, this decentralized defense shall be a formidable adversary for any enemy, foreign or domestic. A well regulated Militia holds that, in a free state, individual rights are non-negotiable and asserts that the duties of a Minuteman shall always be limited to those consistent with a free state. This commitment sets the institution apart as the authentic homeland security.

The Non-Aggression Principle is an innate social construct within all of us that affirms the mutual right to self-ownership. It is the guidepost for natural law and authenticates a social contract of human rights.

Anonymous incites a peaceful revolution, not to fight the existing reality, but to build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.