I’m not sure who this guy is, but he’s got some really great ideas for a sensible foreign policy. Some think tank should track him down and hire him.

“…power over a man’s subsistence amounts to a power over his will.” -Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper #79

A malignant idea exists in socialistic thought that societies can have political freedom with limited economic freedom.

More precisely, this dangerous idea is that political and economic freedom are separate and distinct freedoms and that one can survive without the other.

Furthermore, in democratic socialism the theory is that wealth can be forcefully redistributed through the government, or in other words that society has a right to the economic labor of all individuals.

At the heart of this destructive ideology is that economic freedom is unnecessary and that a society can still be free without it.

Europe has embraced this ideology to a large extent, and America is not that far behind.

However, there is an inseparable connection between liberty and property, a connection that, if severed, leads to the loss of both liberty and private property.

Why It Matters

It is your unalienable right to work, to labor, and to enjoy the fruits of your labor.

Freedom means the ability to control your destiny through your own effort–if the government takes the fruit of your labor (your property) for anything other than taxes to support its proper role, it reduces your ability to create the life of your choice.

“The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is no force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.” -John Adams

Furthermore, property is a tool to express your unique contribution to the world.

Bill Gates shares his vision and business skills by creating computers. Ray Kroc shared his drive and innovation through real estate and hamburgers.

Without private property rights, these men and others like them would have no outlet to express their individuality.

If a person wishes to pursue their happiness by creating a business, that happiness will be deterred if they do not have access to create a physical manifestation of the business through property.

John Locke wrote extensively about this topic in his Second Treatise on Government. He wrote,

“[E]very man has a property in his own person. This nobody has any right to but himself. The labour of his body and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property.

“It being by him removed from the common state nature placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it that excludes the common right of other men. For this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer; no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to….

“He that is nourished by the acorns he picked up under an oak, or the apples he gathered from the trees in the wood, has certainly appropriated them to himself. Nobody can deny but the nourishment is his.

“I ask then when did they begin to be his? And ’tis plain, if the first gathering made them not his, nothing else could. That labour put a distinction between them and common. That added something to them more than nature, the common mother of all, had done: and so they become his private right.

“And will any one say he had no right to those acorns or apples he thus appropriated, because he had not the consent of all mankind to make them his? … If such a consent as that was necessary man had starved, notwithstanding the plenty God had given him.

“We see in commons, which remain so by compact, that ’tis the taking part of what is common, and removing it out of the state Nature leaves it in, which begins the property; without which the common is of no use.”

Without economic freedom all other freedoms are obsolete. With freedom comes the responsibility to use your hands, your mind, and your strength to care for yourself, to provide you and your family with economic necessities and desires.

With responsibility comes opportunity to create your own destiny. Unless your private property rights are protected your ability to determine your life is severely limited.

Recommended Reading:

• The Mainspring of Human Progress by H.G. Weaver
• The Virginian by Owen Wister
• Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt

The seven major societal institutions are family, community, religion, academia, business, media, and government.

Family

The role of the family is to ensure responsible citizens, preserve society, and balance the desires of individual liberty with the demands of community responsibility.

As James C. Ure, professor at George Wythe University, has written,

“The family is the bubble in which a child…feels safe enough to explore his individuality. It is also the first place a child learns to make personal sacrifices for the good of the whole.

“In the family, it is natural for a parent to expose a child to various activities or ideas to determine what unique interests the child may have and to give the child an enhanced sense of self. It is also natural for a parent to ask a child to sacrifice personal interests to benefit the family, such as to provide help with cooking or cleaning.

“In the end, this is not very different from what makes free societies tick…It is in the family that children are expected to learn the core values and beliefs that democratic institutions later draw on to perpetuate themselves.”

Community

The original concept of federalism meant that as many decisions as possible were made at the lowest level possible.

As Cleon Skousen taught, strong, local self-government was the keystone to the original American system.

Understanding that power centralizes and expands, the Founders knew that the bulk of our political decisions should be made on the community level.

The role of the community, therefore, is to prevent the centralization of power by keeping responsibility and decision-making close to the people.

Religion

John Adams wrote that,

“Religion and virtue are the only foundations, not only of republicanism and of all free government, but of social felicity under all government and in all the combinations of human society.”

George Washington affirmed,

“Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure…reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

The role of religion is to remind republican citizens of their duties to and reliance upon God. Virtue is the bedrock of free society, and religion provides a constant reminder of that fact.

Furthermore, religion serves as a venue where citizens serve God by serving their fellowman; philanthropy is enacted in large part through religion.

Academia

Academia advances culture through knowledge, helps to prevent socio-economic inequities, breaks through boundaries of human ignorance and fear, helps societies to avoid repeated historical mistakes, and serves as a check on the government by keeping citizens informed of civic affairs.

As John Adams said,

“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people…They have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge — I mean, of the characters and conducts of their rulers.”

Business

The role of business is to provide exchange, commerce, and ultimately widespread prosperity. In a free market economy prices tend to decrease through competition and innovation, the ultimate benefactors being end consumers of products and services.

In a free market economy poverty decreases, the standard of living rises, and people are able to find self-fulfillment as their subsistence needs are met.

In The 5,000 Year Leap, Cleon Skousen wrote that,

“By 1905 the U.S. had become the richest industrial nation in the world. With only five percent of the earth’s continental area and merely six percent of the world’s population, the American people were producing over half of almost everything — clothes, food, houses, transportation, communications, even luxuries.”

The occurred because of our free market economy, where business was left free to fulfill its role.

Media

The role of the media is to disseminate information, highlight important current events, and to essentially stand as a witness, an observer of cultural, political, community, and educational events.

A healthy media provides a check on the government and increases the political astuteness of republican citizens.

Government

The role of government is to protect unalienable rights. Government is the institutionalization of force, and as such should not do anything that would not be right for an individual to do (such as steal).

As Thomas Jefferson said,

“…a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”

Why It Matters

Freedom occurs when all seven of these societal institutions are on an equal plane, with no one form being more important or having more power or influence than another. When one gains predominance, some form or level of tyranny always emerges.

For example, having family run society results in the mafia. The Dark Ages illustrate the problems of religion ruling. When business is predominant, the society is oligarchic. When the government is predominant, this usually occurs as a monarchy or aristocracy.

The best way to ensure that all seven institutions remain on a level plane is to keep the government within its proper role.

Since the government does not produce — it only takes what others have produced and redistributes — any time it favors one institution over another it does so to the aggrandizement of the one favored and the detriment of the other.

When government tries to get into the business of philanthropy through wealth redistribution, family, community, and religion are weakened.

When government stifles the press, the media is obviously weakened, and so is academia as citizens are kept in the dark on important matters.

In America today, government and business are predominant over the other five societal institutions. Furthermore, they are often joined together, forming an oligarchic structure that harms small business, decreases widespread prosperity and increases discrepancies in wealth distribution, and increases the size and scope of the government.

If America is to survive and thrive in the 21st Century, it is imperative that the power and influence of the government and business be reduced and the power of family, community, religion, academia, and media be increased.

“Fear is the foundation of most governments; but it is so sordid and brutal a passion, and renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and miserable, that Americans will not be likely to approve of any political institution which is founded on it… The foundation of every government is some principle or passion in the minds of the people. The noblest principles and most generous affections in our nature, then, have the fairest chance to support the noblest and most generous models of government.” – John Adams in Thoughts on Government

At the core of political philosophy and constitutional government is the issue of human nature; we can’t know how to govern unless we fully understand whom is being governed.

Designing and managing a polity must take into consideration who human beings are, how and why they act, and how to best promote their happiness.

Human nature is composed of two things: 1) motivations, and 2) tendencies.

Human Motivation

The Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises formulated a methodology for understanding human action that he called “praxeology.” Mises deduced fifty laws of human action, which include the following highlights:

1. Choice determines all human action.
2. Human action is purposeful; people make choices for reasons.
3. Action is the attempt to change the state of being for a more satisfactory state.
4. No person does anything except what they think will improve their satisfaction.

The core of Mises’ laws is that we act to increase our satisfaction. From getting up from the couch to get a soda, to going to church, to perpetrating violent crime, every human action is designed to bring the actor more satisfaction than he or she currently feels.

A well-designed body politic, then, will allow its citizens to seek and gain satisfaction in any way they see fit, as long as they do not encroach upon the unalienable rights of others. As the Roman statesman Cato said,

“By liberty, I understand the power which every man has over his own actions, and his right to enjoy the fruit of his labor, art, and industry, as far as by it he hurts not the society or any members of it, by taking from any member or by hindering him from enjoying what he himself enjoys.”

Human Tendencies

Are human beings good, or evil? Are we fallen beings, or are we enlightened beings of light and love? Do we seek depravity, or degeneracy?

Yes.

Most philosophers seemingly take the either/or view of human nature; some say we are good, and some say we are bad.

It seems clear to me that we are both, that inherent to every individual is the potential for divinity and degeneracy.

Why It Matters

The purpose of government isn’t to change human nature; it’s simply to allow us to be free and to prevent us from using our freedom to harm others.

It’s not–or at least should not be–a positive, offensive force employed to mold people and institutions; it must be merely a negative, defensive force used to protect unalienable rights.

If you want to change people for the better, the government is the absolute worst place to do so, since by nature government is force.

You can’t force people to be and do good; you can simply influence, inspire, and persuade through love and example. As George Washington said,

“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master.”

Inevitably, imperious dictators and benevolent demagogues end up in government; it’s the quickest–and laziest–route to “do good” and impose one’s will upon society.

The Connection Between the Human Spirit & Liberty

One cannot believe in liberty without also believing in the power of the human spirit, our capacity to transcend external circumstances, our persistent desire to find truth and virtue in the midst of violence and degeneracy.

If you don’t believe in people and their ability to succeed, you’ll eventually come to believe that you must be their guardian and caretaker.

This mindset inevitably leads to a condescending benevolence and false philanthropy using the force of government, as opposed to humble service through voluntary virtue.

If you believe that people are fundamentally evil and that you must change them, you’ll become a dictator to impose your will upon others; you’ll force them to change, believing that they won’t change otherwise.

If you believe in the human spirit, your modus operandi for enacting societal change will be through loving persuasion and humble service using private, voluntary institutions such as religion, family, charitable organizations, business, etc.

If you believe that human beings are fundamentally weak and selfish–but you feel called upon to “help” them–chances are that you’ll use the force of government to attempt to change human nature.

In the first scenario, your view of others will be from the position of a servant looking up; in the second your view will be as a ruler looking down.

Conclusion

Using the force of government is the absolute worst way to help or to change people; it leads to nothing but tyranny, bureaucracy, mediocrity, and stagnation.

The government must allow its citizens to pursue their own forms of satisfaction, as long as they do not prevent others from doing the same.

People can be both good and bad–when government stays in its proper role to protect unalienable rights it encourages the good and prohibits the bad.

People must be helped and influenced to change through voluntary private institutions.

Recommended Reading:

• The Uncomfortable Mirror: Overcoming Self-Deception Through the Study of History
• Thoughts on Government by John Adams
• Human Action by Ludwig von Mises

“The fabric of American empire ought to rest on the solid basis of the consent of the people. The streams of national power ought to flow immediately from that pure, original fountain of all legitimate authority. –Alexander Hamilton

Simply put, legitimate foundation means the will of the People at large, while legitimate authority is the express permission granted by the People to the government to perform some function.

Put together, they form the philosophical foundation of the powerful idea that man does not exist for the state, but that the state exists for man.

Legitimate Foundation

The idea that the government should exist according to the will of the People and solely to benefit the People at large was revolutionary in the 18th Century. Previously, governments primarily benefited those governing, or special interests.

The American Founders taught that the will of the People, as expressed through constitutional means, is the only solid, sustainable, and legitimate foundation of republican government.

This does not mean, however, that they were referring simply to the concept of majority rule alone, as we learn from Federalist Paper #51; the idea is to guide the nation by the will of the majority, while protecting minority rights (i.e. preventing the majority from taking private property).

Legitimate Authority

Thomas Jefferson spoke of legitimate authority in the Declaration of Independence when he wrote,

“…That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

The United States Constitution was the first (and to my knowledge the only) constitution to be instigated by, or to have originated in, the People, then ratified by the People.

In other words, the People, through their colonial representatives, called for the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Representatives at the Convention represented the People within their respective territories–not the government itself.

They were authorized by the People to do the will of the People. Our Constitution was initiated and created from the bottom up, rather than dictated from the top down.

Then, after its creation by the representatives of the People, the Constitution was taken back to the People–once again through their colonial representatives–to be ratified, or accepted.

Previously, the historical norm was for the government–whether through a monarchy, aristocracy, or other form of ruler’s law–to dictate from the top down the laws and constitutional forms that the People must obey.

As David Hume wrote in 1752,

“Almost all the governments which exist at present, or of which there remains any record in story, have been founded originally either on usurpation or conquest or both, without any pretense of a fair consent or voluntary subjection of the people.”

Why It Matters

To drive the point home with these critical concepts, think of illegitimate versions of the same concepts.

For example, illegitimate foundations of government would include a government being founded by the will of a monarch or a dictator, a special interest group, one branch of government solely, etc. and primarily to protect and benefit such individuals or groups.

Illegitimate authority would include any government imposing arbitrary laws without permission from the People to do so through constitutional means, any branch of government engaging in extra-constitutional activities; a special interest group, such as a banking cartel, exercising undue influence upon the People without their consent; etc.

Any time a government, individual, institution, or special interest group imposes any law, regulation, policy, program, or procedure without the express permission of the People through constitutional means–and backs it up with force and violence–tyranny ensues.

In fact, the word “tyranny” itself originates from the Greek, meaning “illegitimate ruler.”

It’s like your in-laws meddling with your children — only much worse, since it usually involves pesky things like theft, murder, rape, and pillage.

Danger From the People

However, an even more important point must be made, which is that the greatest danger to popular governments lies with the people themselves, rather than with illegitimate rulers or laws.

With the right and ability to vote and legitimately influence public policy comes the temptation for the People to vote themselves benefits from the national treasury. As Benjamin Franklin wrote,

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

Our nation flipped this ruinous switch in 1913, with the ratification of the 16th and 17th Amendments and the passing of the Federal Reserve Act. I’ll save my analysis of these for another article.

The point is that with rights and privileges come responsibilities. We are so blessed in America to enjoy a constitutional structure based on legitimate foundation and legitimate foundation. However, this also means that We the People are primarily responsible for the maintenance of our freedom.

This requires education. As Thomas Jefferson wrote,

“I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

Recommended Reading:

Federalist Paper #38
Federalist Paper #22

“To put the world right in order, we must first put the nation in order; to put the nation in order, we must first put the family in order; to put the family in order, we must first cultivate our personal life; we must first set our hearts right.” -Confucius

Although this is certainly debatable, it seems clear, when considering the four foundations of freedom, that culture is far more important than politics and government.

What I mean by culture is the social patterns, activities, mores, customs, belief systems, and sense of morality inherent to a society.

It’s how the people at large behave in the absence of force. It’s how they view each other and their place in society and how they interact with one another.

In other words, in an aristocratic culture, poor members of society are unlikely to consider that they have the opportunity to attain a higher social status.

In social democracies or meritocracies, however, individuals understand that they have the opportunity to be mobile in their social status.

(And remember that there is a fundamental difference between a social democracy and a governmental democracy.)

Politics refers to how members of society make group decisions, and government is the institutionalization of force, or the way that political decisions are enforced.

Why It Matters

Although there is some overlap, morality is mainly the purview of culture.

So if a nation has a government that stays within its proper realm–to protect unalienable rights–yet voluntary virtue is required to sustain this arrangement, then culture is far more important than its system of government.

By the way, it’s important to define morality, since there’s a tendency to think of morality only in terms of sexual purity.

However, by morality I’m referring to a holistic sense of the word, a morality that includes far more than sexuality, including philanthropy, providence (or living up to one’s full potential and doing what they were born to do), personal responsibility, and stewardship.

Another way to explain the preeminence of culture of politics and government is through the principle of voluntarism, which means that the health of a society is equal to what individuals will do voluntarily without the force or assistance of the government.

James Madison explained this concept well in Federalist Paper #51. He wrote:

“But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.

“In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

“A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”

In other words, he says that the primary way to preserve the society is through virtue in the people, but auxiliary precautions are also necessary, auxiliary precautions being the form of government.

For far too long, we’ve both depended on the government to do things we should be doing as private citizens in the realm of culture, and then blamed them when things go wrong.

It’s time for America to realize that our voluntary culture, or how we act in the absence of government, is far more important than anything the government does, since the government is nothing but a collective reflection of our private lives anyway.

Focus less on changing the government, and focus more on creating a family culture that makes illegitimate government functions unnecessary.

Recommended Reading:

• Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
• The Giver by Lois Lowry
• 1984 by George Orwell

According to the American Founders, the Four Foundations of Freedom are:

1. Private Virtue
2. Public Virtue
3. Widespread Education
4. Auxiliary Precautions

The Founders consistently taught that, in the absence of these foundations, no society can survive, or at least maintain its freedom.

Private virtue means being a person of integrity; being honest in your dealings with others, being faithful in your duties to your family, controlling your appetites, etc.

Public virtue means to voluntarily sacrifice personal benefit for the good of society.

For example, George Washington served two terms as President even when, as he was accepting the post, he wrote that it “would be the greatest sacrifice of my personal feelings and wishes that ever I have been called upon to make.”

Contrary to our modern conception of education, widespread education to the Founders didn’t mean job training; it meant classical, liberal education designed to teach individuals how to think, not what to think (see A Thomas Jefferson Education by Oliver DeMille).

And finally, auxiliary precautions are a society’s forms of government that ideally protect life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. Auxiliary precautions, as outlined in The Federalist Papers and other writings, include the following:

1. Legitimate Foundation
2. Legitimate Authority
3. Legitimate Role
4. Separation of Powers
5. Checks
6. Balances
7. Federalism
8. Written Constitution
9. Enumerated Limited Powers
10. Periodic Elections
11. Electoral College
12. Factionalization

Why It Matters

What matters most about the four foundations is their order of importance. The Founders understood that no free government, however enlightened, can survive unless the people that it governs are moral and virtuous.

Constitutional government is nothing but words on paper unless its principles are alive in the souls of the people; free nations get the government that they deserve.

When a free people fails to internalize and exhibit public and private virtue, no government on earth can keep them from destroying themselves. On the other hand, people who cultivate and maintain virtue and value their principles above their privileges enjoy unlimited prosperity, peace, and happiness.

As Benjamin Franklin said:

“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”

James Madison added:

“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”

In a free government, the People get the government that they deserve. The only way to maintain freedom is to maintain private and public virtue.

The most common–and grossly incorrect–answer to this question is that we are a democracy. The right–albeit simplistic–answer is that we are a republic. A more sophisticated answer is that we are a constitutional republic.

The most thorough answer came from James Madison, who said that our form of government is an “Extended Limited Commercial Federal Democratic Republic.”

By “extended” he was referring to geography–never before in history has there been a republic that covered so much territory.

“Limited” refers to the fact that the Constitution expressly defines what the government can and cannot do.

“Commercial” refers to our national character.

The Founders said that there were three main national characters–martial, religious, and commercial. Rome had a martial character, as does China. Ancient Israel had a religious character.

Since religious and martial-character nations tend toward tyranny, the Founders chose commercial.

By “federal,” Madison meant as much power as possible was preserved with the People, and that the federal government only existed for specific and limited purposes.

The idea of federalism is that the closer one gets to the People the more power there is, while the closer one gets to the federal government, the less power one finds.

“Democratic” refers to the idea that we are a social democracy, although not a governmental democracy.

Social democracy is the concept that intrinsic in our culture is the understanding that all men and women are created equal, that no individual is better than another, and that everyone has equal opportunity to succeed.

(As an interesting side note, Oliver DeMille gives an updated version of Madison’s lengthy label. He says that we are now an “Internationalist, Sometimes Constitutional (Except Where Prohibited By Law), Extended (Globally), Increasingly Commercial, National, Representative/Virtual/Popular Democracy, With a Technocratic Supremacist Court.” But that’s a conversation for another day…)

Why It Matters

As James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper #10:

“…democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.

“Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.”

In a pure democracy, all it takes to pass a policy is simple majority vote. But what happens if the policy encroaches upon unalienable rights? If 51% vote in favor of it, the 49% who voted against it will be tyrannized.

Furthermore, what always happens in a democracy is that very few people are even actively involved–which means that it always degenerates into some type of aristocracy or oligarchy, or rule by few.

To quote James Madison again:

“A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.

“The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.

“The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations.

“Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose.”

In other words, a republic has a much greater chance of protecting and preserving unalienable rights than does a democracy.

Democracies in history have always degenerated into “mobocracies” that tyrannize minorities, and they have always failed.

Beware of those who say we are a democracy — they are those who will encroach upon your unalienable rights in the name of equality.

According to the American Founders, the proper role of government is to protect unalienable rights.

The government cannot rightfully do anything that an individual cannot rightfully do. In other words, if it is wrong for an individual to steal another’s property, then it is wrong for the government to do the same thing.

As Cleon Skousen put it in The 5,000 Year Leap, the government should protect equal rights — not provide equal things.

Competing views include, but are not limited to, the following:

• The role of government is to distribute all things equally (communism).
• The role of the government is to take care of its subjects (democratic socialism).
• The role of the government is to expand its empire (martial societies).
• The role of the government is to “help the little guy” (democracy).
• The role of the government is to promote the interests of “big business” (capitalism).

Why It Matters

By definition, government is force. Behind every government policy is a gun to the heads of citizens saying, “You will do this, or else…”

Therefore, anything other than the philosophy that the proper role of government is to protect unalienable rights always has and always will lead to tyranny.

The more government tries to “help” society, the more tyrannical it becomes. Since the government does not produce, it can only take what others has produced to fulfill its aims.

If it wants to provide welfare, it cannot do so without taking from one person or group of people to give to another. And since government is force, this is, as Frederic Bastiat said, “legal plunder.”

Follow-Up Question: Ideally, how, or by whom, should the poor and disabled be helped, if necessary?

Unalienable.com has the following great definition of unalienable rights:

“The absolute rights of individuals may be resolved into the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right to acquire and enjoy property. These rights are declared to be natural, inherent, and unalienable.

“By the ‘absolute rights’ of individuals is meant those which are so in their primary and strictest sense, such as would belong to their persons merely in a state of nature, and which every man is entitled to enjoy, whether out of society or in it.

“The rights of personal security, of personal liberty, and private property do not depend upon the Constitution for their existence. They existed before the Constitution was made, or the government was organized.

“These are what are termed the ‘absolute rights’ of individuals, which belong to them independently of all government, and which all governments which derive their power from the consent of the governed were instituted to protect.”

In short, unalienable rights are the rights every individual has whether in or out of society.

In other words, if you live alone in the wilderness, do you have an unalienable right to “free” health care? Obviously not.

Do you have an unalienable right to till the ground and produce food, to build a house, to pursue your own happiness? Of course.

Civil rights are rights granted by the State that are not unalienable. Civil rights include such things as the right to drive and the right to vote.

Civil rights are legitimately created (at least as long as they are aligned with Natural Law) by the society to maintain peace, order, and security.

Why It Matters

A person who believes that man’s rights come from human sources does not differentiate between unalienable and civil rights. To him or her, all rights are civil, meaning they are granted by the State.

Without this fundamental understanding, no rights are sacred and unalienable — all rights can be revoked upon a majority vote or dictate.

This is why we hear politicians claiming such things as “health care is a right.”

A person who believes that health care is a right believes that the State can give and take away rights based on a majority vote or the whims of its leaders.

Follow-Up Question: Does taxation encroach upon unalienable rights?