Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Walter E. Williams: Getting back our liberties
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, December 17, 2003 | Walter E. Williams

Posted on 12/17/2003 12:40:43 AM PST by JohnHuang2

Getting back our liberties

Posted: December 17, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

Last week's column, "Let's Do Some Detective Work," provided unassailable evidence that the protections of liberty envisioned by the Constitution's Framers mean little today. I was pleasantly surprised by the responses from fellow Americans expressing disgust and fear over what our nation is becoming. Several asked how we can regain our liberties. My short answer is: I'm not sure they can ever be recovered. Let's look at it.

We all have a moral obligation to pay our share for constitutionally mandated functions of the federal government, but we have no such obligation to have Congress take the earnings of one American and give them to another American. Forcing one American to serve the purposes of another is one way slavery can be defined.

I'm an emancipated adult fully capable of taking care of my own retirement. Why should I or anyone else be forced to pay into the government's Social Security? Do you see any signs on the horizon that such practices are coming to an end? The list of encroachments on personal liberty like these is virtually endless.

Self-determination is a human right we all should respect. If some people want socialism, that's their right – but it is not their right to use brute government power to force others, who want liberty, to be a part of it. Liberty-minded Americans might organize to acquire government power to impose their will on socialist-minded Americans, but that's not right either. A far more peaceful method is simply to part company.

That's an idea already being explored by the Free State Project. Their plan, as stated on their website, is: "20,000 or more liberty-oriented people will move to New Hampshire, where they may work within the political system to reduce the size and scope of government. The success of the Free State Project would likely entail reductions in burdensome taxation and regulation, reforms in state and local law, an end to federal mandates and a restoration of constitutional federalism."

In 1788, during New Hampshire's ratification convention, a concerned people said "amendments AND alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good People of this State and more Effectually guard against an undue Administration of the Federal Government. The Convention do therefore recommend that the following alterations and provisions be introduced into the said Constitution: (among them) First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly and particularly Delegated by the aforesaid Constitution are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised." The Ninth and Tenth Amendments, which mean virtually nothing now, were added to our Constitution in response to these fears.

While members of Free State Project have not proposed it, I would imagine that if New Hampshire's elected representatives couldn't successfully negotiate with the U.S. Congress to obey the Constitution, the only other alternative would be that of making a unilateral declaration of independence and go our own way just as our Founders did in 1776.

Many people might argue that it's the U.S. Supreme Court that decides what is constitutional or not. Here's what Thomas Jefferson said about allowing the Court to hold a monopoly on the interpretation of the Constitution: "... the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what are not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch."

The history of the Court, not to mention last week's decision on the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform that attacks free speech, is proof that Jefferson was right and Alexander Hamilton wrong in his Federalist Paper No. 78 prediction that the judiciary would be the "least dangerous" branch of government.





TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: federalist78; freestateproject; judicialdespotism; judicialtyranny; oligarchy; restoringliberty; thomasjefferson; walterewilliams; walterwilliams
Wednesday, December 17, 2003

Quote of the Day by San Jacinto

1 posted on 12/17/2003 12:40:44 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
BUMP

Walter Williams is the best.
2 posted on 12/17/2003 12:43:04 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I want my own island...run under a clearly worded constitution similar to the US...with harsh penalties for politicians who write, sponsor, or vote for an unconstitutional law.

Now, where did that winning lottery ticket go to...
3 posted on 12/17/2003 12:50:23 AM PST by flashbunny (The constitution doesn't protect only the things you approve of.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
we have no such obligation to have Congress take the earnings of one American and give them to another American. Forcing one American to serve the purposes of another is one way slavery can be defined.

And we think we are free. Right. Try NOT paying and you will see how free we are!

4 posted on 12/17/2003 12:52:46 AM PST by ovrtaxt ( http://www.fairtax.org * Centrist Republicans are the semi-colons of the political keyboard.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
go our own way just as our Founders did in 1776.

Actually, it would be much more similar to (ahem...) 1861. And that worked out great, didn't it?


5 posted on 12/17/2003 1:11:15 AM PST by MrJingles ("Democracy is doomed once the majority realizes that it controls the public treasury." - - Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
...with harsh penalties for politicians who write, sponsor, or vote for an unconstitutional law.

Question...
If the government is willing to ignore certain parts of your Constitution, why would they respect the portion that punishes them for such an act? Who's going to punish them, anyway?


6 posted on 12/17/2003 1:17:14 AM PST by MrJingles ("Democracy is doomed once the majority realizes that it controls the public treasury." - - Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Dr. Williams is one of the greatest intellects mankind ever produced. He is the greatest intellect of the Twentieth Century and by far, the greatest intellect alive today.
7 posted on 12/17/2003 1:31:26 AM PST by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
Is that you, Walter?
8 posted on 12/17/2003 1:34:12 AM PST by ovrtaxt ( http://www.fairtax.org * Centrist Republicans are the semi-colons of the political keyboard.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
BUMP for Dr. Walter E. Williams, and the Free State thing is great, but New Hampshire is too cold, and they don't have any beaches either.
9 posted on 12/17/2003 2:47:01 AM PST by putupon ("Borders? We don' need no steenkin' borders!"-Presidente Jorge Dubya Arbusto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
What a dumb article.
10 posted on 12/17/2003 4:26:34 AM PST by Huck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
I would put Thomas Sowell in his company.
11 posted on 12/17/2003 5:48:10 AM PST by sauropod ("Ladies and gentlemen, we got him.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Most people in this country wouldn't know what liberty was if it walked up and bit them in the ass. That includes the "Live Free or Die" folks.
12 posted on 12/17/2003 6:56:37 AM PST by agitator (Ok, mic check...line one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The history of the Court, not to mention last week's decision on the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform that attacks free speech, is proof that Jefferson was right and Alexander Hamilton wrong.

With apologies to the Kennedy brothers, the South was right. The justices are, and have been, out of control. At least the state of Georgia once refused to comply with their idiotic decisions.

13 posted on 12/17/2003 7:08:21 AM PST by 4CJ (Come along chihuahua, I want to hear you say yo quiero taco bell. - Nolu Chan, 28 Jul 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Dr. Williams is right as rain, as usual.



14 posted on 12/17/2003 7:12:13 AM PST by Eris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: putupon
New Hampshire does have beaches....... but those winters!
15 posted on 12/17/2003 7:12:19 AM PST by Rummyfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
I will second that notion. Walter Williams should be the poster child for what is a great American.
16 posted on 12/17/2003 7:14:49 AM PST by MizzouTigerRepublican (82nd ABN Gulf war vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: agitator
"Most people in this country wouldn't know what liberty was if it walked up and bit them in the ass"

And therein lies the source of the problem which is not even recognized as a problem by most people and for the same reason.
17 posted on 12/17/2003 7:19:22 AM PST by RipSawyer (Mercy on a pore boy lemme have a dollar bill!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
Walter Williams has always been one of my favorites. Merry Christmas, John!
18 posted on 12/17/2003 7:35:42 AM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
What a nut! This guy actually thinks that he ought to be allowed to be free!

< /sarcasm>

19 posted on 12/17/2003 7:47:52 AM PST by Protagoras (Vote Republican, we're not as bad as the other guys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrJingles
Actually, it would be much more similar to (ahem...) 1861. And that worked out great, didn't it?

It worked out the way it did because of the way it was handled, not because the idea was wrong.

20 posted on 12/17/2003 7:49:45 AM PST by Protagoras (Vote Republican, we're not as bad as the other guys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MizzouTigerRepublican
I will second that notion. Walter Williams should be the poster child for what is a great American.

Not on this site.

21 posted on 12/17/2003 7:50:57 AM PST by Protagoras (Vote Republican, we're not as bad as the other guys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Superb article. Thanks for posting it.
22 posted on 12/17/2003 7:53:28 AM PST by Stop Legal Plunder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Federalist 78
Thought you might be interested in this based on your handle.
23 posted on 12/17/2003 9:32:38 AM PST by zeugma (The great experiment is over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Why wouldn't Walter Williams be welcomed as a great American on this site?
24 posted on 12/17/2003 9:53:56 AM PST by MizzouTigerRepublican (82nd ABN Gulf war vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras; MizzouTigerRepublican
Walter is insufficiently statist for the drug warriors, for one thing.
25 posted on 12/17/2003 10:18:50 AM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MizzouTigerRepublican
Why wouldn't Walter Williams be welcomed as a great American on this site?

Because he is a libertarian and wants to be free, not control others at gunpoint. Therefore many here detest him and anyone like him.

26 posted on 12/17/2003 10:20:37 AM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Walter is insufficiently statist for the drug warriors, for one thing.

Sign me up on Walter's side!!!!

27 posted on 12/17/2003 10:44:32 AM PST by Onelifetogive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: putupon
...the Free State thing is great, but New Hampshire is too cold, and they don't have any beaches either.

I think there needs to be a "Free District Project" in every state. If (when) the Free State Project begins to flourish in NH, it would be nice to have a bunch of friendly Congressman from all over the country to help keep the Federal troops off of the streets of Concord.

28 posted on 12/17/2003 10:52:01 AM PST by Onelifetogive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Walter Williams bump.
29 posted on 12/17/2003 11:33:42 AM PST by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
MERRY CHRISTMAS!!
30 posted on 12/17/2003 3:18:16 PM PST by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

"... the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what are not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch."

The history of the Court, not to mention last week's decision on the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform that attacks free speech, is proof that Jefferson was right and Alexander Hamilton wrong in his Federalist Paper No. 78 prediction that the judiciary would be the "least dangerous" branch of government.

I agree with nearly all Walter's comments.

 As you read through the Consitution, this statement will be repeatedly confirmed:

James Madison, His Legacy: Federalist Papers (FEDERALIST No. 51) But it is not possible to give to each department an equal power of self-defense. In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.

Congress can fire a President and a federal judge. Neither of those can fire anyone in Congress. And who controls Congress? "We the people."

Congress & the President have neglected using several Constitutional means of preventing and correcting what has become the "despotic branch."

The Federalist #81 The arguments, or rather suggestions, upon which this charge is founded, are to this effect: "The authority of the proposed Supreme Court of the United States, which is to be a separate and independent body, will be superior to that of the legislature. The power of construing the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution, will enable that court to mould them into whatever shape it may think proper; especially as its decisions will not be in any manner subject to the revision or correction of the legislative body. This is as unprecedented as it is dangerous. In Britain, the judical power, in the last resort, resides in the House of Lords, which is a branch of the legislature; and this part of the British government has been imitated in the State constitutions in general. The Parliament of Great Britain, and the legislatures of the several States, can at any time rectify, by law, the exceptionable decisions of their respective courts. But the errors and usurpations of the Supreme Court of the United States will be uncontrollable and remediless." This, upon examination, will be found to be made up altogether of false reasoning upon misconceived fact.

Federalist #81 goes on to explain and expound upon the very limited power of the federal courts.

Jefferson and Hamilton were both right. Hamilton described the design and Jefferson described what occurs when the government operates contrary to design.

31 posted on 12/18/2003 2:54:45 PM PST by Federalist 78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Federalist 78
I find it to be interesting that the Federalist Papers are so widely distributed and quoted, while the Letters from a Federal Farmer (i.e., the anti-federalists) are virtually unknown even amongst thoe who are fairly well read on the subject. It is especially instructive to read them in order. IMO, as it better frames the arguments for and against.
32 posted on 12/18/2003 3:56:00 PM PST by zeugma (The Great Experiment is over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
Antifederalist No. 78-79, like Jefferson, describes our condition when lax legislators and pusillanimous presidents fail to check/balance the federal judicary.
33 posted on 12/18/2003 4:09:20 PM PST by Federalist 78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

It is especially instructive to read them in order. IMO, as it better frames the arguments for and against.

AGREE!!!

 The anti-federalist explains what all the fuss is about in the federalist and describes a great deal of our present condition due to neglect.

34 posted on 12/18/2003 4:13:25 PM PST by Federalist 78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson