The Levels of Government in Action, Facilitating Communication

                          The Role of Government

                                     Prologue

     Government is naturally born from dispute just as a child comes from a
woman and a man. The mother of government is dependence, and the father is
conflict. If men were to always agree and always remain equal in self-right, no
government would exist. As problems are best solved when tended to at the
level most intimate with those conflicted, governmental action should take
place at the lowest possible level.

     The role of government is to allow for the unimpeded natural progression of
man to the final disposition of the individual. The government must facilitate
communication between the multitudes of individuals whenever necessary, as
this is the foundation of government; representation. The government of a
nation must be directly controlled by the individuals which grant power to the
government, as the government is an agreed upon mediator between groups of
individuals.   Government shall allow for this natural progression by defending
against imperial or oppressive persecution that inhibits the individual from
progress. The government must not allow tyrannical power to deter the natural
progression of the individual. Government is not to falsely impede or
accelerate the natural progression of man. Government must not steer any
individual or group of individuals to a set destination in the progress of man.
Above all, individuals must do for themselves.

Section 1: The Levels of Government in Action, Facilitating
Communication

     Government is meant to resolve an otherwise impassable conflict. All
levels of government serve the exact same function; the only difference is the
target population on either side of the governmental mediation. The most
influential level of government in the United States of America must be the
State level governments, as the State is the hub at which all levels of
government in the United States intersect. Each of the States is its own
sovereign entity cooperating with each other State.

     Each State is further broken down into counties, or similar divisions.
Within these divisions, there are districts, cities, and communities. It is within
these local areas where government begins; government does not begin at the
federal level. Within the local areas, people come together to identify city
council members and mayors. Within the abilities available at this local level
of government, this is the level at which all issues of individuals are to be
resolved. For those areas unincorporated by town and cities, their first level of
government must fall at the county level of interaction. In larger cities and
towns, the individuals who make up the community may find it beneficial to
identify sub-district representation and more localized governmental sub-
divisions, so that they may better articulate their wants, needs, and desires to
a population with which they are incapable of democratic interaction, thereby
utilizing the republican, representative form, government as it is intended.

     Communities of individual people come together to live a symbiotic life
with the nature and other individuals in a geographic region. Government
comes into play when the citizens of a community require interaction with
another community. As individuals, we each retain the natural right to
cooperate, or not, with any other individual.

     When we join communities, we extend a limited amount of cooperation and
good faith to the community. When other individuals in other communities
require our assistance to fulfill a want, need, or desire the route they take to
request this aid is government. There is no need for government without first
the need and inability to communicate. If an individual requires other
individuals or communities to provide aid to fulfill their wants, needs, or
desires, they must appeal to the community or individual directly. Government,
is only to be utilized when an individual or group of individuals are incapable of
providing support to the appealing party and the appealing party is incapable of
democratic interaction; therefore resorting to representative forms of
government.

     A clear and common example of required government interaction is for the
access to natural resources. Access to man made, fabricated, and produced
resources that are producible by a select group of the population may also be a
reason for government in the same way access to natural resources are made.
For instance: If a community is established downstream on a river, for whatever
reason, from a previously established community, governmental representation
may become necessary to make sure the community upstream does not impede
on the community down stream’s access to the natural resources of the river. In
essence, send a few representatives upstream to let that community know that
it hinders the life of downstream residents if sewage is dumped in the river
upstream.

     If possible, the groups of individuals must communicate with each other
without the intervention of government. If a family is unable to provide
themselves with sustenance, they must first appeal to the individuals within
their community before requesting governmental intervention. If the family in
need asks a few other families for support, they may find much more efficient
and effective aid than by going first to the government. This may also improve
upon the motivation for the family in need to hold a greater role in community
support when they are able. This also eliminates the need for government
intervention; thusly, eliminating impeding on individuals who would otherwise
not be involved with the support of the needy family.

     Individuals within a community must communicate their wants, needs, and
desires to each other if they are unable to accomplish their satisfaction on their
own. The purpose of a city council is to bring the wants needs, and desires of
the cities divisions to the attention of each other. The city council members
must then decide if their divisions are capable of supporting the requests of the
other divisions. If a council member deems the district they represent capable,
then the council member of that division must present the situation to their
constituents for consideration. The individuals of the district must decide on
their own if they are willing and able to support the specific wants, needs, or
desires of the division requesting assistance. If the division chooses to
support the specific wants, needs, or desires of the requesting division, then
the problem is solved and the governmental intervention ceases. Then only the
representatives and individuals of the divisions supplying and receiving aid
maintain this assistive relationship, as to not encumber districts not involved in
the aid.

     If no other division of a district is adequately willing or able to support
other divisions within the district, then the request for support is brought up to
the city council. The council member assigned as the representative for the
district where the divisions cannot resolve the wants, needs, or desires of its
individuals may bring it to the other city council members representing the
other city districts. These district representatives then pass the request up to
their division representatives, who in turn present the situation to the
individuals who live in the districts. Once these individuals democratically
come to a decision about the request, they pass the response to the individuals
whom originated the request by way of the division representatives, to district
representatives on the city council, and back up to the original requesting
individuals through their identified representatives.

     If the people of the districts decide that they can come together and
support the request, then the mayor of the city will formalize whatever
agreement the communities make between the districts and enact it into
enforceable law. This is so that the groups of individuals uphold the agreement,
which they have entered themselves into, to each other by penalty of law.

     If the districts within a city cannot support the original request, the mayor
of that city may then present the request to the other mayors in the county, or
whatever similar sub-state level breakdown is applicable to this level of
government. Those mayors may then present the request to their constituents
by way of district and division councils. The citizens’ pass their responses to
the requests to the originating party in the same manner; down through
division and district councils, to the mayors, through district and divisional
councils, to individual citizens. (Essentially, this process repeats going lower
down the governmental chain until it reaches the federal government.)

     If the people of the cities within the county decide that they can come
together and support the request, then the county seat will formalize whatever
agreement the individuals in the cities make between each other and enact it
into enforceable law. This is so that the groups of individuals uphold the
agreement, which they have entered themselves into, to each other by penalty
of law.

     At this point, if the people of a county cannot come together to provide,
willing and able, for a community’s needs, wants, or desires then the
community must attempt an alternate route. The people requesting support for
their wants, needs, and desires must attempt to gain support from a larger
population audience.

     The individuals in want, need, or desire must now send out their request
for aid to the individuals in other counties. These individuals must present
their wants, needs, and desires to their State representative. These State
representatives must then present the request to the State representatives of
the other state districts. These other State representatives may then present
the issue to their constituents. Upon the receipt of response from the
individual constituents, the State representatives must relay the response to
the individuals who originated the request.

     If the districts within a State can are willing and able to provide support to
each other, the State governor takes a role similar to that of a mayor. The
governor enacts a law agreed upon between the individuals throughout the
state whom agree to support and receive the aid requested. The governor
enacts this law so that the individuals agreeing to aid and to receive become
liable to their words of faith. This law must be specific to the action, which will
take place between the people involved in the aid as well as the aid itself.
This law must not bind all of the citizens of the State. As with any laws, this
law must only bind those specific individual citizens agreeing to provide and
receive the support. This way, only those willing and able to be involved with
the action are held liable for the neglect or abuse of the aid.

     If a solution to the requesting communities wants, needs, or desires
cannot be found within the State, the State legislature must decide (with
special representation from the requesting community) whether or not to have
the governor seek resolution from the citizens of other States. If the State
legislature deems it appropriate to have the governor seek assistance from
other States, the governor must do so. The governor of the State requesting
aid for a community must present the request to the governors of the other
States of the Nation. These governors may then present the situation to the
citizens, which they represent, by way of the State representatives.

     If States of the Nation obtain a solution to the requesting community’s
wants, needs, or desires, the General Governor* will execute an Agreement of
Law. This Agreement of Law will bind, by law, the individuals agreeing to
provide and receive support. The Federal Court, in the Federal Court district
where the States are located, will execute this law. If the States involved in
the law occupy more than one Federal Court district, the Supreme Court shall
have jurisdiction.

     If the solution to the to the communities wants, needs, or desires cannot
be found within all the States of the nation, the individuals of the community
have yet another course of action with which they may pursue a resolution.
The community must proceed to seek support for their wants, needs, or desires
from outside of the Nation. The community must present their request to the
United States Congress through their United States representative. The
representative of the requesting community must present the situation to their
peers. Through great debate between the Representative of the individuals of
the United States, as well as, interaction and communication with each United
States representatives own constituents, the House of Representatives will
decide whether or not to submit the request to the United States Senate. If
the House of Representatives decides not to pass the request onto the Senate,
the request goes no further. The community requesting support for their want,
need, or desire must continue to search for a resolution within the nation.

     If the Senate receives the request, they too must debate the request in
effort to decide to pass it on to the President of the United States. If the
Senate does not pass the request on to the President, the request goes no
further. The community requesting support for their want, need, or desire must
continue to search for a resolution within the nation. If the United States
Senate approves the request, it will then go to the President of the United
States of America.

     The President must then consider the request. Since any request from the
President will be seen, and rightfully so, as a request from the totality of
individual citizens of the United States of America, the greatest care must be
taken during these events. Any requests of this magnitude must hold
precarious and planetary repercussions. The President of the United States of
America must only present the most awesome and dire requests to the world.

                                     Section 1: Alibis

In Cases of Emergency.

     In the case of responding to an emergency, either interstate or
international, where both the democratic and republican decision making
processes are too slow for an appropriate response; the heads of State or
Nation, respectively, shall reserve the right to provide a response upon their
own judgment. The identifying factor for whether or not democratic and
republican response is to slow shall be that if the clamor for either response or
no response occurs before the Head of State acts. If the Head of State acts
prior to the people’s reaction to the event, the voice of the individuals shall be
heard through re-appointment or removal of the head of State from office.

     The Executives of government must keep in mind to protect and defend
their own constituents before others. If wild fire threatens the safety of the
citizens of California, then California’s governor should not spare the emergency
resources to support Mississippi’s flooding coast. If Mexico threatens the
security and sovereignty of the United States, the President should not spare
the resources to liberate Oman from Yemen.

Laws Binding.

     Any laws at any level of government within the United States of America
may only bind those willingly partaking in the law. When six States decide to
take action and create a law between them, they must not assume that every
individual in each State is bound to that law. A majority of citizens are not
required to make a law. For example: If only 200,000 citizens between 6 States
agree on a law, only those 200,000 are bound by that law.

     No human can bind another human without the explicit specific consent of
the human being bound. Simple geographic location does not a grant or allow
for the assumption of consent to be bound by any law.

Constitutional Authority Dictating Executive Behavior.

     State Governors and the President of the United States of America must
maintain the right to veto action requiring them to seek outside aid. If a State
legislature deems it necessary for the Governor to submit a request to other
States, the Governor may veto this decision in accordance to the State
Constitutional law. The President of the United States maintains the same
veto authority in congruence with laws set forth in accordance by the United
States Constitution. Congressional bodies at the State and Federal levels may
overturn the veto and force the Executives hand by a vote, according to State or
Federal Constitutional based laws.

Solutions to Requests of Wants, Needs, and Desires.

     Not all solutions to an individual or groups wants, needs, and desires may
be necessarily the solution the originator thinks is appropriate. In most cases,
the person in want, need, or desire for a particular outcome will not achieve the
outcome. At times they may obtain their requirement, at times they may
obtain a compromise, and many times (perhaps always) they will obtain
nothing more than what they can provide for themselves. These outcomes are
appropriate.

Request for Support and Aid, Request to Support and Aid.

     Since this section has repeatedly referred to “requesting support for wants,
needs, and desires”, and the courses of action to do so, it may seem that I
have neglected individuals and entities desiring to give charity and to provide
unsolicited support and aid to others.

     The fact of the matter is that charitable actions such as these must take
the same path as actions seeking charity. It is of the utmost importance that
individuals provide support to one another at the most local level, before
searching outward. Appearances of opulence and grandeur are of no recourse
to those truly in need. When a neighbor suffers from want the same as a
foreigner suffers, animosity and angst will be obtrusive and blatant when you
aid the foreigner before the neighbor.

     That honorable action, charity, must be focused so that the greatest
benefit comes of it to those who need it. If the local neighborhood is so well
endowed, and the desire for charity remains, then it is most prudent to bring
the charity to the city. If the city is so fortunate that it does not desire the
blessing of the individual, and the desire for charity remains, then it is wise to
maintain this regional affluence and to offer the charity up to the individuals
within the State. When one State thrives and flourishes with abundance, if the
desire for charity remains, this State may offer its charity to other States,
increasing the National prosperity and strengthening independence. If the day
comes when all the individuals of the Nation are in a utopian state, and there
is no unfulfilled want, need, or desire within the Nation, then the strength of
that Nation may be exercised in supporting the wants, needs, and desires of
other nations of individuals throughout the world.


*The General Governor is simply a connecting entity, which provides the Supreme Court a law with which
to enforce action. At the point that the General Governor comes into action, the debates and decisions
have occurred. The General Governor is the neutral channel to the neutral Supreme Court to allow the
equal enforcement of a law agreed upon between multiple States.





               Section 2: Power of Representation, Authority of Law

     This is not a situation as was the American Revolution; where an entity
which became itself and was breaking away from a newly occurring outside
ruling agency. This is not a call for revolt as was the French Revolution; as it
would be foolish and useless to exchange our method of government with any
other. Any violent uprising in a nation so established as the United States of
America is a tragedy of life avoidable simply by doing nothing. Armed
revolution is for those nations with no such constitution and fortitude as the
standing method of governance upheld within the United States of America.
We, simply, need to correct the direction of influence within the government.
Government is for the individual to exercise over their self, Representation is
the course of action used to communicate wants, needs, and desires to a great
populace.

     This is an occurrence in which one made up of many must reflect upon
itself and perform the most painful surgery. We must cut away from our body
the harmful cancer that has become the ruling government, instead of the
representative government it is meant to be. We must replace the cancer with
healthy tissue. We must appoint those who are willing to represent others, not
those who are wanting to. The position of representative must be weak in the
individual holding the office and strong in the people which they represent. The
stresses of the position so powerful, yet so weak, should outweigh the
pleasures and benefits. A renewal of substance again made up of the people,
people with no lasting allegiance to any but those who identify them. No
bureaucracy, agency, or company shall guide intent of the government; but, the
will and desire of the people will speak with the tongues of those assigned to
represent them will guide the intent of government.

Section 2A: Limiting Law

     The government must not work control the individual persons who make up
the Nation, which the respective government represents. Every individual must
realize and exercise their authority over their own self. A single individual has
no natural, or actual, power or authority over any other individual or group. A
single individual has all power and authority over their own self. No other
person or group of people can dictate to one person what that one person must
or must not do. Only by the explicate and specific identification of one person
to another, can any person direct the individual bestowing the authority.

     Only by the rule of law can a government impose upon an individual. Only
through the threat, and subsequent execution of the threats consequence, can
a governing body cause an individual to perform in a particular fashion. Laws
that are meant to protect the individual are necessary and clear. Laws that are
made for the common good, however, are relative and therefore biased against
any particular individual or group.

     The first priority of any law must be to harm no individual. If one aspect of
a law harms an individual in any way, it is a failed law. Regardless of the
amount of individuals aided by the law, the law cannot hurt any amount of
individuals. Whether the law takes a toll an individual’s livelihood, their
earning, their property, their intellectual pursuit, their physical being, or any
other effects of the individual; the law is a failure. No law shall exist that
promotes the welfare of any individual over any other individual or at the
expense of any other individual.

     If a law for the common good must be enacted then the law is attempting
to force action upon individuals. For instance; if a group of people desire to
behave a certain way, then there is no reason for a law to force these people to
act the way they want to. Some people consider the law to become necessary
when an individual from this group no longer wishes to participate in the
activity. People create laws to force an unnatural behavior upon a person.

An illustration.

     The Mandrake family is plagued with illness. They are too ill to work and
have no money to purchase medicine or medical care to get better, so that they
can work. This vicious circle will inevitably lead to the demise of the family.
The Mandrakes appeal to the people in their community. Three other families,
the Dawn’s, the McKenzie’s, and the Harl’s decide to come together and
purchase medicine and provide support to the Mandrake’s. There is no law to
force the hand of these three families, they are simply able and willing to help.
After some time the Harl’s decide to no longer support the Mandrakes. This
causes the Dawn and McKenzie families to follow suit and no longer support the
Mandrake’s. The Mandrake’s illness gets worse and eventually the family dies
off.

     The city community sees this and decides that it is a horrible thing.
Therefore, the community comes together and passes Mandrakes Law, which
states:

A.) Mandates that no citizen may provide support to any other citizen matching
the condition of the Mandrake family.

-or –

B.) Mandates that all citizens in the community provide for any citizen in the
condition that claimed the Mandrake family, so long as no citizen under the
condition of the Mandrake family supports another citizen in the condition of
the Mandrake family.

-or-

C.) Mandates that any citizen who volunteers to support another citizen in
need, and willing to accept the aid, must continue to do so until the citizen
supported is deemed to no longer need the support.

-or-

D.) Any citizen may or may not at any time support any other citizen that falls
upon the same condition as the Mandrake family.

In any case available the law chosen will harm individuals.

     Law A may initially seem to harm the family in need. However, it is not
the law that harms this family. “Mandrake Syndrome” is what harms the family,
not the lack of aid. People must be sure to lay blame and responsibility where
it belongs, not where it is convenient and suitable; the misfortune of life is not
for the government to impede upon. The harm done in Law A is the limiting
freedom of individual action. Law A dictates that no person will aid another
person, who has “Mandrake Syndrome”, under the penalty of law. No matter
how much a person desires to help the “Mandrake Syndrome” sufferer, they
cannot.   This law harms the person wanting to help by forcibly limiting their
freedom and their right of self-governance; which, at least, would not harm the
subject of the support. Law A also indirectly dictates the choices of a person
who may receive the offer of support. Law A does not allow an individual to
offer aid, thereby not allowing the individual needing aid to accept or reject it.
Law A limits the individuals’ freedom of deciding for oneself what course of
action they will take in their life.

     Law B is the most harmful law of the group, though it is very similar to Law
A in that it eliminates the freedom of individual choice. It dictates to all
individualizes that they must support those with “Mandrake Syndrome”, so long
as they themselves do not have “Mandrake Syndrome”.   Law B disregards
individual creed, morals, ethos, bias, ethics, or persuasion. So long as a
person does not have “Mandrake Syndrome” they must offer some form of
support. Not only does this law tear away the ability to decide for ones own
action, but it forces an action upon a person. This law enslaves each individual
into servitude to those who have “Mandrake Syndrome”. Resistance of this
slavery is the penalty of law. Law B also forces those with “Mandrake
Syndrome” to accept the support of those without “Mandrake Syndrome”.
These people with “Mandrake Syndrome” become the masters of the enslaved
through this law. Whether witting or unwitting, willing or unwilling, this law
creates slaves and masters.

     Law C though initially seems non-damaging. It does not force the initial
action of any individual. However; Law C is like a park slide, each individual
may choose to go up to the top of the slide ladder, they may even be able to
climb down the ladder without getting on the slide, but once the individual
starts going down the slide they must go until the slide ends. Even though they
have no input concerning the length of the slide, the individual must now
continue until they reach the bottom. Once an individual chooses to support
another, they must do so until they are released from this support by the body
governing whether or not the supported individual still needs to be supported.
Once the person makes the initial decision, they no longer have the authority
to decide to continue the action or not.

     Law D is useless. Individuals will make this law simply for show, as it is an
optional law. Optional law is a waste of all resources that go into its
production. It is essentially telling people that they can do as they please,
which was already the natural right of the people. No law establishes natural
right; laws limit rights.

     The solution is to not create any law to support those with “Mandrake
Syndrome”. Let those in need appeal to those able to help. Let those willing
and able to help seek out those in need.

     Make no law that harms any individual. Make no law limiting the freedom
of the individual. Make no law binding an individual without their explicit
specific consent.

Section 2B: Representation

     Elect representatives not because of their own initiatives. Electing
representatives based on their own wants, needs, and desires only allows “the
lesser of two evils” to be appointed as a representative, by selecting someone
who you agree with most. Instead, elect a representative who will represent
you. A person must not be put in a representative’s seat unless they are
willing and able to express the wants, needs, and desires of those who appoint
them.

     The goal of any representative is not of their own making. If you appoint
somebody to represent you in an auction with explicate specific instructions to
buy a piano without spending more than $2000, but by using as little of the
allowance as possible, you expect that person to bid as low as possible until
they win the piano for you or the bid goes over $2000. This seems very
simple. If your appointed representative does not win the piano and the piano
sold for $600, you may inevitably fire that representative. Elected officials are
the same; other than the fact that elected officials are appointed by many
instead of by one.

     An elected official is not to simply go along with the majority of
constituents. It is not enough to say that 51 out of 100 people want, need or
desire sprockets, while ignoring the fact that 49 people want cogs. The elected
official must represent all 100 people; it is the duty and responsibility of the
elected official to pursue the wants, needs, and desires of all the constituents
they represent. That elected representative must pursue 51 sprockets and 49
cogs.

     This does not cause a conflict within the representative. The
representative can say, and completely believe, that there needs to be a tree
and a street light in the same spot. This is because it is not the representative’
s independent wants, needs, desires, beliefs, thoughts, or ideals that they are
expressing. It is because the representative is expressing the wants, needs,
desires, beliefs, thoughts, or ideals of the many individuals, which they
represent. From many individuals comes many perspectives, it is the
representatives job to put forth these perspectives.

Section 2C: Career Politician

     The career politician is an individual who disguises themselves behind the
voice of those they are appointed to represent. The stresses and
responsibilities of an office of representation should not be so comfortable as
to promote the desire of remaining in a representative position for life long
careers. However, under the special circumstances of constituents and
representative harmony there is no reason not to retain an appointed
representative for however long the individuals represented and the individual
representing can sustain the harmonious interconnection.

     The great dangers that lay within a careerist representative is the
development of callousness towards the wants, needs, and desires of
constituents; as well as, apathy towards the wants, needs, and desires and
neglecting the duties of the post of representative.

     Upon the decision of maintaining a career as a representative, the
representative is no longer concerned with presenting the wants, needs, and
desires of their constituents. Upon the decision of maintaining a career as a
representative, the representative is concerned with acquiring enough votes to
remain in office.   The career representative no longer represents the
individuals. Thus, the career representative becomes a career politician. The
politician now represents the majority. This politician now focuses on obtaining
and maintaining the power of representing many by only representing few. In
effort to maintain ones position as the representative of a constituency, the
politician will inevitably become deaf, dumb and blind to the wants needs and
desires of the constituents they represent. As the politician’s desire to remain
in office increase, so does the desire to maintain enough agreeing constituents
to keep them, the politician, in office. In this situation, the calls and cries of
any minority group of voting constituents go unheard. Only the goal of
appeasing the largest group is a matter of concern to the career politician.

     Although people generally consider it a success to be continuously re-
elected into a position of representation, it is only a success if the wants,
needs, and desires of all constituents are presented when necessary. Getting
51 sprockets for 51 out of 100 people is a failure of 49. The success of the
majority is moot. Only the success of the individual matters. Success of the
majority is a byproduct of the success of the individual.

     So long as the career politician remains in office and acquires the
appropriate amount of majority votes, there is no interest or concern for the
wants, needs, or desires of the non-majority. Pay close attention to the loud
cries of the majority, whether the politician stirs them or the population stirs
them, they will be the wants, needs, and desires, that the politician peruses.
No other perspective will matter. If the politician presents the minority
perspective this may upset that majority which places the politician in office.
Upon upsetting this majority, the career politician upsets the chances of being
re-elected. Once the politician is out of office, they lose the power they have
been cultivating and have wasted away their own individual success and have
lost their own individual wants, needs, and desires; they are then an individual
failure unto them self.

     These are the pursuits of a politician, to gain the natural power and
authority of many people and to utilize it to pursue their own wants, needs,
and desires. Thusly infringing on the natural authority of the individual
constituents they are charged with representing. The politician will neglect
responsibility of representing every constituent in exchange for representing
only the majority, the remaining difference of effort; the effort to represent the
49 individuals wanting, needing, or desiring cogs, is then utilized for the wants,
needs, or desires of the representative. For every individual there is only an
individual voice, for the politician there are 100 voices.

     If, however, the individuals of a community continually re-appoint the same
individual as their representative due to the proper behavior and effort put out
by the representative, there is no problem. To say that a group of people
cannot appoint any individual to represent them limits their natural delegation
authority. Simply because a person has been a representative of people for so
many years, or that they are from the wrong geographic area, or any other such
nonsense is a ridiculous limit on the will of individuals in a community.

(Now, if the individuals of that community themselves say, “We will not elect
any individual to represent us who is not of us.” This is perfectly fine and
reasonable for them to do, as individuals can limit their own behavior. If a
group of people in a community wants to appoint a representative from outside
of their community, they have all the right to do so. If 83 people, in a
community of 100, decide to appoint a local resident to represent them this is
their right. If the remaining 17 people want to elect a foreigner to represent
them, they can lobby to create their own community, or join one already
created, separate from the community of 83 and therein elect whosoever they
desire to represent them.*)

Section 2D: Service to Oneself

     It is not the people who exist for the government, but the government that
exists for the people. The government is not to lead the people but to
represent groups of people to other groups of people at whatever level of
government is applicable. The government is not to present a course of action
to the people. The government is not to provide a set of options to the
people. It is the people, each individual, that present courses of action to the
government. The government is simply the mediator between groups of
people. The government is not a decision maker.

     Individual people must support themselves at all times. Only when a
person fails, and the support one provides themselves proves insufficient, and
the individual has exercised all means of democratic solution, may they appeal
to the representative government to seek out their desired solution to their
want, need, or desire.

     It is only by the resolve of the individual that they may live, be free, and
pursue happiness. No individual; no matter the affect on their own life, liberty
or happiness may pursue these three at any expense of any other individual.
Only by the solitary means of one, can one be a true, free, and happy success.
No individual is part of any group; though groups are made up of individuals.
No individual can successfully serve another without themselves first being
served. I cannot ladle soup if I have no ladle or if I have no soup.

     All the activity of existence begins at the individual. Whether created by
the hand of God or by the chance of the universe, the individual is the
foundation at which all action takes place.   Two individuals did copulate to
create you, though there were two they were both individual. You have become
one, you are individual. Whether you view your action and your existence as
one who does or one who is done to, it must begin with you; or nothing will
occur.

Section 2E: Service Provided by the Government

     It is not by the work of the government that the government serves
people. The government simply cannot serve the people.    The government is
not a single entity, it is neither has conscience nor is sentient. The
government is a collection of individuals. The government is made up, simply,
by representatives of individuals, those who support the representatives, and
those who carry out the law as decided upon by the individuals. The
government cannot, upon its own will, do any thing. The government has no
will with which to act. The government is only as strong as the apathy of the
constituents each appointed representative represents. The authority and the
power of the government only comes from individuals not caring about what
happens to them. When the government acts under the guise of serving the
people, it is merely forcing another group of people to serve the target group
without the consent of the serving group. In this case, the government uses
rule of law to, for a time, enslave one group of people to another group of
people; when the serving group would otherwise have nothing to do with the
group being served.

     When the government claims to provide a service, it simply redirects the
resources and effort, by way of law, of individual people to work towards the
wants, needs, and desires of another group of people. Each individual is
actively affected; however, the government is a passive benefactor through the
filter of politics and politicians. Government services are not representative of
the individuals affected by the service. Whether or not the individuals charged
with tending to the wants, needs, and desires of others want to tend to these
other people, they must by rule of law. It is not the government providing a
service, it is an individual enslaved by fear of penalty who performs the service.

Section 2F: Permission to Exist

     It is not by the permission of the Government that the people have liberty
and freedom. It is not by will of the government that the people shall or shall
not have, or that the people shall or shall not do; as the government does not
have a will. It is by the pleasure of the people that the government has any
right to exist at all. It is by the will of the people, each individual, that the
government has any power or authority to have or not to have, or to do or not
to do. Without the collective consideration and agreement of all individuals
represented by a government, the government has no permission to exist. The
government cannot “will” anything. The Nation can will the government to exist
or not to exist.

*It is this individuals position that it is absurd to bring a representative in from outside the community.
Though neutrality in representation seems like a positive, it is not. The representative must have
excitement and fervor for the wants, needs, and desires they seek for their constituents. A person of the
community, which they represent, is also held intimately accountable for the action they take as a
representative of the individuals in the community. An outsider can simply return to their origin and not
be held to standard of action regardless of the damage they may have caused. Outside representation
also always creates an enormous conflict of interest between the individuals being represented and the
individuals of the representative’s place of origin.



Section 3: Guardian Against Tyranny and Oppression of its People

Section 3A: Guarding from within the Government

     The government, at all levels, must guard against itself from becoming a
tyrannical power. It must guard against the unfocused pursuit of
improvement.   By imposing means of improvement upon the people of the
community or nation, a government becomes oppressive by burdening the
citizens with activities and actions not natural to their own manner of
accelerating to their desired ends. The government of a city, state, or between
the states, or between counties, or at any level must not act for the people.
The people must act for themselves. The representatives cannot assume
authority to act on behalf of their constituents. The representatives making up
the government cannot impose upon the people, whether for better or for
worse, intentional or unintentional. The constituents must impose upon the
representative to act for them. No matter how innocent and pure the intention
of the government, the representative, may be, acting on behalf of the people
without the explicit specific consent of the people is tyranny. No matter the
seeming impracticality of referring back to constituent for a decision or action,
no legislative body can take action without that explicit specific consent for
every action taken. Only in the most dire and tragic of circumstances requiring
immediate action can the head of the executive branch of any level of
government act without first communicating with the constituents they
represent.

     Members of government; legislative, executive, or judicial, must always
support each other and ensure that they are each representing the
constituents. When a matter is brought to legislation and a representative
responds immediately, the other representatives must be wary of this. Other
representatives present must press the quick-tongued representative to ensure
the constituents are responding and not the representative. When the
legislator brings bills for the government executive to sign as laws, the
executive must ensure that all individuals involved were speaking through their
representatives, and not being spoken for by the representative.
Representatives and executives must be ever vigilant in this, especially when
agreeing with each other. Representatives and executives must be ever
vigilant in this, especially when disagreeing with each other. With these
courtesies and manners, the government can be effective in their pursuit to
properly and accurately represent the individuals of the Nation.

Section 3B: Monopoly Must not Harm

     The individuals and the government must guard from allowing one person,
or one group of people, the arbitrary power to control the manner of life of
individual citizens. A true monopoly must not exist.

     The individuals affected must refuse the service of the monopolizing power
before the government can interfere. The individuals of a population must
revolt against the tyranny which rules over them. Only when the power of all
the individuals cannot change the behavior of an arbitrary authority shall the
government be called upon to make laws, binding against the oppressor.

An illustration.

     A privately owned electric company is the only provider of electricity in the
region. This electric company decides to use a meter that frequently causes
electrical fires, thereby endangering the lives and property of its customers. All
of the customers in the region rail against this method of monitoring electrical
use. However, the electric company continues to impose this hazardous
monitoring method on its customers.

     Some customers attempt to create a different electric company, or to get
power brought in from a different plant in a nearby region. Although, due to
deals and private regulations in place there is no way to get electricity to this
region without getting it from the oppressive company.

Now is the time to involve government. The individuals must gather their
government and create a law, binding against the use of the dangerous
meters. This law must contain the behavior which it is binding against, a
reasonable solution to the problem, and the method of forced correction if the
electric company does not concede to the law (such as forcing the company to
replace the meters with their own profit, or allowing a second or third electric
company into the region, or turning over the electric company to a different
owner).

     This type of action is only allowable when the oppression harms such a
great amount of the population that social devastation will occur. Simply not
liking the behavior of a person or group is not grounds to burden them with
law.   It is not prudent to say a person can or cannot smoke tobacco in a
privately owned establishment, even if the establishment is accessible to the
public. Nor is it appropriate to dictate to a person that they can or cannot
smoke tobacco in an open public area. If an individual or group of individuals
does not desire to be affected by the smoke, they may simply avoid the area.
If a bar owner does not want smoking in his bar, let him decide. If a
community does not want smoking in a park, let that community decide.
However, a high school administrator cannot allow teachers to smoke in class
rooms because the inability of the students to remove themselves from the
harm. No level of government can dictate the behavior of individuals when no
oppression, or tyranny, or harm, or cruelty has occurred; this would only become
oppression by the government.

     Each level of government must tend to oppression and tyranny within its
own jurisdiction. No city can make the laws of another city. No State can
make the laws of another State. The level of government applicable must
create laws appropriate for itself. If a State make a law that only sprockets or
cogs are allowed to be had, then the one community that uses widgets will be
burdened. If an apartment building does not want to allow smoking in its
common areas, let the tenants come together and create this law. If the bar
owner does not want hats in his bar, let her decide so. If a city does not want
to allow widgets within their borders, let them decide so. However, one tenant
in a building cannot impose regulations on other tenants, just as one city
cannot set the speed limits of another city. All the patrons of a bar cannot
force the owner to allow hats in the bar. One business cannot deny the use of
widgets.

     These law-imposed controls are very dangerous; they must be nigh
unanimous. This is why only the most intimate local levels of government can
enact such imposing regulations. The level of government involved in the law
making comes through jurisdiction. If the electric company is using dangerous
meters throughout the State, then State level government must enact the law.
If the electric company is in only acting this way in a county, then the county
government must enact the law. If the United States is held in law with
Canada concerning behavior and activity in Lake Superior, then it is the Federal
level of law that must be enacted. Do not assume different levels of
government are of different importance. A law against murder enacted by a city
of 100 is just as powerful, and prudent, and formidable as a federal law against
murder. The law that a county enacts has no effect on the law of the State,
the law of the State has no impact on the law of a City. They can be the same
law or different. It is the matter of jurisdiction that is decisive.

Section 3C: Tyranny of the Majority

     Individuals must not hide within the title of majority.   Simply because 51
of 100 people prefer, for whatever reason, eating bread with the butter side up
instead of butter side down does not make it proper to do so; or improper to
eat bread with the butter side down. These 51 people cannot make it illegal
for anyone to eat bread butter side down. Preference of individual behavior is
not justifiable cause to force an action through rule of law. Simply because
1,506,239 out of 1,594,012 people would like for any particular behavior to be
suppressed and illegal, does not mean it should be so. By doing so, the
majority is oppressing the minority.

     If 1,506,239 people pass a law that drinking alcohol is illegal, it is not
1,506,239 people limiting the behavior and action 87773 people. It is 1 person
limiting the action and behavior of 1,594,012; this happens 1,506,239 times.
Every person forces the rest of the people out of a choice. Before creating the
law, each individual has the choice to drink or not to drink alcohol; after
creating the law, no individual has any choice whether to drink alcohol or not.
This can be applied to any law limiting action.

     In the United States of America, it is simple to accept that just because 98
people in the 100 Person City are Catholic, that there is no expectation, or law,
or imposition that the remaining 2 people must be Catholic. Even though the
large majority goes to church and behaves a particular way, no one attempts to
force the remaining minority to do so through an act of law. Then how is it,
that just because 98 people believe that smoking marijuana is wrong, that the
2 individuals must also believe this? Just because 98 people refuse to smoke
marijuana, why are the remaining 2 individuals expected to concede to the
desire of the 98 people and also not smoke marijuana? This stands for any
activity undesirable to the majority; whether it be marrying a sibling, raising
veal, cutting grass on Monday, driving faster than 45 miles per hour, having a
clay shingle roof, eating meat, not eating meat, or using a lunar calendar
instead of a solar calendar, there is no authority for a majority to dictate the
behavior of the minority. Those 98 people may appeal peacefully to the 2
individuals (without harassing them), but the 2 individuals should not be
expected to behave like the 98 just because there are 98 people behaving the
same way.

     Regardless of the majority or minority, both groups are made of
individuals; and no individual can burden another without the explicit specific
consent. The majority cannot impose upon the minority. The minority cannot
impose on the majority.

Section 3D: Guard Against Foreign Oppression and Tyranny

     Just as a woman cannot allow a man to rape her body; individuals and
populations, States and nations, governments and people cannot allow each
other to forcibly burden one another. It is the most important duty for the
government, the individuals that make up government, to shield the
constituents from foreign tyranny. The greatest responsibility bestowed upon
the State and Federal governments is to maintain the chastity of the
individuals of the nation which has charged them; to keep the individual
citizens of the Nation pure from blemishes of any invasion be it physical,
economical, social, cultural, or any other; and to allow only the courting of
those that the individuals of the Nation desire.

  Section 4: Governmental Identity, and Pursuits of Mankind

     The government is not to falsely impede or accelerate the natural
progression of man. Representatives must not falsely represent the people for
which they speak in effort to gain a benefit for the individuals. Representatives
must not fabricate, embellish, or otherwise magnify the wants, needs, and
desires of their constituents. Representatives must not lead each other astray
or cause one another to present fictional accounts of wants, needs, or desires
to the individuals they represent.

     A representative must only deliver the information originated from the
individuals in their constituency just as it was presented to them. All the
efforts of convincing and debating must be born from within the individual who
wants, needs, or desires the outcome. Representatives must not attempt to
sell an idea or action to each other. The natural inclination of individuals must
carry people to their final disposition. It is not through the talents and efforts
of other people through which we individuals must make our gains and
successes, but through the persistent and rigorous efforts of our own devices.
People must not pursue, and the government must not allow, benefit from
unwitting or unwilling participants.

     The natural acceleration of humanity must remain in the hands of individual
pursuits. Governments must not force mankind to a specified goal, especially
under the guise of “common good”. An individual, or a group of people who
come together with concurrent sentiment, cannot will another individual or
group to work towards an uncommon goal. The government, those
representatives of the individuals, must thwart any attempt to do so by clearly
understanding the wants, needs, and desires the people presented to them;
and they in turn to other representatives and in turn to other individuals. Thus,
the representative will be able to accurately and effectively put forth the
message to their constituents brought to them from another representative.
Thereby allowing individuals to truly present and respond to the wants, needs,
and desires, of other individuals.

     If the individual, or a group, misleads their own representative, then it is
of no fault of the representative. Since it is not the wants, needs, and desires
of the representative but of the people, then it is simply a case of individuals
lying to other individuals. The government cannot allow itself to be a mask.
The government cannot allow itself to be the scapegoat by which individuals
blame their follies. It is not the role of the government to take the blame or
burden responsibility of an outcome initiated by citizens. The individuals who
initiate the pursuit of a goal must be held accountable for the outcome.
Accepting blame or credit or any action or outcome would give the government
and independent identity. The government does not have an independent
identity; the people have the identity.

                       Section 5: The Judicial Government

     Once an initiative becomes a law, the responsibility of enforcing law is that
of Judiciary. The writers and participants in a law must not allow the judicial
branch of government at any level to interpret the law. When a law is written,
there must be no room for interpretation. The law must present in letter its
intention in spirit. The Judiciary community cannot be held liable for the result
of enforcing the penalty dictated by the law. Each law must clearly identify all
aspects and interaction created or caused by its existence.

     People cannot take the development of a law lightly since the penalty of
disobeying that law, intentionally or unintentionally, will inhibit or somehow
restrict the natural freedoms and rights of an individual. Though laws can be
made for many just reasons, they will always damage an individual’s natural
freedoms and rights.

     Any case tried against a law must stand on its own. No merits or
weakness from any other case gone up against the same law will affect the
outcome of the case at hand. An individual has either broken the law and will
be punished according to the penalty included in that law, or they have not
broken the law and will not be punished.

     The judicial branch of government will still have to debate each case in the
search for innocence or guilt; however, it will not be a matter of charging an
individual against a smattering of laws. In the trial of a perpetrator of crime,
whatever crime the individual is found to have broke, they will be punished for
that crime. If a person is being tried for killing another person with malice and
forethought; but is found innocent of malice and forethought and found guiltily
still for the death of the other person, the individual being tried will be found
guilty and punishable under the laws concerning manslaughter instead of those
of murder. If a person is being tried and found guilty only under a law
concerning trespassing, but through this trial is found to also have damaged
personal property, the person is then to be punished separately for trespassing
and for damaging the property; so long as the person harmed by the action
sees fit to press the charges.

     No crime can be committed against the state. No crime can be committed
against the government. Crimes cannot be committed against a company or an
organization. Just as crimes cannot be committed against these entities, these
entities can also not commit crimes. Only individuals can commit crimes
against individuals. If a group of men belonging to the Black Panthers beat
another man to death, the Black Panthers are not responsible for the death;
the individuals who directly contributed to the death are responsible. If a
member of the Ku Klux Klan burn a church, it is not the Ku Klux Klan
responsible for the arson; it is that one person who set the building on fire. It
is not Ford Motor Company or Anheuser-Busch who destroyed the telephone
pole; it is the individual who drove their vehicle while intoxicated and ran the
pole down. It is not the government who takes away a percent of the money
you earn every year; it is the people who receive the money (Just as it is not
the entire ethnic population that mugs you at the gas station, but that one
individual who held a knife to your face.)

     No action that produces no victim is a crime. No action an individual takes
that has no consequence against anyone else is a crime. No person who
explicitly and specifically consents to an action can be a victim of the action.
The fact that the money that bought the bullet that killed your friend originated
from a person who bought heroin from the shooter does not make the heroin
user a criminal; it is the shooter who is the criminal. An unpunishable action is
not a crime. A person committing suicide commits no crime in the act of
suicide; for no person remains to be punished. Attempting suicide is no crime;
there cannot be punishment for failure, for failure proves no action. If a person
attempts to kill themselves by jumping off a building but lives, and in the
process crushed a person they landed on, then the jumper can be punished for
harming the person or jumping off a building that is illegal to jump from; but
they cannot be tried for attempting to do something and failing. If the jumper
dies upon impact, only then can the estate of the actor be prosecuted. From
any action that incapacitates the victim to the point where the victim cannot
choose to press charges or not, the victims representative will make these
decisions in the victims stead.

     Doing nothing cannot be a crime. A law requiring a person to act is forcing
the person into slavery.

                                     Epilogue

     The government is only a means to an end. Government must not be a
goal within itself. Government is but a method of attempting to attain the goal
of an individual or a group of individuals in agreement with each other over a
particular specific platform. A government is only a tool to be used by
individuals and groups of individuals. There is no control over people that
people do not give each other.

     Only through the mutual cooperation can groups of people succeed. There
is no amount of government, or social engineering, or slavery, or penalty that
can force humanity to an accomplished society. The society will inevitably fail.
Though conflict may move society forward, it is only through cooperation that
society will succeed. Only through individuals choosing to cooperate with one
another can an idea such as society exist in practicality. Without choosing to
conduct an action upon their own volition, a person will resent and resist
performing the action in any way that does not cause a penalty upon them; in
some cases penalty is of no consequence. Fear of law cannot sustain peaceful
existence for the majority, for if each individual is afraid the entire population
is afraid. Fear of law cannot rule.

     We individuals, we citizens, must not fall under the authority of a
government; government is but the individual’s authority over the governing of
their own actions. The government falls under the authority of the individual.
Representation is what is commonly considered the “government”. The true
government is each individual exercising their authority of themselves.
Representation is the action that the idea of “government” is meant to take,
not control of the population. The government does not control individuals.
Groups do not control individuals. Individuals do not control other individuals.
Individuals control themselves.

                                                                                         -A.J.B

Table of Contents

Home