scratch-mark

Sumpreme Surprise

Well, I see that while I wasn’t looking, the Supremes went and voted to take away your right and mine to own property. Take note: that emphasis on the word "own" is of critical importance.

At any rate, they didn’t take away anything, from a political standpoint; for, the state can’t grant that which is not its to grant in the first place, and given that, can not then take it away.

The right to own property is a natural one. It’s immutable, inalienable. It’s a given, per our natures as volitional beings. Where the state exists, the state usurps all property under its jurisdiction through the use of guns, fists, billy-clubs, jails, and kangaroo courts. It withholds its power from time-to-time for the purpose of propping up and maintaining the illusion of freedom and rights; to maintain The Big Lie.

Looks like they let their guard down just a bit here and exposed their true nature, the nature that has been there all along and that I’ve been telling you about all along.

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More

4 Comments

  1. Walter E. Wallis on June 26, 2005 at 07:17

    The solution is to make them pay the improved price for the land.

  2. OTTMAN on June 26, 2005 at 13:13

    Please see my post on this subject.

  3. Richard Nikoley on June 27, 2005 at 08:52

    The point of my post is that there is in essence no meaningful distinction to make between taking people's homes at gunpoint ("compensation" being irrelevant–theft by force is theft by force) for a nw freeway or taking them at gunpoint for a shopping mall.

    None whatsoever. All this "public use" bullshit is completely beside the point and always has been.

    The Supreme Court decision is no big deal in light of the original license to steal granted in the Constitution. It simply clarifies it–quite accurately. The problem is the state and its Consitution of no authority. Deal with the root, not the inevitable consquences.

  4. Ian Rowan on June 27, 2005 at 04:59

    OTTMAN: If I give you something in exchange for what I have taken from you against your will, I have still committed theft. Who defines "just compensation"? The only honest way to determine something's value is to see what someone will offer for it, and what its owner will accept as an offer. A thing is worth whatever someone will pay for it. But we are not talking about honest people who pay for what they want, we are talking about thieves who take what they want, because they know there will be no consequences.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

YouTube1k
YouTube
Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
40
45
Follow by Email8k
RSS780