The libertarian solution to the monopoly on violence is decentralization. A libertarian seeks to separate the powers of government into smaller pieces. How far one carries this fragmentation of power differs from one person to the next. The difference in individual ideas validate the view of the anarchists that power needs to be broken down to the singular person. From the federal to the states, the states into counties, the counties into households, and the households down to the individual, power is to be dissolved until one may rule over only one’s own property. Anyone who does not wish to restrain their power to themselves wishes to have power over another. Decentralized power is a weakened power.
Think of power as a stone. A 5 pound stone dropped on the hood of a car will do some noticeable damage. That same 5 pound stone, granulated into 5 pounds of sand, when poured onto the hood of that car, might scratch the paint. It is of almost no concern.
The same strategy liberty-lovers call for to weaken the grasp of the state, government uses to weaken those they wish to control. A decentralized concept of the right to property clouds the individual’s view of who and what is aggressing upon him, and from where. The equal rights advocate works to silence the bigot, and once successful has silenced everyone. The typical “gun rights” supporter rails against the legalization of drugs. The typical drug decriminalization advocate, is all for the regulation, and maybe even prohibition of private firearms.
What the “gun guy” doesn’t understand is that the forces charged with rounding up all the drugs and the drug users will be the same forces that round up all the guns and gun owners. These forces are all well trained and funded thanks to the war on drugs. What the “pot smoker” doesn’t understand is that greater restrictions of private arms reduces the individuals ability to defend himself, and leaves the state in the position to enforce any whim with its guns. The same paramilitary forces will be coming through their door for one thing or another.
The attributes of your right to property that you hold dear, you fiercely protect. Those attributes that seem less important you might leave within the reach of tyrants, and like pulling on a leg, the body will follow. You cannot remove a part without sacrificing the whole. No one person truly has a right to property in the presence of a state. If what is supposed to be your property can be taken from you, if its legal transference from you to the state can be initiated by the state, you are not the real owner. If you can be conscripted, you are not the real owner of your body. Whether it’s your life, free speech, firearms, drugs, raw milk or a business, it is all the property of an individual.
Where there are taxes, no individual can truly own property. Not only are taxes theft from individuals buying and selling goods, services and labor, worse still, the funds are used to feed the imaginary thing called “the public”. Could public property really exist? Ostensibly, you are co-owner of the property called public, be it a public library, park, or the very roads you drive on. Yet everyday individuals must ask permission to use the property they co-own. They must pay for its use. They can be kicked off of it, and charged with trespassing on it. Public property does not exist.
The public itself does not exist. The public, when looked at in its effect, can be defined as everyone except you. And everyone can define it correctly the same way. Meaning that no one is the public.
Over centuries, there has been a line of debate that argues Christianity as a polytheistic religion. “The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost” are divided up into three distinctly separate personas. The Holy Trinity is best illustrated as H20. In its various forms, it can be ice, water, or steam. It is still H20, no matter how it is presented. The Trinity is not many, it is one. You cannot attack one aspect without attacking the whole.
Your rights as an individual is the same. It is The Holy Trinity of your right to be. That is “Life, Liberty and Property”. The forms your right may take might vary, but never ceases being your one true right: the Property Right. There is no other right, only aspects and variations in how the Property Right manifests.
Life. ~ It is given to you, much like an inheritance or a gift. It is yours without equivocation. None have any claim to come and take it by force.
Liberty. ~ It is what you do; it is how you spend your life. None have any claim to direct you in the manner in which you live.
Property. ~ Like “The Son”, property is the physical, the tangible product of the trinity. It is what you have legitimately acquired during the exercise of liberty and life.
The four essential components of property right can be described as:
The legitimate right to use the property.
The legitimate right to earn income from the property.
The legitimate right to transfer the property.
The legitimate right to the enforcement of property right.
Individuals have the right to own their body and mind. The products of your bodies’ labor, and your minds’ thoughts are extensions of you. Your right is not plural. They are not many, and the enumeration describing aspects of your right is no more than a division to weaken you, the individual, and separate you from your property right.
The bill of rights is a fraud. Government leads you to believe you have property rights. That your right to property is divisible and contingent on the type of property, the circumstances under which they may be owned, what arbitrary jurisdictional boundaries you’re surrounded by, and whether you have paid the proper fees for permits and licenses. Imagine how hard an average person would resist losing their one and only Property Right. The belief in enumerated rights, in limiting rights concerning an individual, was and is a key to control by those who would claim to grant those rights. The founding lawyers knew this. Your Right divided will fall.
This redux version of Pastor Niemöller’s poem, shows how fragmentation of people or property right can eventually lead to tyranny:
First they came for the intoxicants, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a user.
Then they came for the guns, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a gun owner.
Then they came for the business’, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a business owner.
Then they came for certain religious groups, and I did not speak out—Because I was not among them.
Then they came for those who would move from one place to another, and I did not speak out—Because I did not travel.
Then they came for my neighbor’s house, and I did not speak out—Because I paid taxes.
Then they came for certain subjects of speech, and I did not speak out—Because I had nothing to say.
Then they came for me, and there was nothing left of me.