Yes or No?

Column by Paul Hein.

Exclusive to STR

There can be good reasons for not answering questions. If you are being questioned by the police, for example, prudence would dictate that you remain silent. Or perhaps you do not know the correct answer to a question, and would prefer not to guess and subsequently be proven wrong.

But you might also decline to answer if your answer could put you in an uncomfortable position. In that case, you might resort to evasion. I have found this to be a position frequently taken by politicians and bureaucrats. Therefore, I have devised a simple questionnaire for my public servants, asking only for Yes or No responses. Of course, they can ignore the questionnaire entirely, but in itself that is informative, since the questions are certainly reasonable. Silence, as a federal court has maintained, is itself a form of speech. The final form of the document will resemble this draft.

Dear Public Servant:

In order to better understand my relationship, if any, with the state, and therefore, with you, I would appreciate your answers to the following few questions. I enclose a self-addressed envelope for your convenience. (It is not stamped, but you have franking privileges and I do not.) Simply circle Yes or No. Thank you.

No. 1 Black’s law dictionary defines a statute as “the written will of the legislature.” Do you agree with that definition? Yes No

No. 2 The dictionary defines laws as “rules written by the government.” Do you agree with that definition? Yes No

No. 3 Are the “rules written by the government,” or “the written will of the legislature” binding upon me? Yes No

No. 4 The federal Constitution tells us that the powers of Congress are delegated to them by the people. Is this true? Yes No

No.5 My state’s Constitution (Missouri) declares that all political power is possessed by the people, and delegated by them to the government. Is this true? Yes No

No. 6 A person cannot, nor can many persons, delegate a power which they lack. Is that true? Yes No

No. 7 Government officials cannot derive from the people a power which the people do not possess. Is this true? Yes No

No. 8 The people cannot express their will as “laws,” or make binding rules obligating the general public. Is this statement true? Yes No

No. 9 Government officials routinely exercise powers which could not have been delegated by the people, or derived from them. Is this true? Yes No

No. 10 Thomas Jefferson wrote that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. Was he correct? Yes No

No. 11 Have you sought or acquired the consent of your constituents? Yes No

Thank you for your cooperation.

Will this tactic result in a growth of freedom? No. Its purpose is to make members of the ruling class simply think about what they habitually do automatically. It can accomplish this even if it’s discarded after a glance. A thought, once introduced, cannot be suppressed indefinitely. Sooner or later, it must be faced. Our Rulers have the great advantage of having been around for so long, that the validity of their existence is taken for granted, by their victims, and certainly, by them themselves. My thought is to introduce a therapeutic germ into this malign organism or, as Thoreau put it, to strike at the root.

10
Your rating: None Average: 10 (2 votes)
Paul Hein's picture
Columns on STR: 126

Comments

richyankee's picture

Paul, I do believe that this is an accurate strike, at the root so to speak. I question whether the integrity of the intended recipient of this treatment could withstand the treatment.

In the context of living in that saturated environment of lies and deceit, can a person recover his senses?

It's a pleasant and heartwarming dream, one I have had many times. Yet, there they are, like sick dogs.

I'm not suggesting euthanasia.

Cheers,
Rich

Samarami's picture

This is a couple weeks old, but since nothing's going on here nowadays I'll reflect a thought or three.

I abstain from multiple choice exams. That includes yay or nay questions. The writer(s) of the exam(s) will virtually always redirect "bad" thinking (in her opinion) to "more acceptable" thinking. Participants are thus not-so-surreptitiously propagandized throughout the entire gamut of multi-choice testing. This works nicely in the case for the state (which does not exist -- only psychopaths hiding behind that abstraction exist).

One can grade a ton of multi-choice easily, which makes them popular. Plus, if one of your superstitions is "statistics" you can arrange large numbers of square pins in round holes without anyone challenging the linear representation. That's handy.

All multiple-choice questions are loaded. They can be nothing but. As a repentant government ("public" ha ha) educator I certainly can see why all questions should be rigged from their point of view. Government "schooling" is in place for that purpose. One of the several definitions of government is "obfuscation" (another is "entrapment" -- another "murder").

"Written will of the legislature" and "Rules-written-by-the-government" are non sequiturs, since "legislature" and "government" are merely collectivist denotations. Only people have wills and can write rules.

Reflecting on this has caused me to examine just how far out of mainstream I've percolated in my dotage. Not just in mainstream conventionality, but anarchist and libertarian orthodoxy as well. Paul states that this is a questionnaire for "...my public servants..." If he considers lunatics acting under the guise of senators or "representatives" at a place they're now calling "Missouri" as "his", then my comment is off base.

I an commenting from the perspective that I have no "public servants" -- in that part of the world, or anyplace else.

The inveterate anarchist inherits the nomenclature of loner. Sam

Glock27's picture

Sam. Liked the "Loner" article. Reminds me much of myself. I can count all my friends on one hand. I have a lot of associates, but very few friends. Former New York Mayor, something Dumberg is here in my state and has gotten some legislatures riled up that they have created legislation to start confiscating our firearms for no legitimate reason and we have no due process to lean upon. Two House bills and two senate bills to be considered. Since we are a state heavy into hunting I am hoping for a special season to be announced. Anyway, when a cop comes knocking at my door he's not selling light bulbs, or checking my special season permit.