The constitution DID limit the US government at one point. But, after the mass immigration of the early 1900s and then the world wars, they lost the FEAR of revolution that kept them in check. When the US populace ALLOWED machine gun and gold confiscation without a massacre, it was the signal the tyrants needed to begin cutting the restraints from the bureaucracy.
As one of "those in the US," this became quite obvious to me decades ago. The constitution, along with all the other BS "laws of the land" are nothing more than window dressing for the underlying tyranny that is the state.
Those in power do whatever they please; the state is an evil beast that we need to starve. We can do that by building and living in parallel, voluntary, decentralized communities:
https://peakd.com/kingdom/@creatr/the-state-or-god-s-kingdom-a-comparison-chart
Discussion
Have you read Lysander Spooner?
All nation-states are built on a structurally flawed foundation; the God-forsaken notion that any human or group of humans has some magical right to use coercive force to control other humans.
And that idea is baked into the US constitution, so while things began better than they are now, there's never been any chance of long term success.
I have not read spooner. That being said, force is inevitable. It is the automatic default in any human interaction save when it is tamed by other force. So long as avoidance becomes impossible (such as in large and populous civilizations) there will ALWAYS be force, be it defensive or offensive. Governments are instituted amongst men so as to subordinate force to its proper retaliatory purposes.
But I will agree that this leads to a state of entropy wherein, eventually, whatever power a state possesses becomes like the One Ring and brings its elites into tyranny over the generations until a nation is ruled by sniveling cowards and snakes.
But then that state falls and, from the anarchy, comes more violence. There will ALWAYS be force. Even in a totally anarchic system, the moment a man is robbed and robs back what is his, or rescues the stolen property of his friend, that man BECOMES the state. Whenever one group of people come together to fight off barbarians, that militia captain BECOMES like government.
Offensive force is utterly immoral, condemned by all men of good will and prohibited by Jesus/God. Nothing "instituted among men" can make that right.
All such warring organizations will ultimately self destruct, or atrophy as they are replaced by moral systems. I consider such organizations the fiefdoms of satan, and believe scripture teaches that God himself will ultimately destroy any holdouts.
Defensive force is moral, but optional, depending on the circumstances and choice of the individual or group being aggressed against.
"Anarchy" literally means "no rulers," a situation far more prone to peace than a society oppressed by control freaks who believe they have a right to rule their neighbors.
I didn’t say offensive force was moral. I said it is inevitable. Conflicts will arrive. No moral society will be so perfectly free of any social conflict so as to avoid it entirely. Criminals always exist, even in the most peaceful ones.
Anarchy does NOT produce peace. There is no such thing as an anarchist society that remains peaceful for long. Inevitably, 2 or more groups disagree on something and then come to blows. The court system of a government is meant to dissipate this natural human tendency.
The problem is when the courts become the WEAPONS of an immoral state, ignoring criminals whilst dissipating your moral Revolution against them.
PS I recommend Spooner's "Constitution of No Authority."
Good reading.😁👍😆❤️🔥
Bookmarked. Do you know if there is an audio version? I work outside in construction, so it I usually easier for me to get around to a book if there is one.