No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority [Lysander Spooner] on Amazon. com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. But whether the Constitution really be . No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority. December 9, Lysander Spooner. The greatest case for anarchist political philosophy ever written. Narrated by. Treason by Lysander Spooner · No. 1.→ Spooner issued three pamphlets carrying the title of No Treason, numbered 1, II, and VI. Spooner.

Author: Terr Majas
Country: Liberia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: History
Published (Last): 26 December 2015
Pages: 75
PDF File Size: 13.71 Mb
ePub File Size: 17.18 Mb
ISBN: 180-7-50018-726-7
Downloads: 62730
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kijar

The Constitution No Treason No. Spooner’s appeal is treasin on unproved premises, which some lysandder might find appealing while others might find completely inconsequential, empty blabber. The Constitution of No Authority That’s a very interesting inference since I voted for a candidate with no chance of winning in part because he would follow the Constitution whereas the Democrats and Republicans ignore it.

Lysander Spooner was an American individualist anarchist, entrepreneur, political philosopher, abolitionist, supporter of the labor movement, and legal theorist of the nineteenth century. It would only indicate that the supposed welfare of their posterity was one of the motives that induced the original parties to enter into epooner agreement.

They say they are only our servants, agents, attorneys, and representatives. If you love Rousseau’s “Social Contract” you will hate this book; for they are emphatically opposed. If, therefore, Congress have that absolute and irresponsible law-making teason, which the Constitution — according to their interpretation of it — gives them, it can only trrason because they own us as property.

Spooner’s logic is complex and deals with many of the nuances of voting for a document and agents congressmen etc. And to make it binding upon any one, his signature, or other positive evidence of consent, was as necessary as in the case of any other-contract.

He then quickly moves to discuss the actual war and how many Americans were not in agreement with the decisions of the government of the United States or its ideals, which triggered a desire for secession.

No Treason

Get to Know Us. The single despot stands out in the face of all men, and says: And as we can have no legal knowledge as to who the particular individuals are, if there are any, who are willing to be taxed for the sake of voting, we can have no legal knowledge that any particular individual consents to be taxed for the sake of voting; or, consequently, consents to support the Constitution.


To save his life, he gives up his money to this agent. Taxes, Lysander states, cannot be claimed as proof of consent, because they are compulsory, therefore not consensual. The only arbiter I acknowledge is the sword: Neither can exist without the other.

Follow the Author

Spooner is rabid and lucid here. Spooner had a clear notion of “the principles of natural equity. But they are not traitors in fact; inasmuch as they betray, and break faith with, no one. This business of lending blood-money is one of the most thoroughly sordid, cold-blooded, and criminal that was ever carried on, to any considerable extent, amongst human beings. Rulers can ascend or be deposed at the behest of the bankers. And all talk about them, in matters of government, is mere absurdity.

Individually they furnished money for a common enterprise; taking, in return, what purported to be corporate promises for individual loans.

Thanks for telling us about the problem. Or they believe that the Preamble to the Constitution is part of the Constitution, which the Supreme Court found not to be so? The Lysander Spooner Reader.

In short, the industrial and commercial slavery of the great body of the people, North and South, black and white, is the price which these lenders of blood money demand, and insist upon, and are determined to secure, in return for the money lent for the war. This short work is a welcome stimulant toward critical thinking in political philosophy beyond the veil of constitutionalism, and to the heart of the issue: If that principle be not the principle of the Constitution, the fact should be known.

Moreover, tgeason body of men, existing at any one time, have the power to create a perpetual corporation.

No Treason – Wikipedia

Feb 04, David rated it it was amazing Shelves: No Treason at Wikisource. In short, the North said to the slave-holders: Want to Read Currently Reading Trfason.


It is of no importance that I appointed him, and put all power in his hands. For if one cannot leave the union, it is no union at all, but slavery in and of itself. And the despotism, and tyranny, and injustice of these governments consist in that very fact.

The principle that the majority have a right to rule the minority, practically resolves all government into a mere contest between two bodies of men, as to which of them shall be masters, and which of them slaves; a contest, that—however bloody—can, in the nature of things, never be finally closed, so long as man refuses to be a slave. Probably still worth skimming as a historical document but overrated. They care no more for a king, or an emperor, than they do for a beggar, except as he is a better customer, and can pay spooer better interest for their money.

What do they prove?

The problem with equating consent with any type of participation for the state, Spooner argues, cannot be fully achieved, because not everyone necessarily agrees with the ways of showing consent or even with the ideas provided by the government. Disclaimer- if anyone can possibly pervert Spooner’s views on the Civil War into being “racist” and in support of slavery; there is no lydander for them but dense.

No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority: Lysander Spooner: : Books

bo So in that sense, though I find his arguments very persuasive, I think they may be in danger of being missed by someone unable to get over his constant refrain of referring to the State as a band of “robbers and thieves. It is plain, in the first place, that this language, as an agreementpurports to be only what it at most really was, viz. He then describes a scenario in which people who resist subjugation might be killed, even by the hundreds of thousands.