The Slave State and the Nation State: One and the Same by Bill Buppert

God knows I detest slavery but it is an existing evil, and we must endure it and give it such protection as is guaranteed by the Constitution.”

– Millard Fillmore

In this day and age when human beings have access to an unlimited fountain of human knowledge vertically and horizontally, one would think that slave people who are told they are free would know the difference. Not so, the government academic complex has been incredibly adept informing legions of both useful idiots and spirited scribblers and talking heads that are happy to massage the message. If one were a bird in a cage since birth, how in the world would you know what your wings are for? Much has been written on the terror of overtly totalitarian societies and various observers from across the accepted political spectrum have thrown barbs at one another over who lords over the worst measure of society.

The worthies in command would have you believe in the nonsense of Left and Right and everything in between, the apocryphal battle between fascism and communism in the twentieth century culminating in the West ironically winning the second half of WWI, the War to Save Josef Stalin, and making the planet safe for communism and the concomitant reaction of Western elites to build garrison states of their own to protect their subject populations from something…

There is no Left and Right but there are coercionists and individualist of which the former must intervene in every human transaction to exist and be made whole and visible.

So let’s make clear what our definitional constructs are before we begin the examination. The Cambridge English Dictionary has the following quaint definition of slavery.

…the condition of being legally owned by someone else, or the system in which some people are owned by others.

What is this notion of ownership?

Ownership is a condition of possession. If one lives in a nation state, you can be abducted at any time by the police authorities who are the pointy end of all political policies. There is a reason modern policing in America is originally a 19th century artifact of slave patrols powered by the Federal Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. You will note that this Act was merely an updated treatment of the same act from 1793 (I will note this is a mere two years after the ink is dry on the wretched Constitution).

Yet another reminder that the Constitution not only codified slavery but used government money to equip the patrols to repatriate the “human property”. Read Section 3 and 4 of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 to really get your government muscle on. This was approved on 12February 1793 with 48 votes in favor and 7 against and 14 abstaining.

This was the unfinished business of the slave clause from 1787 coup convention:

The Fugitive Slave Clause undoubtedly gave slave-owners something of value. The Articles of Confederation had contained no similar provision, nor had the Articles given the Confederation Congress power over the issue. At most, masters might attempt to exercise their common law right to recapture fugitives on their own, but it appeared that nothing restricted free states from denying that right by asserting that any slave who entered their territory could not be seized and returned.

Both of these laws also made it a crime to abet or provide sanctuary for runaway slaves. This is an important part of the modern police state in America with its huge odious infrastructure of confidential informants, accessories and all the active police state apparatchiks that comprise the bloated malum prohibitum legal/ custody complex in America.

One may look at the enforcers of repatriating the human property to its rightful owners the very birth of the modern police state in the West. No “professional” police force existed in the West before 1829. Many modern police apologist point to earlier origins but it simply has no basis in history.

The Philadelphia Police Department today claims to have been established in 1751, but – again – there were no Philadelphia police patrols in the 1700s, there was something much closer to what we would today consider “detectives.” There was simply no concept of “policing” in the sense of patrolling communities. While widely documented and easily verifiable, this simple historical reality sounds so far-fetched, that many who do not know any better would write it off as a conspiracy theory. And yet, this is what is taught in every introductory criminal justice college course.

Fabrications, lies and distortions should as a surprise to no one in modern America who has made even a cursory examination of American policing history and behavior.

Mr. David goes on to describe this critical linkage to today:

Kappeler notes that scholars such as Turner, Giacopassi and Vandiver all support this thesis of American policing emerging from slave patrols, explaining that “the literature clearly establishes that a legally sanctioned law enforcement system existed in America before the Civil War for the express purpose of controlling the slave population and protecting the interests of slave owners. The similarities between the slave patrols and modern American policing are too salient to dismiss or ignore. Hence, the slave patrol should be considered a forerunner of modern American law enforcement.”

I am simply underlining a point I have made repeatedly, the American police state is not about justice but law enforcement. Law is not even a nod to justice, it is merely the teeth of all political will by the nomenklatura invested with power in the nation state. It is the expansion of the slave patrol system to keep modern Helots in check. The modern bureaucratic methods have provided these government enforcers to go beyond anything imagined by the worst political actors in the nineteenth century.

The sad state of human cogitation demands a reappraisal of the basics. Opposition to human slavery means that it is wrong to:

Own other human beings. There is no corporate entity in America that can actually lay title to a human being and prevent them from opting out from working and leaving when they wish even though they may lose their jobs in the last instance. This is not the case for the government. They have what is virtually a carte blanche capability exercised all the time to officially kidnap people against their will for alleged violations against what is mostly malum prohibitum laws. These people are taken before levels and legions of government employed bureaucrats who determine the amount of wealth or property surrendered against their will or the opportunity to spend time against their will in the vast political gulag system in America. If you think this is hyperbole, remember that more than 85% of all inmates in the Federal system are non-violent offenders. Most inmate, probationers and paroles are guilty of trafficking in illegal vegetation and rendering products in the black market that alter people’s consciousness. The distinction between corporate entities and government coercion is the element of consent and opting out.

I am often amused by the usual suspects mewling about know the law. Anyone who says obey the law should have the entirety of the law printed out and then dropped on their head.

Government in its modern construct is simply a new form of slavery. The distinction between chattel and regulatory slavery is surprisingly subtle. Chattel slavery, also called traditional slavery, is so named because people are treated as the chattel (personal property) of an owner and are bought and sold as if they were commodities. While this may seem a remote memory, the analog serves well to describe the attitude and behavior of robed government employees to their charges brought before them in the American star chambers. Some of these worthies even use it to line their pockets or pump up their dossiers.

Libertarians often view taxation and the use of conscription as forms of slavery but I would suggest they are missing the mark. Whenever one has no legal or decriminalized choice to opt out, this provides the definitional basis for a society based on slavery. The many wonderful abolitionist fighters from the 19th century asked the right questions but didn’t take the question to its logical conclusion. No moral man would suggest that chattel slavery is wrong and tax slavery is not, they are simply different forms of ownership. In this case, the state through the silly notion of implied consent and physical existence in a tax jurisdiction assumes that a human may be compelled to pay through wealth or wages or time for his alleged transgressions against the laws of the nation state even if there is no victim and they are merely corrupt pronouncements by the political class for a whole raft of malum prohibitum crimes.

The government is so drunk on power it doesn’t even realize how it indicts itself with the Department of Fatherland Security training on human trafficking that betrays the construct of the modern nation state. Read the ad copy for the maximum state.

It all boils down to limits on self-ownership. Elegant and simple.

Yes, in modern America, I feel compelled to examine why is slavery wrong.

First and foremost, it abridges self-ownership. By its very nature, it violates the non-aggression principle or zero aggression principle. Self-defense is prohibited by fiat. If you don’t believe this, search for instances where police maim and kill folks running away from them.

Surprisingly, the 19th-century abolitionist movement came to grinding halt in 1865 in the mistaken impression that the Lincolnian project had eradicated slavery but the administration had simply codified it and put everyone on the plantation. The Federal government took the notion of the Constitutional “60 percent” citizen and nationalized the notion and put every American on the plantation. The 19th-century abolitionist did not take the argument to its logical conclusion. If slavery is wrong, isn’t all slavery wrong.

This demands a thought experiment: What is the primary difference between chattel slavery and the regulatory variant in the 21st century in America? Surprisingly, we discover that affluence and slavery can co-exist.

In the modern regulatory slave state, implied consent to the billions of words in the laws and regulations in the American plantation charges every human not with an obligation to liberty but instantaneous surrender to any policing or bureaucratic authority figure proclaiming their need to enforce political will on the unwilling and unknowing. Unlike indentured servitude, modern slavery equals no contract in regulatory slavery in which terms of social contract constantly change to the detriment of the servant. Implied consent equals government manufacture on a daily basis of whatever its evil whims may be.

So if you champion the nation-state as the greatest fruit of mankind, it is strange fruit indeed.And we know why Billie Holiday sang that tragic song.

Resist.

You cannot have Liberty in this world without what you call Moral Virtue, and you cannot have Moral Virtue without the slavery of that half of the human race who hate what you call Moral Virtue.

– William Blake

 

Bill Buppert
thirdgun@hotmail.com
14 Comments
  • Buppert:The Slave State and the Nation State – One and the Same | Western Rifle Shooters Association
    Posted at 06:32h, 17 May Reply

    […] Thought provocation for a Sunday morning. […]

  • MtTopPatriot
    Posted at 11:08h, 17 May Reply

    I think before I understood the scope of state slavery I exist under I was going to get out from under it cheaply. Or even get out from under it. Because I believed in my rightful liberty. And somehow that gave me special powers to avoid the worst of this all encompassing tyranny which permeates every facet of our lives.

    The truth is one can get out from under it, a little at a time, a bit here, a bit there, or all at once in a most exuberant manner. Both are expensive, and require careful consideration of the consequences. I like both methods, though the slow way, the incremental way is more practical and has more long term benefits, yet as time goes by I am increasingly fed up with the catch22 of state slavery.

    One thing I am beginning to sense is the increase of a kind institutional navel gazing the state is contracting. Hard to define, but it is part the law of diminishing returns an administrative dictatorship is vulnerable to, and its own preoccupation with its power and the need to preserve it.

    This is changing things in a fundamental way. Other peoples money is running out, the overhead required to keep the leviathan fed is a leviathan in its own right.

    The vassal states are going broke too. And slavery is a system of economy no less. Money is what greases the wheels. All that entitlement, the inordinately disgusting flow of tribute stolen from the productive, most goes to the feeding and caring of the administration of entitlement. The minions who administer the allocations of that booty. It in itself is a mini leviathan, but it is local, local, local, and it will do whatever it can to keep its paychecks and comfy desk jobs. And the first state organs that will suffer is the legbreakers. They go first. It has already begun at town and county level in many places. There is a pecking order to these things. And who ranks where has nothing to do with law, or concern for the citizenry and everything to do with survival and protecting the rice bowl. Those who administer didn’t get there because they are selfless servants.
    It is administrative implosion.

    It is bottom up, outside in collapse. It begins slowly, as it progresses it begins to cascade. It is the rot at the foundations of this leviathan. And slavery of the state ain’t going to save the state because it is slavery that is the disease.

    That little bit less of slavery at a time method? It is fighting back, it is being free, it is denying the sonofabitches their tribute, it is refusing to comply, it is creative withdrawal of consent. And every tiny bit adds up. And before long it ain’t a tiny bit. It becomes a cascade.

    As long as people think the state and its system of slavery is not vulnerable, well it ain’t vulnerable.

    That is the states greatest secret. Not only is it vulnerable, it is terrified a plurality figures its secret out.

    That virtue? Well I say virtue comes with a rightful plurality, there is built in moral imperative in a plurality that says MYOB!

    Refusing to comply is a most moral and virtuosic thing, it is dignity of Liberty.

    What could posses the caveat of virtue greater than refusing to be a slave no longer. If we are all slaves, the only way to go is to no longer be a slave.

  • Anonymous
    Posted at 13:20h, 17 May Reply

    Does the right of the government to tax stem from the government being an arbiter of disputes. If there is no impartial arbiter, we have mob rule or the wealthy and powerful ruling. Gang wars happen because drug dealers cannot approach an impartial judge to arbitrate between two parties.

    All people can benefit from this process just by living in the land. Courts and judges create peace. Therefore it is fair to tax everyone in the jurisdiction.

    A government that cannot tax is not a government. How is advocating no right to tax different from anarchy?

    • Bruce Wayne
      Posted at 15:45h, 17 May Reply

      When, exactly, do courts and judges create peace?

    • Bill
      Posted at 18:48h, 17 May Reply

      Thanks for the thoughts, so this giant monstrosity is capable of impartial arbitration and not being captured by the interests that feed it the loot and parasite class it requires?

      How is advocating no right to tax different from anarchy?

      An interesting question to pose to the crafters and administrators of the Articles of Confederation that forbade taxing authority to the central government. Please remember this site is friendly to the notion of a world of rules with no rulers. Even the most hidebound and morally deformed statist practice anarchy everyday with friends and family. The state is the external manifestation of the psychopathic mind made real and palpable.

    • Ron Olson
      Posted at 20:14h, 17 May Reply

      8====D)

  • TS Adams
    Posted at 15:16h, 17 May Reply

    The problem is the nature of man. It is a conqueror, enslaver and oppresser. It seeks security at the top of the pile. Security means personal control or paying or giving someone enough insentive to do it for you while you get on with your life. Some people are just natural born control freaks that promise to protect you from other control freaks that will leave you bleeding on the floor. Control freaks (those sheep dogs among us) seek positions of power with shiny badges and wooden hammers. And of course they must be paid to protect and serve; thus taxes must be paid.

    God gave Moses ten laws. The control freaks expanded them to about 1500 laws. So God tried again and reduced them to just 2 laws; love God, love your neighbor. But that didn’t work out either. So He decided to change the very nature of man. So He mauled His Son and hung Him on a cross in payment for everybodies sins and told the world that to believe in Him and His resurection would get your sins forgiven and get you a new nature, i. e., actually be spiritually “born again” and break your old control freak nature. That helped a lot; it helped me a lot. But still the majority of control freaks won’t give God control of their life or the lives of those they have captured. Thus the failure of government in any form whatsoever. And to think it will get better in total control or total freedom is delusional at best. The control freak will always find a way.

    There is no answer to the problem except that of eternal heaven or eternal hell. And these have been arranged for and we may rejoice. The lawless will get what they want which is total separation from the lawgiver and those with new natures do not need laws to control them. At least that will be the end result.

    • Benjammin
      Posted at 08:10h, 20 May Reply

      It seems to me your statement might be better as “the problem is the nature of some men”. That is how so many bad laws get enacted in the first place. Legislate to the exception.

  • RRND - 05/18/15 -
    Posted at 04:42h, 18 May Reply
  • Andrew
    Posted at 06:13h, 18 May Reply

    The “Law”.

    I’m assuming you’ve covered this in an entry I just haven’t read yet, but here’s an easy way to put it.

    Obey the “law” and “ignorance of the law is no excuse”.
    I liked your above statement, “I am often amused by the usual suspects mewling about know the law. Anyone who says obey the law should have the entirety of the law printed out and then dropped on their head.”

    Here’s an excellent illustration of your statement…

    https://street-pharmacy.blogspot.com/2015/05/laws.html

    Having that much “law” dropped on one’s head would probably be an eye closer.

    • Bill
      Posted at 06:25h, 18 May Reply

      Andrew,

      Indeed, I have written on that. Excellent post you recommended.

  • David
    Posted at 08:34h, 18 May Reply

    Bill –

    You are saying precisely what I’ve been barking for years – that slavery was never abolished, the plantation simply changed. I have had a debate with many people, especially those who adore Lincoln. The 13th amendment never repealed slavery. It says in part – “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

    Note the exception. If one is convicted of a state defined crime then they are a slave. If the state really wanted to repeal slavery the text would have been quite simple – “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” Period.

    Most folks I talk to do not understand that slavery still exists in the US. Of course they have an image of someone picking cotton or in some way serving their ‘massa’. They don’t have a clue that they are constantly whipped by the hundreds of thousands of pages in the federal register.

    Finally, in my opinion, the 13th amendment, the 16th amendment and Article 1, Section 8 comprise the holy trinity of tyranny in these here united States.

  • gone2yonder
    Posted at 09:58h, 21 May Reply

    People demand to be slaves, and kindly psychopaths take the burden of rule upon their shoulders.

  • Jackson
    Posted at 08:48h, 23 May Reply

    “Violet”

    And the sky was made of amethyst
    And all the stars look just like little fish
    You should learn when to go
    You should learn how to say no

    Might last a day, yeah
    Mine is forever
    Might last a day, yeah
    Mine is forever

    When they get what they want, they never want it again
    When they get what they want, they never want it again

    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to
    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to

    And the sky was all violet
    I wanna give the violet more violence
    Hey, I’m the one with no soul
    One above and one below

    Might last a day, yeah
    Mine is forever
    Might last a day, yeah
    Mine is forever

    When they get what they want, they never want it again
    When they get what they want, they never want it again

    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to
    Go on, take everything, take everything, I dare you to

    I told you from the start just how this would end
    When I get what I want then I never want it again

    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to
    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to
    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to
    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to
    Go on, take everything, take everything, I want you to
    Go on, take everything, take everything, take everything, take everything

Post A Comment