It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If Government Is Only Allowed By "Consent Of The People" ......

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Please move if in the wrong place.


While reading the thread concerning the legality of the Declaration of Independence, I took a visit to the source provided.

THREAD IN QUESTION: www.abovetopsecret.com...
SOURCE PROVIDED: www.bbc.co.uk...

The part of the source that gives the American case for the Declaration, it states that "Under basic principles of "Natural Law", government can only be by the consent of the people and there comes a point when allegiance is no longer required in face of tyranny."

Am I right in thinking that, in any case, the "people" can take away their consent to be governed, therefore dissolving the Government? Obviously the Government nowadays is far too corrupt, and is in no way run "by the people" more than urine is a healthy beverage, but if this is the case, then why aren't people standing up to Governments? If Government is subject to the people, then why is it that people who conspire that 9/11 is a Government controlled operation, or other such conspiracies such as UFO's, Bilderberg, Governmental Lobbying, NWO etc, don't or can't decide to file a lawsuit against the people that run the Government, since "allegiance is no longer required in the face of tyranny?"

Obviously people would be worried for their life due to the very real threat of being assassinated, but if enough people filed?

Opinions? Views? Comments? Perhaps a noble cause is no longer a possibility nowadays.




posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
The very notion of government brings to mind an alien or other worldly presence in our lives. In reality government is made up of the citizens that constitute a nation. If a government still consisting of citizens of that nation pledge an allegiance to each other over the nation itself, it is they who take the first step of dissolving government. They are in essence traitors to the people and enemies of the state. It is at that point that the people need to re-establish their government.

If government exists it is because we will it to be so. It can only "not" exist if we are no longer represented by it. It is like saying if the pope of the catholic church begins worshiping Satan, he no longer is the pope and the papal throne is then vacant, even though he sits in it.

We actually don't have a president, a congress, etc. We have not for some time now. The contemporary struggle is not to change that government or the system of government but rather to fill it with our representation.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by casenately
The very notion of government brings to mind an alien or other worldly presence in our lives. In reality government is made up of the citizens that constitute a nation. If a government still consisting of citizens of that nation pledge an allegiance to each other over the nation itself, it is they who take the first step of dissolving government. They are in essence traitors to the people and enemies of the state. It is at that point that the people need to re-establish their government.

If government exists it is because we will it to be so. It can only "not" exist if we are no longer represented by it. It is like saying if the pope of the catholic church begins worshiping Satan, he no longer is the pope and the papal throne is then vacant, even though he sits in it.

We actually don't have a president, a congress, etc. We have not for some time now. The contemporary struggle is not to change that government or the system of government but rather to fill it with our representation.


I see. So is the basic premise of what you said along the lines of "we don't want to get rid of Government, we want to get rid of all the people in it that can't be trusted, and replace them with people that work for the good of the nation?"



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by domasio
 

Interesting post. As you'll learn I am one of the most confused people on ATS so, of course, your thread confuses me. (See my signature)

Remember the purpose of the Declaration. "We are not your citizens anymore, we're a separate country, and you can lump it." Naturally, England felt differently about the subject, so there was a "discussion" to see who was right. Because the Americans were left standing at the end of the "discussion," we were given the go ahead to start a new country.

Of course, the people can take away their consent to be governed, they did in 1861. There was another "discussion" that lasted four years. At the end of it, it was decided that, nope, you can't dissolve the government and start your own country.

"File a lawsuit against the people that run the government?" No, you don't file papers with the government to tell it to dissolve itself. Remember, this is done through "discussion." Or, if you want to try, you can vote to put people in office that think like you do. Me, I prefer voting to "discussing."

By the way, welcome to ATS.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by domasio
 


"File a lawsuit against the people that run the government?" No, you don't file papers with the government to tell it to dissolve itself. Remember, this is done through "discussion." Or, if you want to try, you can vote to put people in office that think like you do. Me, I prefer voting to "discussing."

By the way, welcome to ATS.






No no, I didn't mean file a lawsuit asking it to dissolve itself, I meant, if the Government is accountable to the people, the shouldn't the people be able to file a lawsuit to get to the bottom of the unconstitutional happenings such as disallowing the citizens of the country from being privvy to certain information, such as Area 51, 9/11 etc.
edit on 11/1/12 by domasio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by domasio
 

Dear domasio,

Sorry I misunderstood you. I told you I was the most confused guy on ATS.

As far as a lawsuit for information? Sure you can ask, the government will say it's classified, the judge will agree, and your back where you started with a hefty legal bill. Maybe Wikileaks will have it, but I don't see it coming through the courts, although it is possible that the government has overclassified something and the judge will order its release.

You can also go after individuals that you think have committed crimes, impeachment for Presidents, that sort of thing. Is that want you want?

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by domasio
 



If Government is subject to the people, then why is it that people who conspire that 9/11 is a Government controlled operation, or other such conspiracies such as UFO's, Bilderberg, Governmental Lobbying, NWO etc, don't or can't decide to file a lawsuit against the people that run the Government, since "allegiance is no longer required in the face of tyranny?"


You do realize that the courts are........part of the government....right???

So you are going to file a lawsuit to try to disolve government...by using a government agency?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by domasio
 


I say the only people that should be there are people serving the nation not each other or a select group. If they lose sight of that, they no longer form part of the government. Even if they are in office.

It is an issue of validity.
I don't know the solution but I think it is closer to keeping the system on coarse or aligned with its purpose all along the way.

to clean house might hurt more than to just start now to demand good government.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by domasio
 



If Government is subject to the people, then why is it that people who conspire that 9/11 is a Government controlled operation, or other such conspiracies such as UFO's, Bilderberg, Governmental Lobbying, NWO etc, don't or can't decide to file a lawsuit against the people that run the Government, since "allegiance is no longer required in the face of tyranny?"


You do realize that the courts are........part of the government....right???

So you are going to file a lawsuit to try to disolve government...by using a government agency?


I am not American, so I have no intention to dissolve the Government. I was meaning that, if the citizens of America decided that the current Government or Administration is not their idea of how they would like to be governed, then would there be any way for them to either dissolve their Government (since it is by their consent that it exists as the Declaration states) or to somehow oust their current leader in favour of one they prefer halfway through a term.

As an example, lets say the Global Economy has just collapsed, and the sheeple finally realise that it is because of the actions of their own Governments and World Banks, then lets say the US Citizens decide that they want their country to be run in a completely different way, and that they do not give their consent to be governed anymore, is there any way for this to be done?

Again, i'm not American, i'm Scottish, but I do see how the US is strangling it's citizens now with ridiculous politics, and the UK ain't far behind, so was just wondering.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by domasio
 


Courts won't work, to many drug cartels feeding their pockets. But could a person separate from its government, and be totally self reliant and do it without breaking the squatters law?





Does a just government get its powers by the consent of the governed; and- if so- then how could the very people who give that government it's power *not* have the right to withdraw from that nation? The answer is: a just government can only get it's powers from the consent of the governed. Furthermore, they do have every right- legal documents not withstanding- to withdraw that consent.

Source www.americanrevival.org...

So how could one withdraw from it's government?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by mytheroy
reply to post by domasio
 


Courts won't work, to many drug cartels feeding their pockets. But could a person separate from its government, and be totally self reliant and do it without breaking the squatters law?





Does a just government get its powers by the consent of the governed; and- if so- then how could the very people who give that government it's power *not* have the right to withdraw from that nation? The answer is: a just government can only get it's powers from the consent of the governed. Furthermore, they do have every right- legal documents not withstanding- to withdraw that consent.

Source www.americanrevival.org...

So how could one withdraw from it's government?








I guess the same way Egypt and Libya?

Protest, revolution, downright refusing to accept your Government and the masses overthrowing them?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   
If they can make laws that anyone can be detained indefinitely without a trial, then clearly they are in fact declaring that they recognize no law.

I still recognize and respect the constitution, so it appears that the lawless ones have absolved themselves.
edit on 11-1-2012 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join