You say "Also, if its a contract arbitrarily imposing rule by force over others how is it anything but a fraudulent contract... You can't arbitrarily force everyone into a contract. Isn't that totaltarianism?"
But that is the entire point of Lysander Spooner's essay, "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority". You missed (or ignored because it disturbs your world-view), the first sentence of my proposal.
Spooner argues, quite successfully, that the US Constitution is just such a fraudulent and even totalitarian contract.
The differences between what I am proposing and the US Constitution are:
1) I am not hiding the implied contractual agreement.
2) I propose a contractual agreement that independent sovereigns, not under any duress, would prefer to the contract implied by the US Constitution especially given the absence of plentiful unsettled territories.
This doesn't imply that I disagree with you -- merely that I think there are some steps that we need to take on the way to the ideal of totally private contracts, voluntarily entered into as individuals.
1) The Laboratory of the States Platform to take Congress.
2) Restoration of Constitutional government (as fraudulent and tyrannical, by your own standards, as it is).
3) Rehabilitation of territorial secession as the foundation of all other human rights.
4) At least one State (perhaps no longer under the Federal Government) adopting the Contract Between Americans to test out its premises.
5) Reestablishment of the Federation on the basis of dividend-supported market allocation of territory to sovereign individuals who choose to live in the same territory, under the Contract Between Americans entered into by mutual consent.
If you read nothing else, read this: A Contract Between Americans
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions o