Citizens or Subject? Aristocrat or Commoner?

Are we citizens or are we subjects?  If you live in the British Isles, you are a “subject” of the Queen.  At least in theory, although the time that everyone was effectively a subject of the current monarch is long past.  Still, in those European countries where they still have a monarch as a figurehead, the people are officially “subjects”.  And even more countries consider those living in their country as “subjects of the State”.  A “subject” is generally considered incompetent to rule themselves, pretty much as we view children as being “subject” to their parents’ decisions regarding any number of things.  Which brings up the question:  “Does the US government consider us as “citizens” or “subjects”?  As the federal and state and local governments actually do prohibit us from now doing things that at the worst only harm ourselves, I’d say that the governments tend to view us more as “subjects” incapable of taking care of ourselves without having the government making a number of decisions for us regarding such things as running businesses, purchasing medical services, medicines, etc. If you sit down and make a list of things that you need government “permission” to do, you’ll be surprised at how long that list might just be!

For example we have prescription laws regarding such things as buying heart worm pills for your dog or cat.  Apparently you are not considered competent to make this sort of decision for your pet.  As dogs and cats are not “people” (regardless of how we might view them), what justification does the government have for a law like this?  There is no legal requirement that you provide these medications for your pet, humans are not subject to this disease, but yet you still have to have the prescription from your veterinary doctor in order to purchase these pills.  Now I could understand that say that the Humane Society might have an interest in seeing that our pets all receive this medication, but there is no requirement by the government that all dogs and cats get their heart worm pills during the season when mosquitoes are active (the carriers of the disease).  So why do we need to obtain a vet’s prescription for this medicine?  There is no issue of “possible abuse” by humans of the drug as it functions mainly to kill heartworm eggs if your dog or cat is bitten by a mosquito.  Unlike narcotics, you can’t get “high” off of heartworm pills.  So in this case the only possible answer is that this law benefits veterinarians in that it gives them a monopoly over access to those drugs that are used for the welfare and comfort of our pets.  Like human doctors, our “animal doctors” benefit financially from these laws and would have lower incomes if these laws didn’t exist.  So the law exists for a professional group that is allowed to profit off of everyone else for their own gain.  Nice of course if you can get the government to do these sort of things for you…  You earn a higher income than you could earn otherwise, but your higher income is derived from being able to use the force of law to extract money from everyone else for your own gain!  We could say that everyone is “equal”, but that some of us are more “equal” than others.  Nice deal of course if you can get government to do these things for you.  Effectively you become a member of an economic “aristocracy” whom the government has favored by passing laws in your favor. Making everyone else “commoners” who do not enjoy the sort of “privileges” that the government has bestowed on you. Of course this means that everyone else has to pay more for anything where they have to deal with a professional…  So we can divide Americans into two groups.  One group is “favored” by the government, the other (the rest of us) are not.  We can vote (as citizens) but our vote means less and less as our political parties, economically controlled by the wealthy, effectively make the decisions for us.  For all practical purposes (except for perhaps a few percent) we are effectively “subjects”.  If we’d wanted to remain subjects, we could have just accepted rule by King George the Third of Britain as they did there in Canada to the north of us…

Instead we fought a bloody Revolution against Great Britain, winning our freedom from King and Parliament after a number of years.  We created a government, replaced it with a stronger one operating under the Constitution with its “Bill of Rights” to protect our freedoms we’d fought for.  Unfortunately we copied quite a bit of English thinking, including the creation of a political system that excluded all those who didn’t own “income producing property”.  The great majority of people didn’t have the right to vote at first, but eventually all “white men” were allowed to vote.  Black men won the right to vote after the Civil War, and women eventually the right to vote early in the 20th Century.  However the political parties and those financing them still yet remained the decision makers.  As they still remain so today.  And while there are small political parties representing differing viewpoints, the Democrats and Republicans still effectively control the political process. Creating in the process an economic aristocracy whose power over the rest of us has grown to the point today that only their wishes appear to be considered by Congress.  Thus we have lots of laws that for the most part are directed against the politically powerless majority of Americans.  Our drug laws are a good example of making something that only effects the individual into a crime.  We have prescription laws that economically benefit every medical professional, along with laws that benefit the legal profession by reserving to that profession things that could just as well be done by those with lesser education.  We have all sorts of occupational laws, which are for the most part designed to benefit those with established businesses.  Laws that exclude those who might otherwise be able to compete with those established businesses.  In effect we have created for ourselves an economic aristocracy that depends upon control of the State for its economic power over the rest of us. We are being forced to purchase health insurance from private profit making companies thanks to Obama and his Democratic Party. There is obviously no doubt that the majority of us have lower standards of living than what we’d enjoy in a society where everyone was truly “equal”.  Unfortunately at the present time only the Libertarian Party represents such ideas. Only if more people start voting Libertarian will there be any change in our affairs…  Most certainly those who profit from the status quo are not going to change.


About muskegonlibertarian

77 year old retired owner of a security guard agency. Member of the Libertarian Party.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s