Replies

I haven't listened to the thing--if it's not worth writing, it's not worth hearing--but it's a stretch to claim individuals in any democracy are sovereign by any measure. Certain powers are ceded by the individual to the state through social contract, most notably the monopoly on legitimate violence. Only a constitutional crisis of a type not seen in America's history could return that right to individuals en masse. Individuals have also not had much luck representing themselves as sovereign to the community of nations; you can't print your own passport, or accredit yourself an ambassador to a foreign power.

One could argue that the People are sovereign, since the People constituted the government and reserve the right to dissolve it through force (unlikely as that is). The sovereignty of the People is vested in the state, which carries out the duties of the sovereign entity. But a sovereign individual doesn't exist in our Republic.

“Only a constitutional crisis of a type not seen in America’s history could return that right to individuals en masse.” I gather you don’t think that we’re in such a crisis. Many of us think we are.

How ridiculous is it to not listen, then comment as though you have any idea what was said? All sovereignty starts with the individual. We cede it to the state, yes. But must never forget where it originated and, ultimately, were it must return. The thesis we get to in the podcast is that one’s choice to cede a degree of their sovereignty to another entity or individual, such as when you consent to receive medical treatment, does not fully divest you of the responsibility for the actions of the party you are turning to. In other words, you should not be able to sue your doctor for making a mistake unless you can prove he was acting in bad faith, because your choice to entrust your care to him comes with the assumed risk a mistake will be made. There are other applications as well, but I’ve restated what is already readily available in the podcast enough.