Disobey!

Townhall.com ^ | May 13, 2015 | John Stossel

[Kaslin]

Charles Murray, already controversial for writing books on how welfare hurts the poor, on ethnic differences in IQ and on (less controversial, but my favorite) happiness and good government, has written a new book that argues that it's time for civil disobedience. Government has become so oppressive, constantly restricting us with new regulations, that our only hope is for some of us to refuse to cooperate.

Murray's suggestion -- laid out in "By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission," will make some people nervous. He argues that citizens and companies should start openly defying all but the most useful regulations, essentially ones that forbid assault, theft and fraud.

He writes, "America is no longer the land of the free. We are still free in the sense that Norwegians, Germans and Italians are free. But that's not what Americans used to mean by freedom."

He quotes Thomas Jefferson's observation that a good government is one "which shall restrain men from injuring one another (and) shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits."

But our government today tries to do much more.

While we try to invent new things, government constantly seeks new ways to control us. The number of federal crimes on the books is now 50 percent larger than back in 1980 -- a time when many people mistakenly thought the U.S. would cut the size of government.

Murray says, correctly, that no ordinary human being -- not even a team of lawyers -- can ever be sure how to obey the 810 pages of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 1,024 pages of the Affordable Care Act or 2,300 pages of Dodd-Frank.

What if we all stopped trying? The government can't put everyone in jail. Maybe by disobeying enough stupid laws, we can persuade judges that only rules that prevent clear, real harm to individuals should be enforced: "no harm, no foul."

Law is not always the best indication of what is good behavior. Riots in places such as Ferguson and Baltimore remind us that even cops sometimes behave badly.

No one wants to see law break down so completely that people get hurt, but historian Thaddeus Russell reminds us that many freedoms we take for granted exist not because the government graciously granted liberties to us but because of lawbreakers.

Bootleggers, "robber barons" who did things like transporting ferry passengers in defiance of state-granted monopolies and tea-dumping American revolutionaries ignored laws they opposed. Sometimes these scofflaws loved liberty more than our revered Founders did. George Washington led troops against whiskey makers to enforce taxes.

More recently, Uber decided it would ignore some cab regulations. It's good that they did because Uber usually offers better and safer service. Today, Uber is probably too popular for government to stamp out.

Edward Snowden knew the legal consequences he'd face for revealing NSA spying on American citizens but did it anyway. I'm not yet sure if he did the right thing, but conservatives and leftists alike should admit that sometimes laws ought to be bent or broken.

Instead, each political party defends civil disobedience unless the people doing it are people that faction doesn't like. The right loves ranchers who resist federal land managers but doesn't like people who flout immigration laws. The left likes pot smokers but whines about corporations ignoring ridiculously complicated environmental regulations.

Maybe most of these laws should be ignored by most of us.

Politicians themselves don't always play by the rules. My last column was about how the Clintons get away with breaking rules. But I made a mistake that I must correct: I said the Clinton Foundation donated only 9 percent of its money to charity. Sorry, that was wrong. The Clintons and their flunkies were worse than that.

In 2013, the Foundation collected $144 million but spent only $8.8 million on charity. That's only 6 percent.

When Bill and Hillary say they want to "help people," they're talking about themselves. I don't want to be forced to obey such people.

[equaviator]

Something In The Air (by Thunderclap Newman)

Call out the instigators
Because there’s something in the air
We’ve got to get together sooner or later
Because the revolution’s here

And you know it’s right
And you know that it’s right

We have got to get it together
We have got to get it together now

Lock up the streets and houses
Because there’s something in the air
We’ve got to get together sooner or later
Because the revolution’s here

And you know it’s right
And you know that it’s right

We have got to get it together
We have got to get it together now

Hand out the arms and ammo
We’re going to blast our way through here
We’ve got to get together sooner or later
Because the revolution’s here

And you know it’s right
And you know that it’s right

We have got to get it together
We have got to get it together now

[SoCal Pubbie]

Murray wants to overwhelm the enforcement agencies of the Fed Agov. He wants to start an organization that will take on cases where the government fines individuals and small businesses for frivolous infractions. Kind of like the landmark legal foundation but an organization that would take on cases more broadly. The group would pay the fine if they lose the case so that the government would be on notice that the taxpayer is not going to suffer from draconian enforcement. He already had one individual ready to give $5 million to the cause.

[SunkenCiv]

"Ignoring the Law? Works Like A Charm! I Am The State! Oh, and Death to America!"

[sauropod]

mark

[zeestephen]

I don't think the book author, Charles Murray, will appreciate Stossel’s suggestion that principled Conservative civil disobedience is somehow similar to the mindlessly violent, destructive, and racist riots in Baltimore and Ferguson.

[nathanbedford]

Of course I noticed, I am an admirer of Charles Murray but I also noticed that John Stossel (whom I also admire) was not fastidious in indicating which of the observations were Murray's and which were his own. I assume some of them were Stossel's, such as his remark about Ferguson.

In any event, my reactions are not dependent on the name of the author of the observations recounted in the article.

[Steve_Seattle]

It was about 15-20 years that I started seeing the phrase "IT'S THE LAW!" appearing on posters on government walls or in public service announcements on television.

That was - I think - one of the first overt manifestations of progressive statism. I never recall seeing that slogan when I was growing up in supposedly more authoritarian times, as opposed to our - so we are told - easygoing, tolerant progressivism.

Whenever I see "IT'S THE LAW!" I imagine a Nazi sergeant lining up Jews alongside a pit, and saying, "IT'S THE LAW! Never mind about the machine guns and bulldozer."

[UCANSEE2]

[UCANSEE2]

[PGalt]

May 5, 2015 (Cinco de Marxist) RINOS in Michigan roundly DISOBEYED.

Status: Defeated

Michigan Proposal 1

Result Votes Percentage

No 1,405,716 80.07%

Yes 349,813 19.93%

http://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Sales_Tax_Increase_for_Transportation_Amendment,_Proposal_1_(May_2015)

(state sales tax increase proposal from 6% to 7%)

See crony-socialism enablers in link.

Citizens 1
State 0

[The Antiyuppie]

Hard to believe that Prohibition WAS constitutional at the time (although arguments could be made that it violated the Bill of Rights).

[navyguy]

The federal government violates it’s own laws every day. It also plays favorites, and picks winners and losers.

I have paid taxes for 35 years. For 2014 I paid $42,000 dollars in federal income taxes. I’m a veteran. I comply with the law.

But I’m just about at the point where I will simply ignore the federal government and any laws they pass. I simply will not comply when other, less responsible citizens are constantly given a free pass. I’ve done my part.

[zeestephen]

Like the Founding Fathers, we need a serious political strategy, a serious legal strategy, and serious financial resources in place BEFORE we start encouraging other Conservatives to break the law.

[Kaslin]

You obviously didn't even bother to read the article and John Stossel wasn't the subject of the article but Charles Murray.

News Flash the font size was 12 not 20 and another thing. Name calling is not necessary.

Now get lost and don't post on any of my threads again. Got it?

[Responsibility2nd]

Piss off.

[Tench_Coxe]

I agree with Stossel. What he doesn't mention is that one needs to be prepared to be made an example by government to cow others into obeying. That can range from fines and asset seizures to jail and possibly even being murdered.

[zeestephen]

Excellent - thanks for the update.

[RitaOK]

What???

Conservatives willing to take a risk???? Actually, RESIST?

Where would we find such conservatives???

Conservative businesses defy the Chamber of Commerce????

Where would we find those???

We live in the compliance era, after all. This is not a generation of Boston Tea Party types. We tolerate anything and everything. Hell’s bells, we FUND it! We are complicit in our own oppression, we send our kids and grandkids to indoctrination camp, willingly, no less, and wonder why our universities rule.

I mean, we’ve got keyboards and cell phones and stuff. It takes a lot of time to tend to these electronic pacifiers of ours. Keeps us out of the streets showing any resistance. It’s so much easier to sit and belt out the chorus line— all together now, “ain’t it awful”.

Shocking.

/S /S

[Paine in the Neck]

Murray wants to overwhelm the enforcement agencies of the Fed [G]ov.

Cloward-Piven put to a constructive use.

[RightOnTheBorder]

Civil disobedience works within civil societies and peoples.

Good point. How would Gandhi or MLK have fared under Stalin, Hitler, or Mao?