NullifyAndSecede 13 points ago +13 / -0

We wont have our country back until the Federal Government is gone.

NullifyAndSecede 82 points ago +82 / -0

When we give government the power to make medical decisions for us, we in essence accept that the state owns our bodies.

— Ron Paul

NullifyAndSecede 1 point ago +3 / -2

Would rather replace RINOs with libertarians.

Populism has no ideological character other than appealing to a large enough mob.

NullifyAndSecede 1 point ago +1 / -0

No need to burn it.

But documents and frameworks you did not individually agree to should have no power over you.

I do not consent to DC, regardless of what the framers attempted to mandate.

NullifyAndSecede 5 points ago +7 / -2

How is it that men who have been dead for 200 years bind you and I to the service of their mandates?

NullifyAndSecede 26 points ago +29 / -3

Secession is not treason.


The question of treason is distinct from that of slavery; and is the same that it would have been, if free States, instead of slave States, had seceded.

On the part of the North, the war was carried on, not to liberate slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; and was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union.

The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals.

No principle, that is possible to be named, can be more self-evidently false than this; or more self-evidently fatal to all political freedom. Yet it triumphed in the field, and is now assumed to be established. If it really be established, the number of slaves, instead of having been diminished by the war, has been greatly increased; for a man, thus subjected to a government that he does not want, is a slave. And there is no difference, in principle -- - but only in degree --- between political and chattel slavery. The former, no less than the latter, denies a man's ownership of himself and the products of his labor; and [*iv] asserts that other men may own him, and dispose of him and his property, for their uses, and at their pleasure.

Previous to the war, there were some grounds for saying that --- in theory, at least, if not in practice --- our government was a free one; that it rested on consent. But nothing of that kind can be said now, if the principle on which the war was carried on by the North, is irrevocably established. If that principle be not the principle of the Constitution, the fact should be known. If it be the principle of the Constitution, the Constitution itself should be at once overthrown.

Lysander Spooner

NullifyAndSecede 9 points ago +10 / -1

When you grew up, automated facial recognition did not exist.

NullifyAndSecede 2 points ago +7 / -5

People should be able to wear masks if they choose. Honestly I like that covid has normalized masks and the resulting anonymity.

NullifyAndSecede 2 points ago +2 / -0

Freedom looks like not having to care about any of this. Including Trump.

We're not there unfortunately.

NullifyAndSecede 6 points ago +6 / -0

He still mandated the destruction of bump stocks via decree.

The State is not our friend, regardless of who heads it.

NullifyAndSecede 25 points ago +25 / -0

There is no reason to assume that a compulsory monopoly of violence, once acquired…by any State rulers, will remain ‘limited’ to protection of person and property. Certainly, historically no government has long remained ‘limited’ in this way.

— Murray N. Rothbard

NullifyAndSecede 9 points ago +9 / -0

Advocates of a limited government often hold up the ideal of a government…’umpire’ arbitrating impartially between contending factions in society. Yet why should the government do so? …the State and its rulers will act to maximize their power and wealth, and hence inexorably expand beyond the supposed ‘limits.’

— Murray N. Rothbard

NullifyAndSecede 17 points ago +17 / -0

How can you reasonably expect the government to investigate and punish itself?

NullifyAndSecede 5 points ago +6 / -1

Our founders did have this attitude.

The constitution was an usurpation of a minority of wealthy business owners.

The whiskey rebellion was an instructive example of this.

NullifyAndSecede 107 points ago +108 / -1

It is no crime to be ignorant of economics…But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance

— Murray N. Rothbard

NullifyAndSecede 19 points ago +20 / -1

Inflation is the fiscal complement of statism and arbitrary government. It is a cog in the complex of policies and institutions which gradually lead toward tolitarianism.

— Ludwig von Mises

NullifyAndSecede 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you're paranoid you should disable referer headers in your browser and/or use tor for accessing this site.

NullifyAndSecede 4 points ago +5 / -1

Every election is stolen. Every voter is a fraud, every vote a suppression.

— Michael Malice

NullifyAndSecede 15 points ago +15 / -0

Always has been.

The State is an inherently illegitimate institution of organized aggression, of organized and regularized crime against the persons and properties of its subjects… a profoundly antisocial institution which lives parasitically off of the pr oductive activities of private citizens.

— Murray N. Rothbard

NullifyAndSecede 0 points ago +2 / -2

I don't anything implemented at the federal level, I want it all repealed, disbanded or otherwise eliminated.

view more: Next ›