“Government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit and security of the people, nation or community; whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, indefeasible right, to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public Weal.”

Mason was just with a minority that overthrew the most mighty military on earth. The majority during Mason's day would have continued to suffer from inequality, suppression of rights, tyranny, and despotism.

The government of the day is guilty of acting in direct violation of the Constitution on a daily basis. They are quite simply out of control. Watch for gun registration to come in under a new tax law that requires you to include your guns on your tax file...so they can "tax" them. Talk about an end run around the Constitution... using an unconstitutional law to create another unconstitutional law. Next comes confiscation...and goose stepping.

Sadly when this occurs there is a number of folk, often 49%, who only bitch and complain. So when the latest new administration took over, with a healthy margin of victory, because a majority of the community exercised its rights to abolish the former government, because it was acting contrary to the common benefit and securtiy of the people (the anti-environment, pro-debt, anti-health, pro-rich crowd) people like Mike and J Carlton and Jim of Austin bitch and complain, yet they say right hear that the people did what they were suppose to do. Which is it folk? If you support the quote then you should support the people and their new administration!

Waff, I doubt that the quote has any thing to do with the Obama election. The election did not "abolish the former government". It's still there with all the bureaucrats that have been there for years firmly entrenched and wasting tax money as usual, only more so. Your comments are so absolutely nonsensical that I'm ashamed to even be responding. And remember, dinner at the rest home is served promptly at 6 so don't be late. You know how angry nurse Ratchett gets when you are late.

Waff , since your hero was elected , we have lost two and a half million jobs, their figures, not mine. Sort of makes you proud you voted for the big O, doesn't it.

Mike, are you marking the quote or the man? There should be continuity on this blog so that we have some idea of the basis of criticism. I give the quote five stars.

Oops

Sorry Waff, can't agree with you. You see, I'm an American and will never agree with your (soft) Communist analysis and rationale. I'd rather be dead than live in the world you want for my children. But sinse I'm a survivor...I won'r be "volunteering" to die to make way for your New World Order anytime soon. GTH

Government ought to be instituted for the reactive defense of each individual's negative rights to life, liberty and property.

Waffler, I would support the change if it pointed towards peace, prosperity, a non-fascist theocracy, freedom, or liberty. When the change was/is from bad to worse, eliminating benefit and security of the people, its not the change that the majority wanted. I won't support change for change's sake, even if the majority want a specific change. I support a representative republic, individual sovereignty, and inalienable rights in all their many administrative forms. Robert, though I'm not the biggest fan of Mason's (I do like a lot of his administrative concepts) the 2 stars was for the blanket 'majority'. I am though, sympathetic to the majority creating any formal organization that will best protect the individual sovereign's inalienable rights (being inclusive of life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness). The simple majority or might never made right. AND, J Carlton, I'm with you, said well;-)

The people made the change, THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE MADE THE CHANGE. The change has resulted on throwing out some of the ancien regimes rules on evironment etcetera. The point is and I repeat if you support the quote then you must support the right of the majority to make the change. You can still bitch for that may be all that you know to do.

Does that mean the majority of people of the US or say, the majority of people of "Oklahoma", for example? Because if the people of a state can not change their form of government then they under an oppressive tyranny of some sort. Which might be seen as a declaration of war on state and individual sovereignty.

Waffler, its real apparent you're incapable of understanding whole sentences or what I've written over the years so I'll type real slow for you. I agree with some of the quote but not all; that is why I did not give it five stars. I typed my above comments a little quicker so you may have to read them 9 or 10 times to understand what I said.

Ooo, good quote because it addresses a very sticky situation. When a government (not just the elected and appointed but the system of governance itself) becomes predatory in practice, 'we' have the right to abolish it. American voters did not abolish the last government with its vote -- we elected different people to administer the government. Simply if the majority of the people can honestly realize that their government is corrupted beyond merely changing administrators, then they may start all over. But that will NEVER happen. The American Revolution was not an act of the majority of the People, but an act of the representatives of each independent colony/state. Only 3% of the male population even fought in the war. I understand Mike's point, and I am a fan of George Mason whose philosophy included every man being armed and ready to defend himself, his family, his community, his state, and his nation. No matter what majority may be popular, there is no voting away the rights of the people, but it is primarily the only way we change legislators.

It is fascinating that most here do not have the grace to accept the current majority views viz a viz the last election. The only majority they agree with is the fictional one that they think must certainly always and forever agree with thier views. You are in a dream world Mike, Archer, Jim K, and J Carlton. Wake up, wake up and snap out of it.

If the US is a 'democracy' then it is a strictly limited democracy, as it should be, with a well defined jurisdiction. 10 people cannot tell 1 person what to do simply because they are in a majority. The President doesn't have to sign a bill that was voted on by both the House and Senate -- where is the majority will there? One juror out of twelve may acquit a defendant. Waffler's comments are too simplistic and do not address any details of specific jurisdiction of each part of our government from county, state, and federal. Waffler, why don't you wake up and realize that a government official is not 'the law' -- the law is the law, and officials must follow it just like every one else -- and that means staying within one's proper jurisdiction, and when a government official attempts to act outside of his authorized role, we not only have the right but the duty to keep him in his place or take him out altogether no matter what party affiliation. And we do not have to wait for a vote!!!

The greatest statesman of his time and probably of all time. Seems Mr Lincoln, by the lights of Mr Mason, was wrong indeed, and the Leviathan we call Big Government is a far cry from what those that prevailed at the time, actually wanted. It should also be noted the Anti-federalist feared exactly what we now have. Freedom is by nature, the restraint of government.