A well regulated Militia

Subordination of Society to Moral Law

No free society can remain free without the education necessary to understand freedom and the vigilance to secure it. That understanding is most important to those committed to its security.


The Founding Fathers declared that a government’s primary role is to safeguard individual liberty and subsequently stated, in the Constitution’s Preamble, the People’s will to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,” thence establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare; and do ordain and establish this Constitution.

Everything written in the Constitution was inspired by the preservation of liberty. The Framers determined the united States to be a Republic; its government constitutionally framed as a free state and “public matter” circumscribed to safeguard individual rights.

Basic Forms of Government: A short primer of world political systems and what sets America apart; why we are a Republic and not a Democracy — and why it matters.

The Constitution was crafted to both limit the government’s power and restrain its predisposition for expansion. The Framers constituted the trias politica model for a “separation of powers” between three branches of government to furnish the “checks” and “balances” necessary to ensure a rigorous accountability in accordance with the Constitution.

They also provided two additional pillars which safeguard liberty — the militia of the several states; and the states themselves, a union of free states conceived in liberty, preserved by Article VI as part of the Republic, and secured from federal overstep by the Bill of Rights’ Tenth Amendment.

The most profoundly revolutionary achievement of the United States of America was the subordination of society to moral law.

The principle of man’s individual rights represented the extension of morality into the social system — as a limitation on the power of the state, as man’s protection against the brute force of the collective, as the subordination of might to right. The United States was the first moral society in history.

All previous systems had regarded man as a sacrificial means to the ends of others, and society as an end in itself. The United States regarded man as an end in himself, and society as a means to the peaceful, orderly, voluntary coexistence of individuals. All previous systems had held that man’s life belongs to society, that society can dispose of him in any way it pleases, and that any freedom he enjoys is his only by favor, by the permission of society, which may be revoked at any time. The United States held that man’s life is his by right (which means: by moral principle and by his nature), that a right is the property of an individual, that society as such has no rights, and that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights.

The concept of a “right” pertains only to action — specifically, to freedom of action. It means freedom from physical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men.

The Declaration of Independence stated that men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Whether one believes that man is the product of a Creator or of nature, the issue of man’s origin does not alter the fact that he is an entity of a specific kind — a rational being — that he cannot function successfully under coercion, and that rights are a necessary condition of his particular mode of survival.

The Declaration of Independence laid down the principle that “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.” This provided the only valid justification of a government and defined its only proper purpose: to protect man’s rights by protecting him from physical violence.

Thus the government’s function was changed from the role of ruler to the role of servant. The government was set to protect man from criminals — and the Constitution was written to protect man from the government. The Bill of Rights was not directed against private citizens, but against the government — as an explicit declaration that individual rights supersede any public or social power.

— Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness


The United States Constitution does not exist to grant you rights; those are inherent within you. Rather, it exists to frame a limited government so those natural rights can be exercised freely.

The right to keep and bear arms is such a right, yet the White House website states, “The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms.” The use of the word ‘gives’ instead of ‘protects’ is a subtle convolution on the Second Amendment that dictatorially implies that the government grants the right as a gift; one it could take away. Contrarily, the Second Amendment’s text recognizes the right as pre-existent, declaring only that it “shall not be infringed.” Like other freedoms including those in the Bill of Rights, that right was already there. It protects a right granted us by our Creator, as described in the nation’s charter,
The Declaration of Independence:

The Framers regarded those “certain unalienable Rights” to be man’s natural rights and independent of any particular religion or personal belief. They are fundamentally man’s right to his own life and “Liberty,” a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. This liberty is often clarified as individual freedom.

Man’s natural rights are also known as inherent, non-negotiable, or inalienable rights but are more commonly called individual rights to avoid confusion from free government entitlements mistakenly called “rights.” The individual rights listed in the Bill of Rights are a few from countless others. How any managed inclusion in the Constitution is historically recounted:

Both James Madison and Alexander Hamilton expressed grave reservations about Thomas Jefferson’s, George Mason’s and others insistence that the Constitution be amended by the Bill of Rights. It wasn’t because they had little concern with liberty guarantees. Quite to the contrary they were concerned about the loss of liberties.

Alexander Hamilton expressed his concerns in Federalist Paper No. 84, “[B]ills of rights . . . are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous.” Hamilton asks, “For why declare that things shall not be done [by Congress] which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given [to Congress] by which restrictions may be imposed?” Hamilton’s argument was that Congress can only do what the Constitution specifically gives it authority to do. Powers not granted belong to the people and the states.

Alexander Hamilton added that a Bill of Rights would “contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more [powers] than were granted. . . . [it] would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power.”

To mollify Alexander Hamilton’s fears about how a Bill of Rights might be used as a pretext to infringe on human rights, the Framers added the Ninth Amendment. The Ninth Amendment reads: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Boiled down to its basics, the Ninth Amendment says it’s impossible to list all of our God-given or natural rights. Just because a right is not listed doesn’t mean it can be infringed upon or disparaged by the U.S.Congress.

— Walter E. Williams, Jun 2000

Though the Founders had a broad view of liberty, they also recognized the distinction between liberty and license. In other words, liberty is without the license to abuse the rights of others. An individual right is always limited by a social construct that defines it: free speech is “free” as long as it doesn’t create a victim. The same is so with the Second Amendment and endless number of rights not addressed in the Constitution. There’s no need for Congress to impose restrictions on freedoms already restricted implicitly to respect the rights of others.


Capitalism is purely the free market but often delineated as “laissez-faire” or “free market” capitalism since, without liberty, the adulterated market exhibits the “crony” capitalism experienced today. Capitalism can only exist in a free state; and so too, a free state cannot survive without it.

Because capitalism is autonomously self-regulated by consumers—whose choices are substantially more effective than any external regulatory interference, the United States Constitution grants its government no power to interfere. To do so not only violates the individual rights guaranteed in the Constitution, but it removes the most direct and efficient method by the People for a cleaner environment, cheaper healthcare, and a better education.


The Classic Blueprint for a Just Society was first published in 1850 by the great French economist and journalist Frédéric Bastiat. It is as clear a statement as has ever been made of the original American ideal of government, as proclaimed in The Declaration of Independence, that the main purpose of any government is the protection of the lives, liberties, and property of its citizens.

Understanding American Liberty

Our legislators are not sufficiently apprized of the rightful limits of their powers; that their true office is to declare and enforce only our natural rights and duties, and to take none of them from us.
– Jefferson, 1816

Government of Laws, Not of Men

Understanding the difference between laws and legislation, or as Adams put it, “a government of laws, not of men,” is critical in the fight for a free society.

In Defense of Capitalism:
Capitalism means the free market

Enough Crony Capitalism:
The free market must be defended

The Free Market

It is not so much a social system but the natural result of a society wherein individual rights are respected, where businesses, families, and every form of association are permitted to flourish in the absence of coercion, theft, war, and aggression.

Capitalism protects the weak from the strong, granting choice and opportunity to masses who once had no choice but to live in a state of dependency on the politically connected and their enforcers.

. . . The hatred of markets must be countered by defenses of freedom in every generation. Our lives depend on it.”
– Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.

New York 1911 prior to personal income tax: No nation ever taxed itself into prosperity

unorganized constitutional militia A well regulated Militia public domain: ucmilitia.us