Aquinas's Commentary On The Metaphysics

#142- No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority Part 2

Scott and Karl finish their discussion of Lysander Spooner’s 1870 essay No Treason No. 6: “The Constitution of No Authority.”

While the duo believes Spooner is metaphysically wrong about the nature of government, this essay will leave you with a lasting impression. Karl asks, “How can you compel someone to stay in an organization which he freely joined? It turns out, government isn’t contractual. It is based in violence.”

While it may be a hard pill to swallow, be sure to tune in for Part Two of Scott and Karl’s discussion. Brought to you by


Don’t miss the limited-time window to get started with Online Great Books immediately!


  1. Tim Woods

    You guys are kind of depressing, but the truth often is these days. I think you can build a government by consensus by starting with the family. And then a small community of families that allow consensus can create a small community of the same. Perhaps several small communities of consensus could create a small town of the same. You see where I’m going with this. So is it merely if the number gets too big that consensus is never possible? I knew a priest once who believed that parishes should never get any bigger than 12 people. So churches have the same problem. I consent to join a church until the church does something I don’t agree with, then I find a new parish.

    Yes, the musical 1776 had the southern representatives saying to the northern that if they don’t like slavery, they should stop buying the rum made by slaves. The North would never do that.

    If you are in favor of violence, there are ways to overthrow governments without forming traditional armies. Tactical assassinations can weaken a standing government without the rebels being defeated. Gorilla tactics can wear down a standing government to the point where they are willing to share power. The Irish republican Army (with potato bullets) did as much. George Washington did as much. But assassins need to be people who believe what they are doing is ‘right’. I could never assassinate politicians I don’t believe in because I believe murder is wrong. But it might be the effective way of defending our country, if we can find someone willing to do it. But then, wouldn’t we still be guilty by association?

    Christianity grew, in part, by being persecuted, and by not resisting the persecution. India became a country because Great Britain was shamed by their persecution of the Indian people. Is that a path toward better government? Protest, be persecuted, until our persecutors lose their motivation through shame?

Your email address will not be published.