.:. WitNit .:.: Evil Dictionaries and Money, Part 4

« 25-Word Challenge Is On | Main | Babylon 5 Quotes »

April 9, 2005

Evil Dictionaries and Money, Part 4

ou can go back and read Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

The story so far: How words are defined has consequences. Con artists of all stripes us language and changing definitions to take advantage of you. The definitions of money are such that most people don't realize that they have been conned into thinking what's in their wallets and purses is real money. It's not.

Mind Games

If you have read up to this point, you might be thinking that I am one of those "Don't file your tax returns" individuals. Not true. I do not see any benefit for anyone to "buck" the system, confront the IRS, and fail to pay income taxes. It would take a fairly significant minority to even consider such an action, but the risks are too great for individuals. Too meaning well-meaning government people simply have no idea what they are participating in. Or of the consequences of changing meanings.

Let me give you an example: The 16th Amendment to the Constitution has very little text. It states quite simply:

"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

Pretty plain meaning, right? Well, not exactly. If you do a Google search on the income tax amendment, you will find a wealth of controversy, but I am going to focus on one small aspect--the definition of the word income.

Originally, income was understood to mean indirect income (such as capital profits and other profits that did not involve labor), not direct wages (such as the money you get for going to work).

In other words, there was a difference between income and wages.

But over time, as such things naturally evolve with government, bureaucracy, and the abuse of power, the definition of income has continually changed and expanded to encompass much more than was originally intended.

But here is the crux of the matter: What exactly does it mean to amend the Constitution?

Where does the Law reside? This is an important question, because it goes to the heart of what distinguishes the U.S. Constitution and the United States from all previous forms of government. Historically, law has resided in men: in princes, kings, monarchs, emperors, bandits, gangsters, and so on.

The right to make law, execute law, and judge law resided in people. And if a king or a thug decided to change the law from day to day, to punish you but not his buddy for the same crime--to be absolutely arbitrary in the definition and application of what was law, crime, and punishment--the king or thug could do precisely that.

Our Founding Fathers changed all that. And the value of The Rule of Law vs. The Rule of Men cannot be overstated, for it is what has sustained the greatest amount of liberty for the greatest amount of people in the history of our world.

The founders separate the making of law (legislative), execution of law (executive), and judging of law (judicial) to dilute the power of men to take the law into themselves in an absolute way. The whole point of the U.S. Constitution is to embody law externally, outside of people. To concretize meanings externally so that people could see and agree on the meanings, and only to change those meanings in a difficult process in order to protect liberty from the Rule of Men.

This is so important that it needs to be emphasized and repeated. The arbitrary rule of men, embodying meanings inside people, so that individuals can decide what the fundamental laws mean on a day-to-day basis is the path to tyrants and thugs and well-meaning despots. It is the death of liberty.

The amendment process to the U.S. Constitution exists for a very obvious reason: To allow an orderly, conservative, difficult-to-implement process for changing the meanings of the Constitution in such a way that it cannot be done by the whim of individual people.

But there are many people who look at others, especially productive people who work hard and make a lot of money, who do not want to go through the difficult process of being explicit about the meanings of their words, and changing those meanings. Instead, they will bait us with one kind of meaning, and then through the interpretations of judges, or the interpretations of bureaucrats writing regulations, change the meaning of the words in the law, without consulting the people.

Words have meanings. Clear definitions have real, practical importance in protecting the Rule of Law. Think about it. The Rule of Law is the primary indicator of whether or not an economic system is viable for investment.

If you have money to invest, are you going to feel more secure investing in a country that has consistent Rules of Laws that are explicit and that you can count on from day to day? Or more secure investing in a country whose leader or leaders can arbitrarily change the law from day to day without notice?

The extent to which a government is governed by a Rule of Law vs. Rule of Men is the extent to which it can have a viable investment-oriented economy.

Now you may be more appreciative of people who argue original intent or original meanings when talking about the Constitution. The extent to which we get away from holding ourselves to the legislated meanings of laws and allowing people to change those meanings outside of an amendment process is the extent to which we return to the rule of kings and monarchs and emperors and despots and tyrants and gangsters and thugs and con artists of all stripes.

How do con artists line their pockets at your expense? By using language to distract you with one meaning in your mind, while they have a different meaning in theirs, and while you are distracted with a fantasy, pick your pocket, or your goodwill, or your virginity.

Words have meanings. How those meanings change is crucial to liberty. Pay attention to meanings. It's important.

If you haven't already started the series How the Mind Works, start it now. That series of posts is heading into some interesting related areas.

*** The purpose of our organization is to perpetuate our organization. Ashleigh Brilliant

--------

Posted by witnit at April 9, 2005 9:31 AM