The Constitution

I'm going to make a claim that many people who call themselves Libertarian won't like.  That claim is that the Constitution of the United States was a bad idea.  Prior to its existence, the States were aligned in many ways, not in a way that would allow for the formation of an overbearing, oppressive centralized federal government.

Some would argue that it is the only barrier to the federal government taking the last of its subjects' remaining freedoms.  In reality though, there are only two ways to look at the Constitution if you believe that the federal government has grown far beyond the size and scope originally intended.

One way is to see it as an ineffective document that clearly has no power to limit what the federal government can do. From wars begun just at the word of the chief executive with no other authorization to the requirement that everyone living within the borders either purchase health insurance or pay a penalty, it is clear that the federal government can take just about any action it wants.

The other view we can take is to see the Constitution as a document that enables the federal government and limits our personal liberties.  Many times the "general welfare" clause has been used to justify something the federal government wants to do.  The Affordable Care Act is a recent example of this justification.  Whether you believe the first or second view is more accurate, both provide a strong case for the Constitution doing more harm than good.

The last point I will make is one that was one of the original arguments against ratification, that still rings true today.  It was argued that specifying certain rights in the Bill of Rights would end up with those being the ONLY individual rights.  The belief was that the government would argue that if it's not in the Bill of Rights, it's a right you don't have.  Can there be any doubt that this fear has come yo pass?  Individuals in the US are now fighting to keep the rights that are actually enumerated in the Constitution.  They certainly aren't allowed to exercise any other rights.  However, the larger problem with enumerating specific rights is that rights don't exist individually.  By that I mean that the right to defend yourself is not independent from your freedom of speech.  They both exist because you own yourself, and you have the right of self-determination.  You, not any government, have the primary right (and responsibility) to make decisions about your life. If the true aim of the Constitution had been to preserve individual liberty, then it would have to be deemed a failure.  But in reality, the Drafting of the Constitution had the same aim as every other government action -- to acquire and consolidate power for that government.  In that regard, the Constitution has been an overwhelming success.