If the Mere Ability to Coerce is the Deciding Factor Never Wm. M. S. Hall (23Dec7)

In a Nation founded upon Legal Coercion, The Right of Coercion shall be The Whole of The Law. I find this to be a profound fact of this country and its progress, or the lack there of, from its inception to present date. Yet, what this statement implies is that regardless of proofs, logic or wisdom the decision of the Courts shall rule the land, and the man, or person, with the greater ability for argument/debate shall rule the Courts; regardless of his/her intentions, or from wherever those intentions may rise.

In the beginning, the original framers of this nation sought to sway the ruling of an English King to recognize and respect the Rights of the colonies of British North America by using the legal precedent of British law, as previously established by Parliament and Royal Decree. In their failure to sway, they resorted to coercion, believing they could force British Parliament, and, thus, the King, to recognize and respect the Rights the Colonies demanded by proving that their Rights already existed within the archives of British Law and Natural/God's Law. {Coerce: to persuade an unwilling person [or party] to do something by force or threats (Oxford English Dictionary, Seventh Edition; c2012)}

Simply put, their efforts to coerce, by wrote, failed and the coercion by physical force, war, ensued. Thus, the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812.

Thomas Paine, "Common Sense" (c1776); "...the present race of Kings in the world [lack] honorable origin ... take off the dark covering of antiquity and trace them to their first rise, we should find the first of them nothing better than the principal ruffian of some restless gang; whose savage manners or preeminence in subtility obtained him the title of chief among plunderers and who by increasing in power and extending his depredations, overawed the quiet and defenseless [to gain more power]."

Having defeated the British at the game of forceful manipulation and countless acts of depredation, and, thereby, gaining their independence, it seems that the original framers of the nation refused to let their years of legal study and coercive arguments go to waste. So, they persisted in the refinement of the art of written and verbal coercion in the establishment of the philosophy/concept of 'The Rule of Law'. The King is dead, long the Law shall reign.

But the corruption of a coercive foundation was known, understood and feared by many, if not by most, of those same original framers.
James Madison, "Vices of the Political System of the United States" (c1787); Section 7, Want of Sanction to the Laws, and of coercion in the Government of the Confederacy; "A sanction if essential to the laws, as coercion is to that of government. The federal system being destitute of both, wants the great vital principles of a Political Constitution." Here, Madison argues that principle and not coercion should be the foundation of the federation, however, lacking a foundation of correct principles, sanction and coercion, in his time, must be relied upon until such time as a foundation of principles is attained.

Elbridge Gerry, "Antifederalist Critique of the Constitution"; Massachusetts Centinel Nov. 3rd 1787; Gerry's confession that he was coerced and under duress when he voted in favor of the Articles of Confederation "...I acquiesced in it, being fully convinced that to preserve the union, an efficient government was indispensably necessary: and it would be difficult to make proper amendments to the articles of Confederation."

It was also understood that without a foundation of correct principle, the federation could not endure. They knew that the potential for corruption was monstrous and eminent.

James Madison, "The Federalist Essays Number 10" (c1787), states honestly, "As long as the reason of [what we now consider to be] man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connections subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves." In essence stating that passions will frequently override logic, and being passionate in the presentment of argument will have the power to sway others to emotional and illogical conclusion . Herein lies the shameless flaw of which the original framers of the nation were well aware of, but, desperate, left the correction of all to an increasingly more desperate posterity.

Yet, over and over again, the best and/or most passionate arguments win case after case in American courtrooms despite the injustice they seemed so frequently to represent, and, whether they are correct, or corrupt, in nature, they set the legal precedent for all future cases, whereon the freedom and justice of the entire nation, and all the people it governs, rests.

"...the Freedom of the Market is essentially a Freedom of Individuals and Groups to coerce one another, with the power to coerce reinforced by agencies of the State itself." Steinfeld, Robert J.; The Philadelphia Cordwainers' Case of 1806: The Struggle Over Alternative Legal Constructions of a Free Market in Labor, in Labor Law in America: Historical and Critical Essays (c1992), pgs. 20-43.

This statement, as a concept, is, at once, the most liberating and oppressive. Yet, all alone, it embodies the spirit of every action in every legislative body and legal proceeding throughout U.S. history; from Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia (c1832), Commonwealth v. Hunt (c1842); Farwell v. Boston and Worcester Railroad Co. (c1842) to William Blackstone, 'Commentaries on Women in the Eye of the Law' (c1765) which introduced two centuries of suffrage for women and is still being cited and/or applied to law as it pertains to women, present day {note: the overturning of Roe v. Wade in c2023}, Thomas Cobb, 'An Inquiry into the Law of Negro Slavery' (c1858) and 'The Mississippi Black Codes' (c1865) which flipped the bird at the Post-Bellum Constitution of the United States and sparked seven generations of Jim Crow {a.k.a. Post-Bellum Slavery}, and still, in 2023, influences the status, education and treatment of African Americans in the United States. And what this power of coercion seems to suggest is that the person with the ability to either manipulate the courts, or avoid them altogether, whether now or then, will hold firmly the Right of Way forevermore no matter how corrupt, or corrosive, their opinions and the judgements that follow.

But, of course, every law ratified by any U.S. Court, no matter how unjust, is backed by its military power. The Police Force, a civil military force employed to enforce the laws of Nation and State is utilized by the U.S. Government to coerce The People into obedience and subservience to their government and the laws which that government deems fit.

Kermit L Hall, "The Law in Revolution and The Revolution in Law", The Magic Mirror: Law in American History (c1989) "...the use of soldiers as police endangered liberty. As a colonial pamphleteer argued, "What is got by soldiers must be maintained by soldiers." ... any law that required enforcement by soldiers [policemen] was not proper law. That is, the law has to resemble something based on a notion of contractual agreement between the government and the governed..." Which argues that true law requires no act of coercion, but only the agreed upon conditions of mutual consent between two parties. And, thus, any act of coercion by any related party voids all contracts, and can never be considered law. Still, coercion has been the policy of this nation throughout its history. And plays a role in stunting the Nation's growth til this day. 

Nancy F. Cott, 'Public Vows, A History of Marriage and The Nation' (c2000); Harvard University Press: Introduction, pg.1. "In 1944 the U.S. Supreme Court portended a momentous line of interpretation by finding that the U.S. Constitution protected a private realm of family life which the State cannot enter." Yet, it is made clear throughout the many declarations of our Nation that the Courts and Legislator have securely anchored themselves as additional parties, without consent, to the institution of marriage, as the State has a vested interest in the issue of those marriages; particularly as it pertains to the value of labor force, the growing market and the stability of the economy. Ms. Cott goes on to reveal that "Even without regulatory power, however, the federal government could exert an impact on marriage through some policy pronouncements ... The Native Americans living on the continent had their own forms of political authority, sovereignty, and marriage practice ... the government's intentions to accustom native Americans to the sovereignty of the United States, or else remove them from the continent..."

The Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 would not have been necessary, nor the genocide of Indigenous Americans, nor the enslavement of Africa, nor the Civil War and many of the atrocities which have annually occurred on this soil ever since National Inception. But that this Art of Coercion... this new science had taken root here in the newly won colonial territory, which would eventually become the United States of America. And every single step of its progression through to this very day has been the result of some legal argument, at whatever level. Some Legal Battle; one side practicing this unwritten Right ... this Right of Coercion over another in order to either maintain, or change, the opinion of the courts, and, thus, The People of whom the governing body of this Nation so often speak. (Whoever they, The People, may be. As that argument is regularly modified, and yet to be determined.) And thus setting, apparently forever, the legal precedent by which all familiar matters must be decided (Stare Decisis), no matter how crude, biased or unjust the original decision. 

This argues for a logical limit and restriction of law and government as directed by contractual agreement, permission, or consent. This also implies that if the governed having at some time consented to a contract, should find that the government, being a corporation and, as such, viewed legally as a person, is derelict in its duties, and thus in breach of contract, then the aforementioned contract is legally null and void; and the neglected party would then, by Right, have legal grounds to seek their own remedy/remedies and forever more act as sovereign in their own interests, until such time as they consent to other contracts.

This brings me, full circle, to my title question; If the mere ability to coerce is the deciding factor, then, after two hundred plus years, this nation has only ever forwarded the efforts and policies by which, Thomas Paine argued, the first British Kings came into power, and nothing more. Hiding, or gilding, the truth of this Nation's subversiveness, brutal persistence and the universal enslavement of its people, and any people it comes into contact with, beneath complex legalities and pretty phrases offers no compensation for all the harm which has been done in an effort to maintain what appears to be nothing more than an experiment gone awry... a failed experiment which is, recognizably, so far advanced that until it is replaced by a better system of government, or no government at all, it must be maintained for the sake of the enslaved.

Inevitably, this reminds of a passage by Aime Cesaire "...that no one colonizes innocently, that no one colonizes with impunity either; that a nation which colonizes, that a civilization which justifies colonization - and therefore force [coercion] - is already a sick civilization, a civilization that is morally diseased, that irresistibly, progressing from one consequence to another, one repudiation to another, calls for its Hitler, I mean its punishment."

During this course, a glimmer of light is shed on a number of primary truths which I had failed to see until recently: 

-Capitalism is a Colonial Mechanism designed to change Human Beings into Transferable Currency;

- Civilization, in the minds of Colonizers, is synonymous with Christianization and Westernization;

- Christianity, Capitalism and Westernization are products, mechanisms and propaganda of Colonialism; and, 

- Colonialism is Slavery promoted only by the act and principle of Coercion.

Citations: *Steinfeld, Robert J.; The Philadelphia Cordwainers' Case of 1806: The Struggle Over Alternative Legal Constructions of a Free Market in Labor, in Labor Law in America: Historical and Critical Essays (c1992), pgs. 20-43. *Tom Paine, "Common Sense" (c1776) *James Madison, "Vices of the Political System of the United States" (c1787); Section 7, Want of Sanction to the Laws, and of coercion in the Government of the Confederacy *Elbridge Gerry, "Antifederalist Critique of the Constitution"; Massachusetts Centinel Nov. 3rd 1787 *James Madison, "The Federalist Essays Number 10" (c1787) *Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia (c1832) *Commonwealth v. Hunt (c1842) *Farwell v. Boston and Worcester Railroad Co. (c1842) *William Blackstone, 'Commentaries on Women in the Eye of the Law' (c1765) *Thomas Cobb, 'An Inquiry into the Law of Negro Slavery' (c1858) *'The Mississippi Black Codes' (c1865) *Steinfeld, Robert J.; The Philadelphia Cordwainers' Case of 1806: The Struggle Over Alternative Legal Constructions of a Free Market in Labor, in Labor Law in America: Historical and Critical Essays (1992), 20-43) *Kermit L Hall, "The Law in Revolution and The Revolution in Law", The Magic Mirror: Law in American History (c1989) *Nancy F. Cott, 'Public Vows, A History of Marriage and The Nation' (c2000) *Aimé Césaire, 'Discourse on Colonialism' (c1955); Translated by Joan Pinkham: Monthly Review Press:1972. Originally published as Discours sur le colonialisme by Editions Presence Africaine c1955 *Oxford English Dictionary, Seventh Edition; c2012)