The Trivium Series: Government is an Organized Religion

Hello, my name is Mike, and I am NotYourAverageMillennial.

In my previous post “Does Religion Stifle Liberty?”, I spoke briefly about government being an organized religion. Today in this post I will elaborate on this topic using the trivium in order to give you a clear and logical explanation on why this is the case. Then after examining this subject we will come to the conclusion on whether we need government in society or not. This is episode two of The Trivium Series.

Grammar Stage: What is Government?

If we wanted the “normal” answer to this question, it would probably be defined as followed:

“Government is the governing body of a nation, state or community.”

However, this definition seems too basic to fully answer this question. Let us find a more detailed definition in the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

5a) the organization, machinery, or agency through which a political unit exercises authority and performs functions and which is usually according to the distribution of power within it.

b) the complex of political institutions, laws and customs through which the function of governing is carried out.

In this definition, government is labeled as “an organization, machinery and agency through which a political unit exercises authority”. So this next question we have to ask is what is authority. Let’s go back to the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

1a) power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior.

Keep this is mind as you continue through this post.

The next thing we have to do is break down the etymology of the word “government”.

“Govern” comes from Old French “governer” which means “to steer, or be at the helm of; to rule, to command, direct”

“Ment” is a suffix from the Latin word “mens”, which is “mind”.

So when broken down to its simplest form, government is to steer/be at the helm of/rule/command/direct the mind. We can make this even simpler by saying that GOVERNMENT IS MIND CONTROL. You’ll never hear that on the evening news.

Now what about the word “authority”. Let’s break down the etymology of that word:

“Author” comes from the Latin word “auctor” which means “master or leader”. The suffix “-ity” has to with :the condition of being something”. So when government is defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary it is labeled as an authority or “the condition of being a MASTER. Hmm?
Keep all of this in mind as we go forward into the logic stage of this topic.

Logic Stage: Why Government?

So to recap from the grammar stage, we defined in detail what government is and even broke down the etymology of the word which broken down in its simplest form to mind control. So in the logic stage, we have to live by this tagline: “QUESTION EVERYTHING”. Let us ask a number of questions and then answer them ourselves:

1) Can we truly have liberty in a society with government?

Now knowing what we know about what government is in its simplest form, the answer to this question should be obvious. If liberty starts within the mind and government is mind control these two things (liberty and government) are in direct opposition with each other. On top of that, government is labeled as an “authority”. When we broke that word down in its simplest form, authority is labeled as “the condition of being a master”. Now again, this is the antithesis of what liberty and freedom represents. Those two things do not require a master. So the answer to this question would be no.

2) Can someone delegate a right that they themselves do not possess?

So government as far as we know is a political unit according to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary definition. So let’s ask a follow-up question: What does this political unit consist of? The answer would be other human beings. So government consists of human beings controlling the minds of other human beings. Well if this is the case, then that means that not all men are created equal. That would mean that some men are “more equal” than others. But wait! That makes no sense. You’re all either equal or you’re all not equal. So if all are not equal to each other, then who gave those other “more equal” human beings that right?
Now let’s get back to the original question using a simple example: One person does not have the right to take the life, liberty and property of another person. However, in the case of government, they were delegated the right to do that to human beings who are not government.

A civilian doesn’t have the right to kill another civilian, but an agent of the government does. A civilian doesn’t have the right to tax another civilian, but an agent of the government does. But again, WHO GAVE THEM THAT RIGHT? If it was another human being, wouldn’t that mean that there dictates would be irrelevant based on the fact that if all humans are created equal?

Is Government the Problem?

If you look at history, government that got too big eventually became tyrannical. This is why socialism and communism are very bad political systems. Do you know what makes this ironic? These two systems preach that people should be equal. The problem is that the people who were in charge of these political systems (the “more equal”) ended up holding all the power and wealth over their fellow human beings. What makes this even worse is that under these systems, government killed its own citizens. We are talking about millions of people here. All equally dead.

Government-dominated systems like socialism and communism always fail because putting aside the economic factors, the state controls everything from education, media, and politics. On top of that, dissent or different viewpoints are not tolerated and are rapidly silenced. This is very much against liberty. This is tyranny to be exact.
 

Government Requires Faith

Now let’s touch on the religious aspect. You may be thinking: “What does government have to do with religion?” The truth is that it has a lot to do with it. Let us once again ask a series of questions:

1) Does government require some type of belief?

If we are being honest with ourselves, the answer to this question is yes. Although most people say that they don’t trust the government, people still vote in elections. This means that when it truly comes down to it, people still have faith in the government. When a crime is committed, what does the average person do? They call the police, which is an arm of government, whether it be local, state or federal. Again, for a person to do this means that they still have faith in the government. Do you receive government benefits such as food stamps, W.I.C., or social security? Well where do you think those benefits come from? Who do you rely on to make sure that you receive those benefits? That’s right. Government.

2) Does government have extravagant ceremonies?

Well look at things like the State of the Union. The president stands in a specific spot when delivering his speech, while the vice-president and speaker of the house are sitting directly behind them in their specific positions. This is to showcase that these human beings have a certain type of status and that there are “more equal” that everyone else in that room. There are also things like the Presidential inauguration. Think about it: the President swears on a Bible and takes an oath. This sounds quite religious to me. Now how about things like the “pledge of allegiance”? Government-run public schools require students to recite this pledge every morning. This can be considered a ritual or a daily mantra. With all the examples that were provided, it is not off base to say that government does have extravagant ceremonies that could be considered religious.

3) Do those who have faith in government look to a man, or group of men to fix all their problems?

Well let answer this question by asking another one: Do people still vote in elections? Those that still vote still believe that there are other human beings that if given power will make all their problems go away. It doesn’t matter if they vote for a president, congressman, governor, mayor, or city council. For someone to go through the energy of listening to someone deliver false promises, believing their hype, and then enter a voting booth to choose that human to rule over you requires faith not only in that person, but also faith in the government.

 

Rhetoric Stage: Society Doesn’t Need Government

So we have now come to the end of this post. So let’s summarize what we have examined

Government in its simplest form is mind control. It labels itself as the authority, or master, of its citizens. In a society striving for liberty, government is impossible because it is about having control over its citizens’ minds. Since liberty starts in the mind and government is about controlling the mind, these two work in opposition.

It is also impossible, in reality, for any human being, whether government or not, to delegate a right that they themselves do not possess to another human being. When government got too big, this led to a collectivist way of life (by means of either socialism or communism) through control of the media, economy and education and was bent on crushing any dissent, resulting in many citizens being killed. Although this system of government preached equality, it never worked out that way for the fact that the ones who were in charge within the government had more power and wealth than the common citizens.

Government can be called a religion because the citizens place their faith in it through their representatives who deliver false promises in exchange for power. This is also shown through its ceremonies like the presidential inauguration where president-elects swear on bibles and rituals like the pledge of allegiance.

I think it is safe to say that based on the trivium, society does not need government. We just need to treat each other as equals because that is exactly what we are. I am no better than you, nor are you better than me. I have no right to take your life and you have no right to take mine.

For a more in-depth look at this topic, I highly recommend that you pick up the book The Most Dangerous Superstition by Larken Rose.
How do you feel about this topic? Feel free to leave your comments below.

#LIVE4LIBERTY
 

 

 

 

12 thoughts on “The Trivium Series: Government is an Organized Religion

  1. Hi Mikey, Government is absolutely a religion and it reigns in the guise of patriotism. All religions are cults. The term cult is Latin for cultus, meaning to ‘worship. American’s worship the flag and all that it represents. Our Pledge of Allegiance is a fine example of master over servant brainwashing. They were bold enough to include it in the title. Allegiance means: loyalty or commitment of a subordinate to a superior or of an individual to a group or cause. When American’s recite the Pledge of Allegiance they picture the red, white, and blue flying over the White House rotunda. The White House represents government. Very clever of them, don’t you think?

    1. Hello Deborah. Very good piece of info that you shared. The Pledge of Allegiance is merely a daily mantra that the masses religiously recite and then in the same breath will swear that they are free. Yes it was indeed devilishly clever. Thanks for the insightful comment.

  2. deborah

    Hi Mike, you have one of the most interesting niche’s I have come across in the year I have been at WA. I suggest you have a news letter subscription so we can keep up with new articles you are posting.

    I like the layout. It’s easy to navigate. You have a great logo and your color choice fits perfectly with your niche.

    Nice job. I left a comment on your site and I am looking forward to reviewing new articles.

    1. Mikey Somersall

      Hello Deborah! I took your advice and now at the beginning of the site there is a window allowing people to enter their e-mail address to subscribe for updates and some bonus material as well. I appreciate the kind words. Thanks for the comment!

  3. Timothy

    The logic behind your article is simply amazing. I never really thought of government as a religion before. With your approach to this explanation and definition of government is on point.
    The “more equal” controlling the “equal” very interesting viewpoint.
    With your very informative article my question is this, If government is a religion then why would they want religion out of government? That in itself is contradictory according to your article. Another question is that if the government is what you are explaining, why wouldn’t they want more followers instead of all the conspiracy theorists?
    In my opinion society needs a governing body, however it should only have very limited control. i thank you for opening my eyes to a new viewpoint. Great Job!!!

    1. Mikey Somersall

      Hi Timothy. Allow me to address your questions:

      ” If government is a religion then why would they want religion out of government?”
      – Most people don’t look at government as a religion, but it’s religious in the sense that its dogmatic. It demands unquestioning obedience, it punishes when you disobey and rewards when you obey, it gives you leaders for you to admire.

      The point is not to blatantly make government into a religion, but the whole concept has the structure of an organized religion.

      “if the government is what you are explaining, why wouldn’t they want more followers instead of all the conspiracy theorists?”
      – Again government is structured like an organized religion. It is dogmatic. Government likes to play protector in times of fear in exchange for liberties. As long as people have a boogieman to fear, government will always have its followers. Organized religions like to use this same tactic. Fear God and you will be okay.

      There are some that see through the veil like you just did through reading this article. Those who do pierce the veil begin to understand why external government is not necessary and is dangerous to liberty.

      Thanks for the comment!

  4. Ted

    Hey Mike, great series…i definitely want to read your next post on the topic. Government in its basic form, with the proper parameters in place, and properly monitored by the people who put that government in place works. That is in its basic form and concept. The problem is, that in order to put government into practice, it requires people. And once people are introduced to govern, government is no longer in it basic and pure form, it is corrupted the moment people are introduced to it and become a part.

    Our forefathers understood that when it comes to government, they had to set up safeguards from the people that would be placed in charge of running it.

    Thanks Again for posting the article, I look for to your conclusion of this series.

    1. Mikey Somersall

      Hello Ted. You are right. When people are put in the role of government, it becomes corrupted. This is why we have the situations with government today.

      Self-government should be the only government in a society that is committed to liberty. That is just taking full responsibility for your thoughts, emotions, and actions. It is understanding the non-aggression principle which means that no one has the right to take life, liberty, and property from someone else.

      Thanks for the comment!

  5. Rachel

    Indeed. I have often felt odd about how government can preach to bring about freedom and liberty to the citizens when they are doing things such as censorship. Now I know why I felt odd, thanks to this post.

    I feel that most governments are trying to instill in their citizens a sense of patriotism, and through the citizens’ belief that they should be of service to the country, choose someone which can set the direction and provide them with the means of servicing the country in the best manner.

    However, now, I have a new conflict in mind: is a leader required for a community to sustain itself, and perhaps even move further down into the future? Or is a leader something that is unnecessary and only do more harm than good?

    1. Mikey Somersall

      Hello Rachel. Great question. The whole point of liberty is for every human to take full responsibility of their own life. So in a society dedicated to liberty, the only government would be self-government. As stated in the post, no other man can grant a right that they don’t have.

      The problem with having a leader, although it may very well start with the best of intentions. is he/she planning to make decisions for everyone? Will their be an election? If so then that would just bring us back to being a democracy. Never forget that democracy is mob rule. Now do the ones who didn’t vote for said leader, are they required to do what he says? Again, this wouldn’t be self-government. So this would be anti-liberty.

      The best bet would be a society of free sovereign beings would work together in a voluntary sense. Meaning no one forces anyone else to do something that they may object to.

      Thanks for the comment!

  6. Wonderful goods from you, man. I’ve understand your stuff previous to and you’re just extremely magnificent. I really like what you have acquired here, certainly like what you’re saying and the way in which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you still care for to keep it smart. I cant wait to read far more from you. This is really a terrific website.

    1. admin

      Hello Isidro. I’m very happy that you find value in my site. I look forward to future comments on future articles.

      Thanks for the comment!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *