Apologetics LegalTender

Published on January 26th, 2011 | by Bojidar Marinov


Liberty Is the Best Protection against the Dollar

The Legislative House of the Commonwealth of Virginia is considering the establishing of a joint subcommittee to study whether the Commonwealth should establish an alternative currency in anticipation of the total breakdown of the U.S. Dollar and the Federal Reserve.

The fears of the Virginia legislators are justified: very few economists these days expect the Fed to survive for too long.

The intention of the legislators is commendable: that’s exactly the spirit of the American Republic as it was established by the Founding Fathers, the different levels of government acting as a system of checks and balances to each other, protecting the life, liberty, and property of the people against injustice and tyranny.

The solution, however, is inadequate. The official adoption of an alternative currency – even if it is officially based on specie – is only adding to the problem, not solving it. The problem we have today with the US Dollar and the Federal Reserve will only be duplicated, on a state level. That problem is called “government.” It has been the problem in every economic and non-economic area in today’s world. Wherever we have left the government in charge, the result is exactly the same as it is with the US Dollar: total breakdown. Replacing one government with another, and replacing government paper money with government gold-backed money, is only jumping from the fry-pan into the fire. Even at the state level, even with specie-backed currency the government bureaucrats will have too much power to decide how many dollars per ounce of gold, what price ratio there will be between gold and silver, who gets the privilege to make the coins or the bills, whether the individuals and businesses will be forced to accept the new money as a means of exchange and payment of debts, etc. The breakdown of the US Dollar did not come as a result of lack of gold-backing; it is the result of abuse of monopolistic power by the Federal Reserve. There is no reason to believe that the bureaucrats of the Old Dominion are less susceptible to the same temptation.

Besides, there’s a practical problem: What happens when the US Dollar collapses? In case of an alternative official currency, Virginia will have to switch to the new currency. Such a move doesn’t happen overnight and doesn’t happen smoothly. In addition to the economic turmoil from the collapse of the US Dollar, another factor will be added. The author of this article lived in a nation with a 1000 percent inflation per annum, and then official denomination of the currency to 1/1000 of the previous value. It is painful, it is chaotic, and it creates long-term problems. The switch to the Euro in the late 1990s wasn’t a picnic either. Whole economies had to go through a mini – and not so mini – recession for a couple of years. Even if the bureaucrats of Virginia are the best bureaucrats in the world, and the most honest and hard working bureaucrats, they won’t be able to avoid the chaos related to such a complete overhaul of the monetary system.

There is another practical problem as well: How would we know if the US Dollar has collapsed? How would we know that the Fed has collapsed? For all practical purposes, they already have, and hundreds of economists these days point to this fact. But the dollar is still there on the market, and the Fed is still babbling about “monetary policies” as if this phrase has any meaning anymore. What keeps them alive? Government compulsion. In other words, the legal tender laws. Government compulsion – especially when enforced on a population that is generally law-abiding, as in America – can keep the stinky carcass of a long-dead currency appear alive for many decades, until the whole economy collapses. Europe is replete with examples like that, not only in the Communist countries in Eastern Europe but also in countries like Italy and Turkey. When a people is forced by the police power of the state to accept certain currency for settlement of debts and transactions, hyperinflation can destroy the whole economy without any appearance of collapse in the currency itself. When will we know the US Dollar has collapsed? Should we wait until the whole economy has evaporated to oblivion?

The solution for Virginia – and for every other state in the Union – is much simpler. It has been tried before, ironically, in the very same Virginia that is leading the revolt against the US Dollar. The solution is called . . . LIBERTY.

Legal tender laws must go. Virginia must declare all such laws by the Federal government null and void on the territory of the Old Dominion. Individuals and businesses must be allowed to decide between themselves what currency they want to use for settlement of debts and payments in transactions. No buyer should be forced by law to accept the US Dollar in payment for goods and services. No banker should be forced to deal in US Dollars. No transaction should be evaluated in US Dollars unless the parties concerned agreed to it. And Courts should be obligated to honor any debt contract presented to them for resolution no matter what currency it is specified in, even if it is wampums or tobacco notes.

Talking about wampums and tobacco notes, it was Virginia that gave the world these two great examples of free market money creation. The American colonies didn’t have an official currency, neither did the United States until the 1860s. For all practical purposes the “currency” of the time – gold and silver – had collapsed. They couldn’t be found at all. There wasn’t enough specie to back all the transactions of the colonial economy; the gold deposits of Yukon and California had to wait for yet another two generations to be discovered, and the Mexican silver peso, the first truly global currency, wasn’t available in large quantities to the American colonists because of the low level trade between the British colonies and Mexico. Gold and silver were scarce, and there was no Federal Reserve to print “one dollar” on pieces of paper and force them as legal tender on the population.

But the colonists had the freedom to decide between themselves what is money and what is not. They had carried over the Atlantic the old English custom of payment through “promissory notes,” possible only in a legal system of Common Law based on the Christian mindset of the population. But promissory notes were still only a substitute for gold and silver, and gold and silver were scarce. So the colonists resorted to other means of exchange, unheard of in Europe before. The started using the Indian custom of offering wampums – made of clam shells – as a means of exchange. The Indians seldom used the wampums for payment. The wampums played a rather ritual role in the Indian society. But in the economy of the entrepreneurial colonists the wampums quickly became a means of payment and settling debts. Following the widespread acceptance of wampums as a tender, many townships and colonies changed their laws to prescribe fines, taxes and tolls in wampums instead of silver. Then, when the cash value of tobacco was discovered, another means of exchange appeared: “tobacco notes.” Anglican parsons in Virginia were paid in tobacco notes, and the popularity of tobacco notes spread as far as Brazil and the Caribbean Islands. Many other means of exchange appeared as well. In the cash-strapped colonial economy, the entrepreneurial spirit of the colonists combined with freedom from government interference in the money market, anything could be money, as long as there was mutual acceptance of it.

Contrary to the modern economists’ predictions, such “chaos” in the money supply did not create constraints on the economy. To the contrary, the average American entrepreneur at the time expected a normal rate of return such as to double his assets every 3 to 4 years; anything less than that was considered “slow” growth. Many business tycoons rose in the colonies, not only in the naturally rich of resources South, but also as far north as Maine, where the land wouldn’t produce enough even for bare survival. Americans were getting prosperous even while gold and silver were such a rare occurrence that there wasn’t enough of it for jewelry. (That might have been the reason for the most famous silversmith of the colonies, Paul Revere, to switch to copper and iron after the Revolution.) Liberty and ingenuity overcame the problem of scarcity of cash, and the economy kept growing with a variety of “monies” used for payments and settlement of debts.

There is no reason to believe that the people of Virginia can’t do the same. If freed from the shackles of the legal tender laws, with the US Dollar disappearing – in value – from the market, Virginians don’t need their state legislature to tell them what they can and should use. They only need the liberty to do it.

What will the consequences be of a repeal of the legal tender laws?

The first consequence will be that the residents of the Commonwealth will be able to gradually shift to other currencies. Unlike any government-imposed solutions where the shift to a different currency will have to happen with a short time and across the board, a market freed of government compulsion will give the participants the time to decide when and to what currency they want to switch to. Some will still prefer the US Dollar. Some will start using gold and silver. Some will prefer barter transactions, especially in the local communities. The possibilities provided by the freedom of the market will make many individuals and businesses consider the cash value of different goods and services. May be the old “promissory notes” will reappear. There may be also different ways of making and settling debt contracts unknown to us today, in our regulated economy. (I am sure no one in Europe before the 1600s ever thought of using wampums or tobacco notes for money.) More and more, with the depreciation of the US Dollar, the economy of Virginia will move to other types of currencies, by the free will of the people, and by their ingenuity. The state legislature won’t have to interfere; only the courts should involve when contracts are not honored.

The second consequence will be that in an economy based on many different currencies the US government will see its tax revenues decrease. Since Federal taxes can be based on US Dollar transactions only, IRS will have increasing difficulties tracking transactions that are based on other currencies. The economy of Virginia may increase but the Federal government won’t get its share of this increase . . . unless, of course, the Federal government itself abandons its own legal tender laws and admits other currencies as legal tender as well.

In addition to it, third, the Federal government will find that its depreciating dollars can buy less and less in Virginia. A market that is free will establish free exchange rates between the US dollar and the newly adopted currencies – a price denominated in US Dollars will always include a premium for expected future depreciation. In this way, the Federal government will get a dose of its own medicine, without harming the producers and the buyers in the process.

Fourth, following from the above, many people will be less willing to take federal government jobs – if one is paid by ever depreciating US Dollars, they will be more willing to look for alternatives to a Federal job, for stable currency rather than fiat money. This in turn will free human capital for productive uses, as over against tying that same capital in the destructive process of re-distribution of wealth.

Fifth, if Virginia frees its people from the US Dollar, this will also bring freedom from a banking and loan system that has been exclusively set up upon inflationary basis. In an inflationary system of legal tender laws it’s the banks that have the first access to the newly created money – or even, under the fractional reserve banking rules, create new money themselves – and therefore the banks hold an immoral advantage over their clients. The existing banks will see their power over the economy diminish due to the bad currency, the US Dollar, being pushed out of the market. While this per se is not a guarantee for the establishment of a new, honest banking system, it will at least create the conditions for it.

Sixth, and very important, the very competition to the US Dollar will force the Federal Reserve to stop inflating – unless the Feds want to phase themselves out of existence. This may be the beginning of the actual salvation of the US Dollar. Of course, we all know that if the Fed stops inflating, this will create recession and may be even depression in the economy today; but that is only because our economy is strangled by legal tender laws. Virginia, if her economy is freed from that limitation, won’t have to go through recession since it will have made the smooth transition to free market currencies and won’t be harmed by the Fed’s inflation and deflation measures.

In other words, if the legislators of the Commonwealth are really concerned for the future of the Virginian economy, the solution is simple: Declare the legal tender laws not valid on the territory of Virginia. And then leave Virginians to employ their ingenuity, entrepreneurship, and skill in remaking their economy on the foundation of liberty. They have done it before. They can do it now.

Print Friendly

About the Author

A Reformed missionary to his native Bulgaria for over 10 years, Bojidar preaches and teaches doctrines of the Reformation and a comprehensive Biblical worldview. Having founded Bulgarian Reformation Ministries in 2001, he and his team have translated over 30,000 pages of Christian literature about the application of the Law of God in every area of man’s life and society, and published those translations online for free. He has been active in the formation of the Libertarian movement in Bulgaria, a co-founder of the Bulgarian Society for Individual Liberty and its first chairman. If you would like Bojidar to speak to your church, homeschool group or other organization, contact him through his website: http://www.bulgarianreformation.org/

27 Responses to Liberty Is the Best Protection against the Dollar

  1. Jeff says:

    Colonial script.

  2. Mark Herpel says:

    Excellent article, we cover all 12 current and past U.S. state bills in this month’s issue(FEB) of DGCmagazine.
    Unfortunately the VA bill is dead.
    01/27/11 House: Subcommittee recommends no action by voice vote


    • Oh, man… Mark, I love your magazine! Some of the articles are outstanding. I especially like Paul Rosenberg’s “The (Presumed) End of History.” I have been telling people the same things for years.

  3. Bill Greene says:

    Wonderful article! I do want to point out to you and your readers, as well, that there IS already a bill that has been proposed to nullify legal tender laws in the States: it’s called the Constitutional Tender Act.

    The United States Constitution declares, in Article I, Section 10, “No State shall… make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”. This means that no State can make something a “tender in payment” (which means they cannot “make something an offer as payment”) for any debts, which would include debts owed by and to the State. However, EVERY State in the United States of America HAS made some other “Thing” an offer as payment – they have by law declared that they will accept, and pay out, Federal Reserve Notes for any debts owed by or to them. Therefore, every State is in violation of Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution. Thus the need for the “Constitutional Tender Act” — a bill template that can be introduced in every State legislature in the nation, returning each of them to adherence to the United States Constitution’s actual legal tender provisions.

    If you go to http://www.ConstitutionalTender.com/ you will find more information on this bill, which has already been introduced in the Georgia House of Representatives; you can also download a paper there which I presented at the Mises Institute’s “Austrian Scholars’ Conference,” entitled “Ending the Federal Reserve from the Bottom Up: Re-Introducing Competitive Currency by State Adherence to Article I, Section 10,” which explains how the ConTen Act can be used to nullify federal legal tender laws as they relate to the State. There is also a template there that can be modified and used by every State.

    Thank you again for this article!

    Dr. Bill Greene

  4. Roland says:

    Great article! Thanks for publishing it on your website for us to read. I would like to suggest the book “The Miracle on Main Street” by Tupper Saussy for those interesting in learning more about this subject. The book is a “classic” on the history of money in the Colonial and Founding Eras of the American Republic. It contains Founding Father Roger Sherman’s (no relation to that other warmongering Sherman!) writings on the danger of fiat currency and many photos of early American coins and paper notes. You can find more info. at: http://www.tuppersaussy.com .

  5. Eugene says:

    Don’t worry your little pin heads about all the gold in the fort because knowing our politicians the only
    thing in there is spider webs and old IOU!!!!!!!!!!! lol

  6. Bob says:

    Well done with the article. It is articles like this that makes this page a breath of fresh air in the otherwise puerile engagement of politics on the part of Christians. The claim that the continental was gold backed is highly dubious, it was in my understanding based upon a fractional gold reserve system which allowed for the reckless printing of script. Just like the Federal Reserve was until Roosevelt siezed all of the gold at the point of a gun.

    This problem of wild inflation is solved with doing away with the fractional reserve system and having a 100% gold backed system. It really is simple. The only problem that can arise from this is that government can’t print money out of thin air and have an empire, and that is why it probably won’t happen anytime soon.

  7. E Harris says:

    Thank you for writing this article, Bojidar. Most Americans (myself included) get so caught up in our rather cushy lives that we forget (even now) that our whole “system” is teetering on the edge of collapse. (Not merely a doubling of prices…which would be hard enough.)

    Question: What is “Old Dominion”?

    • E Harris says:

      Thanks for looking past the problem, and advancing a solution! It’s the BEST political solution for the current climate, not just a solution. It’s a solution that brings freedom to all! It’s a solution that would decrease the power of the state… and lead to more righteousness… at the same time.

      Most people are tempted to simply resort to gold-backed dollar. But you are right: people who would be tempted by that solution do not understand that the secular civil government would be able to alter the ratio of gold-to-dollar at will! And that is not much different from the scenario that we are in, right now! It would create the same inflationary tendencies! And any stability that gold would produce…would only be used to strengthen, rather than weaken, statist control! (After all, that is how the US dollar gained it’s credibility in the first place. It was initially backed by gold – and then merely the presence of gold reserves – and that is why people and countries trusted it. This gave our statist government (especially the Fed) more power, in the economy of the world.)

      I have one important question, that has dogged me for a while: **What do we do, if we cannot convince secular civil governments (governments that give voice to both true christians and imposters and evil people) to create room for valid currencies parallel to their own? **

      How can we proceed to create valid currencies, anyway??? Because it may come down to that.

      The only thing I can think of (that is a pure solution) is to rely on the economy of Heaven. That is, to give, expect little in return, and trust God. To trust in our brothers and sisters (who we know and are friends with), more than we do those who are unrighteous. This pure solution… may not work for those who are unaccustomed to walking by faith. Our overall economy would collapse, because most people in America (and elsewhere) do not walk strictly by faith. Our trust is in the dollar and the sword, far more than it is in the God of Heaven. Even though our currency says “In God We Trust”.

      The second solution would be to create a small black market, among believers and close friends. This isn’t an attractive solution. It’s very small scale, would avoid contracts…

      Backstory: Two years ago, I was like any dumb average American in how I thought of money. I looked at a “dollar”, I saw the number on it, and I was immediately assured of it’s value. I never asked the question “What Is Money?” I do now.

      I now realize the scheme that was deliberately foisted upon us. So I am wondering: “How do we unplug from this unrighteous system of slavery?” (For it is a subtle slavery.) The only answer that I could come up with is that groups of individuals within communities must deliberately make efforts to make, approve, and monitor their own currencies. Then they may put pressure on local store owners to accept this currency as well. (I wasn’t thinking about the “legal tender” laws, at the time…) I know it is against the law, but if there are no contracts, then Uncle Sam cannot get involved. This is essentially a black-market solution, and it would begin small scale, but it is the only solution that I could envision. Of course, then there is the possibility of lawsuit. So my whole idea of black-market growing its own currency is not really possible…unless everyone involved in these transactions is trustworthy and will not turn to the secular civil governors to settle a matter.

      My theory does not work very well, if at all. It is a worst-case scenario, for when things get near the starvation point.

      Maybe this is another thing we are simply going to have to wade through, while we proclaim a clear truth: that we serve God, and we are free only In Him and His Ways.

      Revelation 13:9-11 (ESV)
      9If anyone has an ear, let him hear:
      10 If anyone is to be taken captive,
      to captivity he goes;
      if anyone is to be slain with the sword,
      with the sword must he be slain.
      Here is a call for the endurance and faith of the saints.

      The Second Beast
      11Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. … telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived…
      Revelation 14:11-13 (ESV)
      11And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”
      12 Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.
      13And I heard a voice from heaven saying, “Write this: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.” “Blessed indeed,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, for their deeds follow them!”

      I do believe… more and more… that we are nearing the end of Revelation 14.

      And the page is about to turn. But it will not be easy. Our hardship, and the hardship of the entire world, will make it easier to clearly proclaim our message. Because we are about to become VERY RELEVANT.

      We won’t be raptured… we will have to faithfully proclaim, and teach our children. Because we hope that our words and our investment in our children will follow us. We have wasted a lot of the resources of this generation on our own desires. The page is about to turn. May we wake up on the other side.

      And I can only pray for a “year of jubilee” so that our children are not born into the debt that we and our ancestors have built up.

      • Matthew says:


        • E Harris says:

          Yes. Heavily influenced by Historicism. Then Matt 24 Preterism. Then Postmillenialism. …and it opened me up so much. It opened my eyes and my heart to take in more of the wonder and majesty. I’m not an emotional guy, but I now am beginning to understand (intellectually) what people sometimes are feeling when they worship Him. (They just can’t articulate it.)

          I was raised with dispensational teaching, but thankfully not too much. It didn’t sink in. It just didn’t seem logical enough, to me. I have a good imagination, but I cannot BELIEVE something with ALL my heart, if there is not 100% logic to it. Though I believed in future Antichrist dude (that was hard to get away from). Current events seem headed in that direction…and Antichrist is like the Borg of Star Trek: a collective machine-like entity you love to hate.

          I liked Star Trek. My mind would wander to the mysterious, elusive “1000 year” period, since that was “1000 years” and the Antichrist supposedly only had “7.” It seemed logical that the Antichrist was a hiccup on the way to the 1000 years. It also seemed logical, at the time, that the rapture couldn’t come first since the beheaded saints rising again was the FIRST resurrection. This means that there could have been no rapture, where the dead rise first, until after the Antichrist gets removed, and maybe not until after the 1000 years was over.

          Then I came across a book “End Time Delusions.” You guys MUST give this book to dispensationalists. I slowly became historicist after reading that book. It showed me that antichrist was in the past, but even more importantly: it showed me the PRINCIPLE behind antichrist! It is a kind of social dynamic that can only be described as a SOCIAL PYRAMID…and it is much more devious than the card-board Antichrist that I had previously imagined. It was more concrete, real, historical, factual. I could RELATE to it as my personal adversary…since it’s forces are still in play today. They are HUMAN forces that the devil merely uses! And it happened WITHIN the church, thus making him a very close match to rival christ. He declared himself to be Head of the Church and Vicar (can also mean anti-) Christ. …and so forth.

          One man (theoretically) sat over the world attempting to rule the world (by virtue of being the Emperor’s “spiritual counselor”). He attempted to be head of one world religion, sitting in the Temple of God which is the church. And that can be the ONLY “Temple of God” by the time you are post-resurrection A.D…. so I KNEW that it had to be the Pope, since that was the only position that ever had such authority, seated in power, in the hearts of believers. Using the hearts of believers for its power base. And the Reformation was a de-centralizing movement away from this. There is no turning back the clock to anything even remotely resembling the amount of false spiritual authority that the Papacy had 1000 years ago. History became meaningful, overnight… to someone who was raised to neglect everything that was pre-1904.

          (Back in the 1980′s the UPCI didn’t much care for anything that didn’t point straight to “tongues is the initial evidence of the Holy Spirit.” They are slowly accepting that’s not the case, and are simply ignoring that doctrine, acting as if they never taught that doctrine. They still push tongues…and they say that it accompanies the Holy Spirit, which it does. So long as they stop there, then I’m content. They simply want to avoid the conflict and splits of addressing it and repenting, head-on. This is one reason, among many, that I reject factionalism and denominationalism. It cements false doctrine, false divisions, false regimentation, and whole social heirarchies whose existence seems to be owed to allegiances to SPECIFIC false doctrines. We are christians. I don’t even like naming movements, most of the time. Because it encourages closed-box thinking, it encourages isolation, and hinders open dialogue about the SPECIFICS.)

        • E Harris says:

          When I said that the Pope was attempting to be over the world by being the Emperor’s “spiritual advisor”, I meant that that is what the Pope probably initially thought gave him authority to exalt himself. Rome was the center of the empire, or close to it. The Emperor was (by then) almost universally acknowledged statist head of the statist empire. And so the “spiritual head” of that city, Rome, decided that since the Emperor fell under his jurisdiction, and because he was the one who had resonsibility for the most powerful man in the world, that he was Head of the whole universal church! And a lot of christians let it happen!!!

          Talk about statism. We drove a type of statism so far into the heart of people, that we still have a lot of its doctrines and practices with us today. The reformation is helping to bring us OUT. It’s been a slow climb, in jumps and spurts (that kept cementing themselves into institutions with rules and borders).

          But now we’re reaching critical mass. People everywhere (for better or worse) are screaming, in their hearts, for UNITY and WHOLENESS, and to a lesser degree (but even more importantly) Oneness, which can only be found in our Lord.

        • E Harris says:

          I’m not sure about this (just “generalizing”): But it makes sense that beasts are empire-systems. Nebuchadnezzar, when he exalted himself too far, was condemned to wander the fields like a beast. And our modern Freudian theory about the masses claims that the masses can be controlled through their 4 main animalistic appetites. (thus the controllers would essentially be the Heads of societal beastial natures arising from the hearts of humanity.) Beastial nature requires a regimented physical discipline and sword (and a carrot: money) to keep it occupied and in check.

          I suspect that a “beast” in Revelation is: a military-style regimented heirarchy. Or at least it needs one, in order to function without decaying into anarchy! A beast requires the sword and money in order to be large and function.

          If one is in love with how “successful” the beast is, and wants to mimic the beast, even without the sword and money… then you have a social heirarchy that is regimented in the same manner as a private-sector corporation or a public-sector beast. Only it’s dedicated to a cause, and that economy is what holds people together. This is the way most of our Sunday gatherings and official institutions are patterned. Images of the Beast, without being (technically) beasts, themselves. It’s what happens when corporate group of christians come together and get a little too enamored with the success of worldly systems.

          Then there is the ‘mark’ of the beast or the number of his name. Wouldn’t that be cash itself? In fact, there has been a currency called the ‘mark’ hasn’t there? Those who worship the beast and his image (christian regimented corporateness), have no rest. And those who obsess over money don’t have much rest, either. We can use money, obviously, to spread the gospel. But it should never occupy the altar of our hearts: we should never think that money can do things that it cannot. And sometime in the future (possibly distant future) it is predicted that the saints will have victory over beast-empire-statism (that the nation-state model is largely based on); we will have victory over the mindset (the image) of statism that we sometimes like to copy in order to “rise above others”; and we will have victory over false currencies, and maybe even all physical currencies. The way to enjoy this victory NOW, is to walk as we are supposed to: with our eyes set on the Prize. We are overcomers.

        • Matthew says:


          W.J. Mencarow has covered almost every chapter in Revelation (84 so far), you just have to look carefully through the sermons. He highlights the views of major reformer and protoreformers. He also book drops from time-to-time, which I used as an opportunity to expand my library. (http://www.historicism.com/ is also a good source for articles and books)

          I think he (i.e. the reformers he cites) may be wrong about the second beast, but otherwise I tend to largely agree with him on most other matters. His introductory sermons into revelation are a valuable resource.

        • E Harris says:

          Thank you.

    • Old Dominion is the nickname for the Commonwealth of Virginia. Those of us who lived in Virginia know her by this name.

      • E Harris says:

        You said “bureaucrats of the Old Dominion”… and I figured you were not meaning it as I took it. But it fits. I took it to mean old state/statist/empire-like governments that govern both heathen and righteous people. State governments are better than anarchy (in physical terms) but they are still a form of disguised physical warfare between factions.

        There is a time and place for the sword. But it is fast disappearing. The kingdom of God brings peace, and Jesus is our King.

      • E Harris says:

        This post is just me brainstorming, based on what I know about the world…and Bojidar’s post merely got me thinking in a new direction! These are not firm, fixed beliefs that I picked up from anyone.

        I believe that I may have learned something important here, that go way beyond money. MAYBE we should not appeal to Caesar (secular civil government/statist government) to DO THINGS (take an active stance) ever. (Did Paul ever appeal to Caesar to do anything, other than be converted and personally live righteously??)

        Caesar (by being Caesar, in order to justify his own continued form of government) will take an active stance (either for righteousness, or unrighteousness). But our stance should always be to peacefully and quietly (with firm and clear declaration) roll back and repeal statist strength, beginning in those areas where the state acts unrighteously. When we serve with the power of the state, we should do so only under Christ. And that is, of course, the discussion of the Christian Reconstruction. I have a few “hunches” about what the coming of Christ means for us. I have a hunch (based on history, and the actions of the saints after Jesus came) that the church (the simple, family-based, community of fellow faithful servants) is overtaking statism in its entirety. We can prolong the struggle by adopting statist measures, and diluting our proclamation accordingly. Or we can suffer more in the short term (at least that is how we fear it will be), and have a clear proclamation that will actually speed (hasten) the coming of Jesus Christ.

        We should never appeal to Caesar/statism to help us or save us or anyone else (even if such a thing would appear to be righteous, if it was done by an individual person). We should appeal to Caesar to STOP legislating things that are unrighteous (that would be unrighteous if an individual person were to do them). We want righteousness to have no hindrance, right along with the doctrine of Christ which equips US as individuals to believe do the law by His enabling grace. If Caesar listened to us, and stopped all unrighteous “laws”… then we would be freer! And stronger! And propagate faster! To the point that statism (worldwide) would become less and less of a threat (because conversion rates would be much faster…through free-market prosperity of God’s own people and their obedience as they take the gospel to foreign lands).
        The next step would be to question the “righteousness” in being the one to write “law”. And to question it’s very existence. (Since Biblical Law, strictly interpreted, does not make room for being enforced by a statist-style government.) When we get elected or appointed to office, we do so with the clear understanding that we serve God and God alone…not man. We don’t go by the “US Constitution” we go by the Bible, and it’s Message. As I think Bojidar told me earlier, we are whole people. We are not divided into “institutional” and “personal” dichotomy. When we go somewhere, and speak any word (and do any ruling) it should be as the word of the Lord. We are his ambassadors. Now, this means that we cannot be appointed to a statist position and have it remain a statist position. We would be judges. Like in the books of Judges. As Legislators, executives, judges, servants, or whatever… we would act as individual ambassadors of Christ to all of the individual people that we meet. And any authority we have we will acknowledge as having come from God. And any decree we make (or judgment we pronounce) will be as if from God. This is how we SHOULD be, anyway. This leaves no room for standing on anything that is post-bible-cannon (including constitutional-style government, or creeds). Unless it is the very Spirit of God, which is always in agreement with the Bible cannon, in some way, shape, or form.
        The power of a statist sword is not ours to use. Personal swords, maybe (when against a violent robber, or the state…). Ours is a kingdom not of this world: a kingdom that comes into people’s hearts. That is the kingdom we fight for. It is believed in after we declare a clear message of salvation, and its hope, and its walk.

        I know there are a myriad of real-world problems that would be associated with my hypothesis. It appears to leave us wide open to foreign attack by invaders. And it does. That is it’s glaring weakness. It’s the same problem faced by Christians in the Roman Empire days, when they were besieged by barbarians. Only now, we are besieged by the threat of atomic weapons…and my hypothesis would leave us defenseless (if we were a large majority of the population, and all believed this way). Statism (Caesar, the extra-biblical secular civil state) is the only thing that (currently) provides us protection against the accumulated threat of… other states (states that primarily got their historical power from Christians acting like earthly collective units IN THE FIRST PLACE … but that’s water under the bridge!).

        A righteous solution to the problem of protecting the masses, in a Caesar-less area, against a powerful foreign invader… would be to privatize (in the hands of private sector people) atomic weapons and defensive shields. That is the equivalent of giving someone a very big sword or a gun for self-preservation. It would essentially give the winning bidder a weapon…that has no economic incentive to stay online, unless an incentive is found. Which means that it ultimately wouldn’t stay online. It would be sold to a foreign (potential) enemy, or used for mass-bribery, especially if its owner was not a righteous person. What would a righteous person do, with an atomic bomb in his company’s “backyard”? A righteous person would probably find an economically beneficial thing to do with a nuclear arsenal (or BETTER YET a shield of some kind), so he could keep it online and protect the people of his geographic vicinity from attack. Would economic incentives be good enough to keep private sector corporations in check, and using their power wisely… in the absence of statist controls over their technology and power?

        These questions are very weighty. And the Bible appears not to address them… That is very interesting. That probably means (to me) that we should stick closer to the earth, when we proclaim the gospel. Before we even think of completely dismantling or taking-over Caesar (neither of which are authorized)… we need to think of how to get the (stabilizing, peace-creating) message out to as many people as possible. Go! To all nations! PROCLAIMING will bring peace much faster than staying home, and trying to see how we can advise or steer statist-style governments.

        The peace of the kingdom of God would be expressed in the earth, the more people are brought in. They are brought in through doctrinal clarity, and personal service. People will see our good works and glorify our Father, in heaven.

        A statist-style government is ANY government that: #1) places any authority in heathen hands AND #2) is structured to be larger than a personal family. This would include private-sector corporations, which could develop a sword, and then prisons, etc.

        So… while we de-centralize the physical world, and make it freer monetarily… there will be great centers of wealth. They will probably act less aggressively when there is no collective sword. And if they try to become a sword, we preach to them as individuals. If they insist on aggression, we insist on non-aggressive tactics. By the time the clarity of the gospel of the kingdom is preached around the world (that we are of Christ not the state), our economies will be so intertwined that it would be impractical for an evil person to use the sword. He would gain nothing by it, and he would hurt himself. Satan, effectively, would have nowhere to go, nobody to turn to who would welcome his war.

        To me, this is huge. Don’t look for Uncle Same to enforce something with a police squad or military. War is the health of the state. War creates demand for the sword, which creates demand for more money concentrated in the same hands that bear the sword. This will only strengthen the state apparatus (that can then be turned against us – if a bad guy worms his way to “power”). And bad guys are drawn to the state apparatus like flies to sugar or bees to honey. (They cease thinking about their families as a means of continuing their name…and they start of bigger ways to get glory, that are counter-productive to freedom and rob freedom…as all statist governments do to some degree.)

        If the US protects itself (as a nation-state) and goes to war with Russia (as a nation-state)… then in the end, the winner will be strengthened (as a nation-state). If this is the level that we choose to surrender ourselves to, then God will constantly bring judgments against people on that (collective) level. But man-made corporate collectives are not the highest level of judgment and justice. God prefers to judge (and judge through) people. He wants people who will walk with Him. He prefers mercy. He prefers freedom.

        What this will look like in the long run, is that (hypothetically) if Russia invades the United States, then the United States must repel Russia without statist aggression. We must repel statist aggression AS A PEOPLE. As fathers. And we must fight until we win, without forming a permanent collective machine or standing army. We must stand up for righteousness AND freedom, simultaneously. We can do this by protecting ourselves and our neighbors from violence, with our own personal swords. We can do this by BOLDLY proclaiming truth to everyone (be it our brothers, our neighbors, secular civil governments, or members of an invading army.) As I have said to my friends: “America is a place where tyranny comes; only to die.” It’s never nice when tyranny comes over here. And the struggles have been hard. But we have seen the light (of God’s Reason) dawn slowly over us, as we seek to live for God in this continent.

        No doubt, some will still continue to trust in statist means, for stability, or whatever. Let them. And when the state turns to us for advice (such as elections), we SHOULD PARTICIPATE every time… because they are asking for us to rule. That is a responsibility. We should consider it our duty as servants of God to proclaim God’s message, by electing the candidates that are the most in keeping with our position as possible. We should support those candidates that would keep the secular civil state from acting unrighteously (primary importance). We should oppose the secular civil state with all forms of nonaggressive resistance, when it acts unrighteously or violently. This would make it hard for them to justify violence against us, and at the same time dishearten their cause when they see our righteousness (because they need to believe that they are being righteous in imposing force on us).

        When a statist government seeks to do righteously, we should not oppose it on an individual level. We should live quietly. We should continue proclaiming the gospel, with as much clarity as we can muster. (I used to say that we should proclaim it LOUDLY, but then we all know that a soft answer turns away wrath. And it will surely turn away the wrath and the sword of the state, over time. As it has done over the last 2000 years, when we win over THE PEOPLE. Statist governments cannot be converted. They triangulate. They will forever be used for either war (when one side gets the upper hand) or triangulation. So, it exists to serve ITSELF. It is a beast (or at least an attempt to be one)… since it can potentially go world-wide and become an empire. In fact, when one side gets the upper hand in a statist government…the statist government is still operating by triangulation…it’s just that the political center-of-gravity has shifted. Politics is just refined (and disguised) physical warfare. But our weapons are not carnal. Our weapons are mighty through Christ to the pulling down of strongholds (mental barriers). When we clearly proclaim, with humility and truth on our side… we are like water on a rock. The rock disintegrates into sand. And the most powerful collective in an individualistic society is the collective of those hidden in Christ, moving mysteriously as One in the earth.

        THE PEOPLE can, and will be progressively converted. We should proclaim consistently, clearly, and with boldness…to all of the people around us. We need to know clearly where we stand on all issues, in order to effectively stand, with clarity. So we testify by our good works, and the clear message accompanying. And we peacefully separate our identity, self-image, power, and currency as much as we can from the state. (Otherwise, we are lending our identity, self-image, power, and currency to an apparatus that represents and is made to govern heathen people. And heathen people are always drawn toward infesting such a “system” when it is set up. This even happened when Israel had kings. They first had a “system” that was very individualistic with no national government or currency, no standing army, only families and maybe (?) tribal leaders (?). Their judges (to judge BETWEEN THOSE WHO VOLUNTARILY CAME TO THEM) were free, individual prophet/judges. Most of the kings were not that good. All but one of the judges were pretty ok. The one that failed, Samson, is still remembered.)

        Fathers must take up their rightful place as heads of their households. Fathers are the ones who hold the leadership ability, and decision-making power. They must be strengthened in spirit, and sharpened in mind, and kept in communion so that they know they have others to turn to.

        We do all of our work under direct authority from God (and His Laws). The secular civil state is made for the unrighteous. We judge the unrighteous by our words and our deeds. Conviction falls on them. And God carries through with the Ultimate Judgment.

        When statist governments seek to act righteously (and still remain in control and in power over the “means” of such righteousness), they are in effect trying to take over for the fathers. They are trying to be the father-figure. And they progressively rob more and more from the attention and resources of the family. They want to turn the whole “state” into a “family” with one father (whoever is the ‘top dog’ that year in the statist government). Problem is, the head of a statist government, while acting (more or less) like a father of a (very large) family… doesn’t relinquish his collective power. He keeps it. And keeps it. And keeps it. Until it is destroyed by a rival. This form of collective is corrosive, and irredeemable. Even the good it does, it does by stealing from the family and its respect and resources.

        We should look for peaceful ways to dismantle statist “corporate righteousness” (which is often just a shade away from being self-righteous pomp, anyway).

        Rather, we should point out when “Caesar” DOES something wrong, and actively petition him (according to conscience and logic) to back off! So that we can pick up the slack…and not ever turn back to statist control. Piece by piece. For example: abortion. I despise it with a passion! We shouldn’t be looking to outlaw abortion. That would require enforcement, and would strengthen every branch of the state. This would create incentive for evil people to worm their way into power and infest the state. This is why the governments of empires and states probably tend to degenerate, instead of purify, over time! (Notice, it is the opposite in freely-speaking church government. The Reformation has brought about more and more decentralization, de-coupling from the state, and more freedom of speech. This is creating (along with a lot of sectarianism) more checks and balances about the message of the Bible rather than fewer checks and balances!!! The message has greater ability to be examined and compete in the marketplace of ideas.
        So when we de-couple things from the state, and we have A Reason for doing so… then… it shifts the balance of power toward the private sector (which gives families, workers, inventors, and the community of true believers, the upper hand). The secular civil state is the fullest manifestation of the collective of unrighteous mammon. The body of believers manifests a deeper heaven-sent communion. We are peaceful and working together (striving for unity in heavenly matters, and decentralization for the sake of the family in earthly matters). And we are adding to our number. Our collective is of course, in Jesus Christ. For we are His Bride. Our economy is ultimately an economy of Heaven so we CAN walk above material finances, when we are called to. This makes us all the more formidable.

        It is legal tender laws that attempt to combat our freedom… by consolidating the power of unrighteous mammon against us, our advance, and our message. Righteous people live righteously and peacefully, and are concerned about themselves and their neighbors. Unrighteous people want to elevate themselves and control everything.

        The reason America was so successful, is because it was primarily the CHURCH that designed its own state, in order to accomodate its differences, along with some heathen people. This is akin to an even more serious kind of warfare: it invites heathen people toward the power-center that we feel obligated to protect and fight over! It distracts us from a purer form of dominion and proclamation: getting the message out and proclaiming as fast and clearly as possible! Instead, we get distracted (by all kinds of corporateness) by how we think we should wield a physical sword.

        In other words, the church formed a body politic, and welcomed the heathen inside. (Because they already were inside.) This is what happens EVERY TIME anyone tries to set up a government OF THIS WORLD.

        Was that a wise thing to do? It was expedient. But I am not sure if it was wise. It was only historically beneficial (to the spread of the gospel), because of Christians’ culture. It would probably have been beneficial had Christians not taken up the collective sword, and merely fought the British economically (and territorially: each defending his own house and that of his neighbors). Now this would have meant that (lets assume that God didn’t intervene) the British would have swept over the continent with the power of their collective army… taking each house as they went. There would have been death. But what if they weren’t met with the power of the sword? What if economic war was waged, but the people found ways to ECONOMICALLY RESIST without physically resisting? The worst that would have happened was physical slavery or indentured servitude. But IF the gospel was a clear gospel, and the service was done as unto the Lord with a pure heart… then they would have won over their captors. Sooner or later.

        THIS is HOW the GOSPEL SPREADS. It does not spread through the power of the sword. (That only impresses people’s carnal side, and stirs up their carnal side. Fear. Aggression. Irritation. Excitement. People’s eyes are drawn once again to the physical… when it is a collective sword, everything SEEMS epic. Even if the victory is erased in another 200 years, as if it never occurred. The victories that are not erased are when people are won to the Lord, and they win others (if only their children). How do we protect and preserve FAMILIES in the earth? As I said before, the state is often the enemy of the family…because all fallen men search for meaning and “greatness” and they think they get this in the power and “greatness” of a collective corporation. At least a private-sector corporation relies on a product, and must continually justify its very existence. Not so, with a state. We just give them a pass! The existence of nation-states we do not even question – we trust in their power to protect us. And when one isn’t protecting us, but exploiting us… we begin to think to ourselves of creating a NEW state government to replace the old one.

        The Constitution is a wonderful document, outlining for the first time since ancient Israel, how a people would be ruled by law. Representatives were only to uphold the law. But… just like the danger with a standing army… we had a Standing State. BAD IDEA! (in hindsight!) We made important historical advances by protecting ourselves from the British. But there is more than one way to skin a cat. What is the REAL ENEMY HERE?! The British? Or their ways.

        Bojidar, I know I’m driving you crazy… But I just have to thank you for this article! As usual, when you advance the truth, it opens up all sorts of new avenues. We cannot predict the freedom that becomes available to us when we accept an axiom (or a logical conclusion) that we just never saw before. The truth really does let us perceive the freedom that we have in Christ, and just WHO we are in Him.

        Lies of all kinds (especially statist lies like fiat currency) seek to close off avenues of freedom. Controlling people seek to blind us and cripple us. Our response should be one of love, but denial that they have any power over us. We need to come out of Babylon, even while we dwell within its borders. We need to live like Daniel, Joseph, and countless others… living under God, under open skies… even as those who stand next to us think that they serve a machine and a man.

        Sadly, same goes for some of the most devout church “goers” that I know. Many people fail to see that they ARE the church. And so while some of us feel free as we teach, listen, and worship… others have a VERY statist-style mentality about the “proceedings” and “offices” of a Sunday gathering. Such people are rarely fun to talk to. Warmth seems to disappear when a person is doing a “job” (because in their mind or in their heart’s altar… they have joined the worship of God, with money and the “official” military-style regimentation that has nothing to do with the natural family, but seeks to carve it up or ignore it… that attitude, that I encounter all the time, did NOT originate from the early church. It is seen and felt everywhere in church culture (in Sunday gatherings) but it did not come from the early church.)

        • E Harris says:

          Correction: ANY corporation acting in an evil manner becomes a statist-style government (an image of the beast). A corporation in the right hands becomes privately-owned (more personal in headship); and it exists to SERVE families and fathers (economically, or through publishing the message of the gospel).

  8. JTB says:

    Viva la Liberte! Or as they say in France, I surrender!

  9. I saw several errors in the original Virginia resolution. I just sent the following letter:

    The honorable Mr. William J. Howell, Speaker of the House of Delegates,
    CC: The honorable Mr. Governor,

    Hello. I am writing to you not as a citizen of Virginia, but as a fellow citizen of the United States of America, concerned with the welfare of his fellow citizens of the other states, and interested in even those transactions which will in fact have no legal ramifications whatsoever for him himself.

    The general tenor and purpose of House Joint Resolution No. 557, regarding the establishment of an alternative currency to replace the Federal Reserve’s odious fiat currency, causes me much pleasure and satisfaction.

    I must, however, voice my misgivings regarding some of the particulars. Lines 50 through 56 thereof read:
    [50] WHEREAS, all gold and silver coins of the United States are designated “legal tender” under the
    [51] aegis of Title 31, United States Code, §§ 5103 and 5112(h), and must be so designated perforce of
    [52] Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 and Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United
    [53] States; and
    [54] WHEREAS, pursuant to Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 of and the Tenth Amendment to the
    [55] Constitution of the United States, each State must make gold and silver coin a Tender in Payment of
    [56] Debts; and
    {End quote}
    I believe this is a misinterpretation of the Federal Constitution. The Federal Constitution does *not* give the Federal Government any authority to say (in the United States Code) that gold and silver shall be legal tender; all the Constitution allows is that the Federal Government shall mint the actual coins themselves, but no power is given to make them legal tender; if the United States Code says otherwise, then its declaration is unconstitutional, and it is your duty to interpose and nullify. And the Constitution does *not* say that the states must make gold and silver a legal tender. (Incidentally, if it did say that, then this would contradict the assertion that the Federal Government, in the United States Code, has already made them a legal tender. What the Federal Government has done or must do, the states cannot and must not do, and vice versa, as per the Tenth Amendment.) Rather, the Constitution states that the states cannot make anything but gold and silver a legal tender. They do not have to make them legal tender, but if they do make something or something else a legal tender, the choices are confined to gold and silver alone.

    All this changes what the government of the Commonwealth of Virginia may do, if the Commonwealth wishes to confine itself to what the Constitution permits it. The Federal Government may coin gold and silver, and the Commonwealth may ratify preexisting coins of gold and silver (whether those of the Federal Government’s, or those of any other entity on earth, whether a private business corporation in the United States or a foreign government elsewhere, etc.) Now, perhaps, if the Federal Government refuses to honor its duty to coin gold and silver, the Commonwealth may undertake that task as well, in that the doctrine of interposition of inferior magistrates requires an inferior magistrate to interpose wherever the superior magistrate is negligent in his duties. But be that as it may. The point for now is that only gold and silver coins themselves, one way or another, may be made legal tender. That is all the Constitution permits. The Federal Government cannot make gold and silver (or anything else) a legal tender; on the states can. And the states do not have to make gold and silver a legal tender, but they cannot make anything else a legal tender either, not even specie-backed paper. As John Witherspoon notes in his “Essay on Money”, specie-backed paper (such as the Continentals and the various proprietary state currencies of the colonial and Articles of Confederation periods) is merely a promissory note, a promise to redeem the paper for something of value in the future, but the paper itself is of no value. The only thing which should be coerced via a legal tender law, Witherspoon says, is something of actual, inherent value. Paper may indeed be made a currency, but only a non-coerced one, one that is tender by virtue of private choice, not enforced legal tender laws.

    Lines 69 through 71 of the House Resolution say,
    “[69] … Americans may employ whatever currency they choose to stipulate as
    [70] the medium for payment of their private debts, including gold or silver, or both, to the exclusion of a
    [71] currency not redeemable in gold or silver that Congress may have designated “legal tender”;”.
    But no. This is incorrect. It is not that Americans, for their private debts, may stipulate either gold or silver alone, but nothing else, for their private contracts. No. Americans may stipulate *anything* on earth. The Constitution itself says no states may impair the obligation of contracts. So if two Americans wish to make a private contract in wampums or tobacco notes or barter, this is perfectly lawful, and the courts must honor this, for no law may impair the obligations of these contracts. It is only regarding public contracts and debts to the government that the limitation is to gold and silver. Private Americans may even use government-issued paper currency, if they choose, but the government is forbidden to enforce the use of this currency via a legal tender law, but the use of this government currency must be voluntary and volitional.

    Indeed, while the Constitution allows only gold and silver to be made legal tender (as I have described above), it nevertheless permits the Federal Government “[t]o borrow money on the credit of the United States”, and Thayer v. Hedges (22 Ind. 282, 1864) notes, “Of the right to issue this paper there is no doubt. The power to borrow money includes the power to execute a written acknowledgment of the debt created by the act of borrowing, and also a written promise to pay the debt.” Likewise, James Madison, in his records of the Constitutional Convention, notes in a footnote that he “became satisfied that striking out the words ["and emit bills on the credit of the United States", as Gouverneur Morris successfully moved to be struck out] would not disable the Government from the use of public notes as far as they could be safe & proper; & would only cut off the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making the bills a tender for public or private debts.” Madison had suggested that the clause “and emit bills on the credit of the United States” merely be amended with a prohibition to make them legal tender, but Nathaniel Gorham said that no, this left too much of a mere suggestion that they might be made legal tender despite the prohibition. So the clause was deleted, but the other clause, about borrowing, was retained, and all admitted that it, in fact, contained the same power to emit paper tender as long as it lacked a legal tender law. So Thayer v. Hedges and Madison both seem to feel that even striking out “and emit bills on the credit of the United States” does not eliminate the power to emit paper currency – as long as it is *not* made a legal tender (in other words, as long as it is not a “bill of credit”, a “bill of credit” being something coerced by a legal tender law), because of the power “[t]o borrow money on the credit of the United States”, notwithstanding the loss of the power “emit bills on the credit”. Also, Nathaniel Gorham said, “The power [to "emit bills on the credit of the United States"] so far as it will be necessary or safe, is involved in that of borrowing.” In short: the Federal Government has the power to emit bills of credit, but only on condition that there is no legal tender law, and the use of these bills is voluntary. Likewise for the states, I presume. Therefore, only gold and silver may be coerced by legal tender laws, and everything else must be voluntary.

    Compare the book “History of the origin, formation, and adoption of the Constitution of the United States: with notices of its principal framers” by George Ticknor Curtis, vol. 2, pp. 329f., which a good discussion of this issue:
    It is possible that the phrase “emit bills on the credit of the United States” might have been left in the Constitution, without any other danger than the hazards of a doubtful construction, which would have confined its meaning to the issuing of certificates of debt under the power to “borrow money.” But this was not the sense in which the term “bills of credit” was generally received throughout the country, nor the sense intended to be given to it in the clause which contained the prohibition on the States. The well understood meaning of the term had reference to paper issues, intended to circulate as currency, and bearing the public promise to pay a sum of money at a future time, whether made or not made a legal tender in payment of debts. It would have been of no avail, therefore to have added a prohibition against making such bills a legal tender. If a power to issue them should once be seen in the Constitution, or should be suspected by the people to be there wrapt in the power of borrowing money, the instrument would array against itself a formidable and probably a fatal opposition. It was deemed wiser, therefore, even if unforeseen emergencies might in some cases make the exercise of such a power useful, to withhold it altogether. It was accordingly stricken out by a vote of nine States against two, and the authority of Congress was thus confined to borrowing money on the credit of the United States, which appears to have been intended to include the issuing of government notes not transferable as currency. [Footnote: "See the debate, and Mr. Madison's explanation of his vote, Elliot, V. 434, 435, and the note the latter page."]
    {End quote}

    In short, the only lawful power of the Commonwealth of Virginia, is to make gold and silver a legal tender, and to honor all private contracts, regardless of in what they are denominated. Perhaps, if the Federal Government is negligent in carrying out its duty to make the actual coins themselves, Virginia can interpose and take this power upon itself. But that is all.

    Perhaps there is another possibility as well, that of moving to a legal tender of *electronic* gold. This would fulfill the Constitution’s stipulation that only gold and silver themselves be made legal tender, without requiring the state to usurp the Federal Government’s power to mint the coins. Cf. Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., “The State Electronic Gold Currency Plan”, http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin8.htm But the issue of electronic gold, goes beyond my expertise. I am not learned in practical matters of actual governance, but only in the theoretical science of political philosophy. I simply wish to note the possibility of electronic gold, and emphasize more confidently the basic fact that paper currency can *not* lawfully be made legal tender. In fact, the despised Continentals were themselves specie-backed! Everything we read in the colonial and Revolutionary and Articles periods, about the terrible and awful state of currency, was regarding specie-backed currency! What the Framers sought to secure, was specie itself, as against specie-backed paper. In brief, gold and silver alone (not even specie-backed paper) can be made legal tender for the payment of public debts, while anything and everything may be stipulated in contracts for private debts.

    If my words have any truth in them, I hope the Commonwealth of Virginia takes this all into account.

    Thank you for your attention, and sincerely,
    Michael Makovi
    Silver Spring, MD

  10. David Smith says:

    What you describe, sir, is virtual if not actual secession, which is of course a return to the original intent of our founders. Centralized banking as well as centralized anything, except for the relatively few and enumerated powers in the main body of the Constitution, is forbidden. Of course for a southerner to suggest secession in any form is simply code for a return to slavery and Jim Crow, right?
    Except that the destruction of our republic’s constitutional substance, if not its form, has advanced for the last 150 years and the consequences are becoming ever more manifest. As a matter of fact, we owe King George III and Parliament a huge apology, for the governmental system we endure now is every bit as mercantilistic and even more tyrannical than the one they headed in the late 18th c. and from which we seceded.

    We are headed for a now unavoidable economic ruin. Our best hope is to give up this flawed paradigm of “one nation under God, indivisible . . .” Nothing wrong with the “under God” part, but with the “one nation. . . indivisible” nonsense. The best outcome would be peaceful secession of the states from DC, taking back their delegated powers. Not that the states are in most cases any more virtuous, but at least they are easier to keep accountable being closer to their citizens.

    • Matthew says:


    • E Harris says:

      True. It’s very ironic that the “one nation, indivisible” came before the “under God” addition. Just where does our UNITY come from, in the FIRST PLACE? What is it based on? God. Truth. Principles. Respect, love, virtue, honesty and at least some measure of freedom.

  11. Another excellent article from Mr. Marinov, as always. Thank you!

    “The breakdown of the US Dollar did not come as a result of lack of gold-backing; it is the result of abuse of monopolistic power by the Federal Reserve.” — Indeed, the despised Continentals and various proprietary state paper currencies were backed by silver! Whenever we have talk of returning to a gold standard of paper currency, we should realize that we are advocating a return to exactly the same thing which crashed the economy during the Revolutionary War period in the first place! I remember reading a speech by Daniel Webster in which he pontificated, gravely and solemnly, about the need for specie-backed currency rather than unbacked fiat currency, and I wanted to puke. The United States Constitution allows only gold and silver themselves to be currency, not even gold-backed paper, because it was backed paper that crashed in the first place! Today, we are using something even more despicable and worthless than the Continentals! Even backed currency, John Witherspoon noted, is merely a promissory note promising something of value, but it is not of itself value, and therefore, it is criminal for the government to coerce its use; the government, if it is to coerce the use of anything, ought to coerce only something of actual, inherent, and reliable value. I think if Witherspoon had known that someday there would be such a thing as fiat currency, I’m not sure seeing Cthulhu himself, face-to-value, would be more terrifying for him.

    • EDIT: “I think if Witherspoon had known that someday there would be such a thing as fiat currency, I’m not sure seeing Cthulhu himself, face-to-value, would be more terrifying for him.” — LOL, sic volo “face-to-face”

    • Indeed, the despised Continentals and various proprietary state paper currencies were backed by silver! Whenever we have talk of returning to a gold standard of paper currency, we should realize that we are advocating a return to exactly the same thing which crashed the economy during the Revolutionary War period in the first place!

      Interesting, Michael. I wanted to to include a section on the Continentals exactly after the sentence you quoted but that would have made the article too long so I dropped it. Thank you for helping me. ;)

Back to Top ↑