“And Thus They Did Obtain the Sole Management of the Government”

Thanks goes out to dark_matter, who made a comment that inspired me to expound upon this principle.

The title of this post comes from Helaman 6: 39, speaking of the Gadianton robbers.  The full scripture reads this way:

And it came to pass that the Lamanites did hunt the band of robbers of Gadianton; and they did preach the word of God among the more wicked part of them, insomuch that this band of robbers was utterly destroyed from among the Lamanites.  And it came to pass on the other hand, that the Nephites did build them up and support them, beginning at the more wicked part of them, until they had overspread all the land of the Nephites, and had seduced the more part of the righteous until they had come down to believe in their works and partake of their spoils, and to join with them in their secret murders and combinations.  And thus they did obtain the sole management of the government, insomuch that they did trample under their feet and smite and rend and turn their backs upon the poor and the meek, and the humble followers of God.  And thus we see that they were in an awful state, and ripening for an everlasting destruction.  (Helaman 6: 37-40)

I wonder, does anyone still doubt that we are in the same situation?

Documenting the Most Abominable of the Secret Combinations

Here I present some non-LDS researchers who are documenting in minute detail the main secret combination, the one which Moroni referred to as seeking “to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries”.  (See Ether 8: 25.)  These men and organizations have been doing our work for us and we LDS have largely been ignoring and mocking their findings and conclusions:

Cutting Through the Matrix with Alan Watt – Clearing the rubbish from the road to reality

– suggested by what4anarchy

Bob Chapman’s The International Forecaster

– suggested by PallasAthena

Alex Jones’ Prison Planet – The truth will set you free!

– suggested by a lot of people

To be fair, not all LDS are turning a blind eye to the secret combination:

LDSFreemen.com

LatterdayConservative.com

– recommended by no one (I just stumbled upon them)

There are also a lot of 911 truth sites that point to the existence of a secret combination among us.  For example:

911 Truth Seekers

In addition to the above, there are many other web sites and researchers who are documenting the plans, words, actions and membership of the chief secret combination, both its supporting organizations as well as its main players (the ones actually calling the shots).  But the above web sites should be sufficient to get an idea of what is really going on and who is really in control of our government.

September 2008 Was Our Wake-up Call

Moroni’s warning to us about the multinational secret combination in Ether 8 prophesied that there would come a time “when ye shall see these things come among you” (Ether 8: 24.)  September 2008 was the time when everyone, the world over, finally and plainly saw the handiwork of the secret combination.  It was our wake-up call.  That call is also accompanied with a commandment from the Lord to wake up:

Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this secret combination which shall be among you; or wo be unto it, because of the blood of them who have been slain; for they cry from the dust for vengeance upon it, and also upon those who built it up. (Ether 8: 24)

The Secret Combination and Those Who Build It Up

I think it is safe to say that most LDS are not a part of the secret combination.  (At least, I hope not.)  But do we build it up? If you say, “No,” then I ask you, How is it even possible to build up the secret combination?  What is the chief means used by secret combinations to obtain power and authority over men? There is only one scriptural answer to these questions.  It is government.

The Secret Combinations of the World Gravitate to Government

Government control is always what they seek, from the lowliest, local, organized crime gang to the largest multinational combinations.  They want to rule and only government provides them the means to lord it over the people through the use of force.

This is why the first Nephite secret combination, started by Gadianton and Kishkumen had, as its goal, to elect Gadianton to the judgment seat so that he could cause the members of the gang to also have government jobs.  Here are Mormon’s exact words describing Gadianton’s plan:

“If they would place him [Gadianton] in the judgment-seat he would grant unto those who belonged to his band that they should be placed in power and authority among the people” (Helaman 2: 5.)

Gadianton Profiled

Some years ago, I started to write a script for a movie called, The Sons of Helaman, based upon the Book of Helaman.  The script was going to tell the story of the Gadianton robbers and so I had to develop the character of the first robber.  Here was my description of him (not a direct quote from the script, which I no longer have in my possession)  :

Gadianton wasn’t some two-bit thug, such as a local mugger or gang-member, he was an illustrious man of the community, a self-made man of means, a prominent businessman, having utilized the capitalistic system to further his wealth and influence upon the people to the point where he could no longer make the profits he wanted to make and do the things he wanted to do because of government interference. Honest people in government stood in his way to making more money and getting more power and control.  He was a well-known and influential citizen that felt that the amount of money you made and the amount of education you had (he was “exceedingly expert in many words”) ought to determine who ruled and who did not, not the voice of the people. It wasn’t enough that he owned a lot and influenced many, he needed to own everything and influence (rule) all things.

Some in government could be bought, while others (like Pahoran and Helaman) could not.  So, the plan was to put Gadianton directly in government instead of going through front-men or puppets.

Kishkumen and his gang assassinated Pahoran so that Gadianton would be put in power.  This means that they fully expected to get him into office after the assassination, indicating that Gadianton was a viable and visible candidate for the judgment-seat.  Helaman, though, was voted in by the voice of the people (and not Gadianton), and then he (Helaman), too, was targeted for assassination, with the thought that this would finally get Gadianton in.  So, the profile painted by the scriptures is that Gadianton was popularly known, had campaigned for the highest government office in the land, possibly already held a governmental office, was a man of means and influence, was highly educated and was not just some thug or assassin.  In other words, Gadianton was a member of the Nephite elite, or at least thought of himself this way.  The other robbers also were elites as they thought they had sufficient influence over the people to get Gadianton elected.

Additionally, the plan of Gadianton wasn’t his own.  This strategy—which consisted of infiltrating the government by a shadow government that has its own “citizens”, secret laws, trials, code words, covenants, oaths, signs and wonders (see Alma 37: 27) by which to recognize a brethren of the order, and then, once members obtain positions of power and authority, they use their influence to grant other members government jobs until they can use the combined influence to change the government into one that more closely matches the shadow government they belong to, essentially establishing a monarchy—was directly revealed to Gadianton from Satan himself.  (See Hel. 6: 26-29.)  So, this secret plan and strategy is the master blueprint that all secret combinations rely upon, including that most abominable one that is among us now.

Gadianton, then, became the Master Mahan of the Western Continent, when Satan likely appeared to him as an angel of light and revealed to him the ancient plans of how to obtain “kingdoms and great glory” (Ether 8: 9).  Kishkumen and his band adopted the plans of Gadianton when it became apparent that these were the real (satanic) deal, the actual blueprint from the black soul of the devil himself.

So, while Shiblon was conferring the sacred records upon his nephew Helaman (in Alma 63), Satan was conferring the cursed plans upon Gadianton.  Nevertheless, although blackhearted, in all outward appearances Gadianton was still the upright and “moral” citizen, after all, he was blessed materially so he must have been blessed by the Lord, right?  (The pure doctrine of “If ye keep the commandments of the Lord, ye shall prosper in the land” was perverted into the satanic doctrine of “If ye are prosperous in the land, it shows that ye do keep the commandments of the Lord.”  To this very day, all robbers use the riches = righteousness defense.)

The Gadianton Robbers Were all Elites, as Is the Present Combination

Every Gadianton robber thought that it was his right to rule (and to literally own) the people and their lands and property and this is consistently shown from the time of Gadianton to the end of the Nephite civilization.  Their means of rule was always the government and consistently their tactics were to infiltrate the judgment-seats with their own members and work to consolidate all governmental power into an executive branch, to eventually appoint a king.

Although Anthony E. Larson’s Nephite-American harbinger theory (see parts 1, 2, 3 & 4) explains that the Gadianton robbers paralleled Islamic terrorist cells and organizations in our own day, the Nephite combination only used these gorilla tactics when they were forced from their government positions of power and from the community itself.  While they still resided among the people, they infiltrated and sought to control, not fight, the government and to change it from within.  The Islamic terrorists do not work this way.

The Gadianton robbers are the pattern for the secret combination in our day.  The combination we have among us is comprised of elites.  They come from families of power, prestige, wealth, education, influence, fame, etc.  They feel, like the ancient Gadiantons, that they were born to rule and they use government as a means to that end.

The modus operandi and goal is always the same.  Compare, for example, Giddianhi’s words (threats) with President Bush’s words (threats) concerning the need for a 700 billion dollar robbery, er, bailout:

And behold, I am Giddianhi; and I am the governor of this the secret society of Gadianton; which society and the works thereof I know to be good; and they are of ancient date and they have been handed down unto us.  And I write this epistle unto you, Lachoneus, and I hope that ye will deliver up your lands and your possessions, without the shedding of blood, that this my people may recover their rights and government, who have dissented away from you because of your wickedness in retaining from them their rights of government, and except ye do this, I will avenge their wrongs. I am Giddianhi.  And now it came to pass when Lachoneus received this epistle he was exceedingly astonished, because of the boldness of Giddianhi demanding the possession of the land of the Nephites” (3 Ne. 3: 9-11.)

And now for President Bush.

How We Build Up the Secret Combination

Just as the ancient robbers sought to consolidate governmental power into one executive branch, so the current combination seeks to do the same.  Every law or action taken by the Congress, by the President or by the Justices that builds up executive power and reduces the power of the legislative and judicial branches, and/or reduces (or eliminates) the checks of power put into the government by the Constitution, builds up the secret combination.

Below the level of the Federal government, all robbers and their accomplices in State, county and city governments have the dual job of consolidating power into the executive branches of these governments, with the intention of eventually handing over the reigns to the Federal handlers.  Thus, we see robbers on all levels performing their secret work of destruction as they intentionally destroy their local economies and stall budget deals (sound familiar California?), so that local governments will need federal bailouts, becoming federalized (or nationalized) and consolidating power into one central location.  With their mouths they speak lies, saying they are working to save us, while in reality they work to destroy and enslave us.

This work of destruction of liberty has gone on since the beginning, but as time goes on it becomes more pronounced due to greater numbers of robbers (and their accomplices) and more infiltration of all levels of government.  Eventually, they reach the point where they in fact do obtain the sole management of the government.  It is then that they rape, pillage, murder and rob the people with impunity and in full view.  We are at that point now.

As the secret combination has been in government since the publication of the Book of Mormon, and as it uses government to accomplish its goals, if you have supported or voted for anyone at all in government who has concentrated power and authority in the hands of the President (or any of the executive branches), or you have supported or voted for any measure, proposition, law or policy that does the same thing, you have built up the secret combination. Whether it was done knowingly or unknowingly, directly or indirectly, the effect is the same.

The Hands of the LDS and of the People of this Nation are NOT Clean

If you are like most LDS, you have probably voted for people or issues that have concentrated governmental power into the hands of the secret combination.  You may think Moroni’s prophecy of vengeance “upon those who built [the secret combination] up” (Ether 8: 24) doesn’t apply to you, because you did not do it intentionally to build it up, but the Lord at the last day will show you that it does.  (This brings to mind the saying, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”)  We are an unclean people and have largely sought to build up power bases and authority instead of seeking, like Moroni, to pull them down.

Repentance is Our Only Option

I believe the literal and complete and final fulfillment of the following prophecy is about to burst upon us:

Wherefore, I the Lord, knowing the calamity which should come upon the inhabitants of the earth, called upon my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and spake unto him from heaven, and gave him commandments;  and also gave commandments to others, that they should proclaim these things unto the world; and all this that it might be fulfilled, which was written by the prophets—the weak things of the world shall come forth and break down the mighty and strong ones, that man should not counsel his fellow man, neither trust in the arm of flesh—but that every man might speak in the name of God the Lord, even the Savior of the world; that faith also might increase in the earth; that mine everlasting covenant might be established; that the fulness of my gospel might be proclaimed by the weak and the simple unto the ends of the world, and before kings and rulers. (D&C 1: 17-23)

Moroni has given us the solution to this major problem on our hands: “Repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you.”  If we do not follow this counsel, the penalty is destruction, for the weak are about to break down (destroy) the strong.  Destruction will be upon the secret combination (for the Lord will not allow it to accomplish its goal in this nation) and also upon all those who built or who are building it up.

Next Secret Combinations article: Opening old wounds

Previous Secret Combinations article: Is the topic of “secret combinations” taboo in the LDS church?

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The voice of the people signifies a majority

Because concerns about my use of “51%” in regard to the law of common consent have come up on this blog before, I wanted to address them with this post:

Excerpt of Post

Although the quorum of the twelve vote for the new President of the High Priesthood, the majority of the body of the saints (51%) must sustain the calling by vote, using the law of common consent. If 51% or more raise their hands in approval, the appointment goes through. If, however, 51% or more raise their hands in disapproval, the appointment does not go through and the apostles need to choose another man for the office, which then requires another sustaining vote from the members.  (LDS Anarchist on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

Members can not nominate a candidate and hypothetically the Presiding officer, or body, can also over ride (ignore) the “will of the people”. Incidently the law of Common Consent specifies no percentage. I’d love to know where you got this 51% figure. Having said that any presiding officer conducting business in the Church would hold off setting apart someone or cannonising a revelation even if 5% or even 1% didn’t sustain the decision.  (Comment #609 by Steve on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?, emphasis mine.)

Comment on Post

You are right, there is no specification of 51% in the scriptures. I borrowed the term “51%” from what4anarchy, who uses it all the time. However, I think what4anarchy is right in that the scriptures seem to imply that “the voice of the people” is a majority, or 51%. For example, if you look at the pre-mortal experience, two-thirds (66%) sustained Jesus as the Savior, while one third (33%) didn’t. In this case, “the voice of the people” went with Jesus. The 33% number is far above your 1% or even 5%, yet it wasn’t high enough to stop the election of Jesus. Common sense would indicate, therefore, that the law of common consent works on the majority principle. It does not require a unanimous vote to sustain an appointment, nor can a minority (49% or less) stop an appointment.

You also bring up a fallacy that LDS routinely believe, namely that “the Presiding officer…can…over ride (ignore) the will of the people.” In reality, the presiding officer can only ignore the will of the minority of the people, but if a majority says left, while he says right, it is to be left, as the scriptures indicate that we are “to do [our] business by the voice of the people.” (Mosiah 29: 26.) If the Presiding officer attempts to ignore the will of the majority, he becomes a usurper and a tyrant because in the kingdom of God the governors must govern with the consent of the governed. Any attempt to govern without that consent draws Satan into the picture, as governing without consent is satanic.

As long as LDS hold these views about the law of common consent, it will never function as a means to check tyranny and error, which is its purpose.  (Comment #610 by LDS Anarchist on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?,)

I thought that put an end to the question about the scriptural need for a majority, but then the following was written:

Excerpt of Post

Satan understood that if the vote went his way, if 51% of us voted for him (Lucifer), that the plan of the Father would have been frustrated.  (LDS Anarchist on October 31, 2007 in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

I have a quick comment to the initial question as to the “ramifications of a winning vote by Lucifer”, or “What would have happened had Lucifer won the vote?”

This is what I think would have happened if Lucifer had drawn 51% of us to his side: The scriptures would have said something like, “… and just over half of the hosts of heaven followed Lucifer’s plan.” The plan of salvation would not have been altered, compromised, or destroyed. God would not have ceased to be God. Lucifer would not have “won”.

My point is… why is a “majority” relevant in this situation? I don’t believe it is. Two-thirds of the hosts of heaven could have followed Lucifer and God would still have chosen Jesus and His plan would not have been compromised. I don’t believe this was a “vote”, but rather, a choice.  (Comment #1160 by Jgtrs on June 15, 2008 in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?, emphasis mine.)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

The 51% number has come up before on this blog. See here and here. Also, the heavens splitting into thirds sounds like what4anarchy’s idea of following the leader.  (1/3 under Lucifer, 1/3 under Jehovah and 1/3 under Michael, for example.)

My understanding is “as above, so below” and so what happened in the heavens has its counterpart here on Earth, namely, the law of common consent. So, the following common consent articles may apply to this discussion about percentages: Power of the Law of Common Consent and Is our procedure for sustaining a rubber stamp? and also, perhaps, this one on free agency: The role of free agency in political systems. As God cannot govern without the consent of the governed, I’m not sure what the difference is between a “vote” and a “choice.” There are many ways of voting, not just in raising one’s hand, and each manifestation of a vote is a demonstration of what you are choosing or not choosing.

It doesn’t make sense to me that the principle of “the voice of the people” applies on Earth but not in heaven, as these principles are revealed to us as heavenly principles so that we can pattern our lives according to that standard found in heaven and be empowered to establish Zion, or the kingdom of heaven on Earth.  (Comment #1230 by LDS Anarchist on June 17, 2008, in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?)

The purpose of this post is solely to show that the “voice of the people” means “majority vote.”

Voice of the people defined

Mosiah is the one who defined the expression for us, in the following verse:

Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people.  (Mosiah 29: 26)

Mosiah explains that  “the voice of the people” is not the “lesser part of the people.”  The “lesser part of the people” is otherwise known as a minority. Therefore, as the “voice of the people” is not the minority, it must be the majority. The expression “the voice of the people” is synonymous with “the majority vote of the people.”

Thus, the latter part of the above verse means, “This shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the [majority vote] of the people.”

Book of Mormon scriptures

The expression “the voice of the people” occurs a lot in the scriptures, and in each instance, it means the same thing.  So, here are some examples, with the meaning of the expression rendered in plainer English :

And it came to pass that the [majority vote] of the people came, saying: We are desirous that Aaron thy son should be our king and our ruler.  Therefore, choose you by the [majority vote] of this people, judges, that ye may be judged according to the laws which have been given you by our fathers, which are correct, and which were given them by the hand of the Lord.  Now it is not common that the [majority vote] of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the [majority vote] of the people.  And if the time comes that the [majority vote] of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.  If your higher judges do not judge righteous judgments, ye shall cause that a small number of your lower judges should be gathered together, and they shall judge your higher judges, according to the [majority vote] of the people.  (Mosiah 29: 2, 25-27, 29)

Yea, well did Mosiah say, who was our last king, when he was about to deliver up the kingdom, having no one to confer it upon, causing that this people should be governed by their own voices—yea, well did he say that if the time should come that the [majority vote] of this people should choose iniquity, that is, if the time should come that this people should fall into transgression, they would be ripe for destruction. (Alma 10: 19)

Nevertheless, it came to pass that Pahoran was appointed by the [majority vote] of the people to be chief judge and a governor over the people of Nephi.  And it came to pass that Pacumeni, when he saw that he could not obtain the judgment-seat, he did unite with the [majority vote] of the people.  And it came to pass as he [Paanchi] was about to do this, behold, he was taken, and was tried according to the [majority vote] of the people, and condemned unto death; for he had raised up in rebellion and sought to destroy the liberty of the people.  And now behold, Pacumeni was appointed, according to the [majority vote] of the people, to be a chief judge and a governor over the people, to reign in the stead of his brother Pahoran; and it was according to his right. And all this was done in the fortieth year of the reign of the judges; and it had an end.  (Hel. 1: 5-6, 8, 13)

See also the following Book of Mormon scriptures that use this expression: Mosiah 7: 9; Mosiah 22: 1; Alma 2: 3-4, 7; Alma 4: 16; Alma 27: 21-22; Alma 46: 34; Alma 51: 7, 15-16; Hel. 2: 2; and Hel. 5: 2.

Bible scriptures

Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.  But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord.  And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the [majority vote] of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.  According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.  Now therefore hearken unto their [majority vote]: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.  And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.  And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.  And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.  And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.  And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.  And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.  And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.  He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.  And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.  Nevertheless the people refused to ^aobey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.  And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the Lord.  And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken unto their [majority vote], and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.  (1 Sam. 8: 4-22)

This scripture, in particular, is interesting because Samuel was the prophet of the Lord and the majority vote* was asking for something contrary to the will of the Lord (they were asking to change the tribal anarchy into a monarchical State like the nations around them), yet the Lord told his prophet to listen to and obey the majority vote of the people.  This is otherwise known as the law of common consent.

*Notice verse four where it says “all the elders of Israel.”  This seems to indicate that this wasn’t just a bare majority, but a unanimous majority.

Doctrine and Covenants scriptures

And let all things be done according to the counsel of the order, and united consent or [majority vote] of the order, which dwell in the land of Kirtland.  And it is my will that he should sell the lots that are laid off for the building up of the city of my saints, inasmuch as it shall be made known to him by the voice of the Spirit, and according to the counsel of the order, and by the [majority vote] of the order.  Therefore, you are dissolved as a united order with your brethren, that you are not bound only up to this hour unto them, only on this wise, as I said, by loan as shall be agreed by this order in council, as your circumstances will admit and the [majority vote] of the council direct.  And the avails of the sacred things shall be had in the treasury, and a seal shall be upon it; and it shall not be used or taken out of the treasury by any one, neither shall the seal be loosed which shall be placed upon it, only by the [majority vote] of the order, or by commandment.  And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the [majority vote] and common consent of the order.  And this shall be the [majority vote] and common consent of the order—that any man among you say to the treasurer: I have need of this to help me in my stewardship—but in case of transgression, the treasurer shall be subject unto the council and [majority vote] of the order.  And in case the treasurer is found an unfaithful and an unwise steward, he shall be subject to the council and [majority vote] of the order, and shall be removed out of his place, and another shall be appointed in his stead.  (D&C 104: 21, 36, 53, 64, 71-72, 76-77)

Joseph Smith, Jun., Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams were acknowledged presidents by the [majority vote] of the council; and Joseph Smith, Sen., John Smith, Joseph Coe, John Johnson, Martin Harris, John S. Carter, Jared Carter, Oliver Cowdery, Samuel H. Smith, Orson Hyde, Sylvester Smith, and Luke Johnson, high priests, were chosen to be a standing council for the church, by the unanimous [majority vote] of the council.  Voted: that whenever any vacancy shall occur by the death, removal from office for transgression, or removal from the bounds of this church government, of any one of the above-named councilors, it shall be filled by the nomination of the president or presidents, and sanctioned by the [majority vote] of a general council of high priests, convened for that purpose, to act in the name of the church.  The president of the church, who is also the president of the council, is appointed by revelation, and acknowledged in his administration by the [majority vote] of the church.  (D&C 102: 3, 8-9)

And let my servant Edward Partridge, when he shall appoint a man his portion, give unto him a writing that shall secure unto him his portion, that he shall hold it, even this right and this inheritance in the church, until he transgresses and is not accounted worthy by the [majority vote] of the church, according to the laws and covenants of the church, to belong to the church.  And this shall be done through the bishop or the agent, which shall be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church.  (D&C 51: 4, 12)

And now, I give unto the church in these parts a commandment, that certain men among them shall be appointed, and they shall be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church; and they shall look to the poor and the needy, and administer to their relief that they shall not suffer; and send them forth to the place which I have commanded them; and this shall be their work, to govern the affairs of the property of this church.  (D&C 38: 34-36)

And again, I have called my servant Edward Partridge; and I give a commandment, that he should be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church, and ordained a bishop unto the church, to leave his merchandise and to spend all his time in the labors of the church; to see to all things as it shall be appointed unto him in my laws in the day that I shall give them. (D&C 41: 9-10)

And let there be an agent appointed by the [majority vote] of the church, unto the church in Ohio, to receive moneys to purchase lands in Zion.  (D&C 58: 49)

We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the [majority vote] of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.  (D&C 134: 3)

It becomes plain, then, from these scriptures, that the church functions on the principle of majority vote.

The elders are to receive their licenses from other elders, by vote of the church to which they belong, or from the conferences.  No person is to be ordained to any office in this church, where there is a regularly organized branch of the same, without the vote of that church; but the presiding elders, traveling bishops, high councilors, high priests, and elders, may have the privilege of ordaining, where there is no branch of the church that a vote may be called.  (D&C 20: 63, 65-66)

No need for unanimity unless specified

Unless the voice is specified as having to be “unanimous,” such as in the following scripture, all majority votes (51% or more) are sufficient to decide all issues in the church.

And every decision made by either of these quorums [the First Presidency, the Twelve and the Seventy] must be by the unanimous [majority vote] of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other—a majority may form a quorum when circumstances render it impossible to be otherwise—unless this is the case, their decisions are not entitled to the same blessings which the decisions of a quorum of three presidents were anciently, who were ordained after the order of Melchizedek, and were righteous and holy men.  (D&C 107: 27-29)

Next Common Consent article: We are not doing our business by the voice of the people

Previous Common Consent article: Apathy is not a problem, it’s a symptom and a solution

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

If voting could change things, it would be illegal

We interrupt this program for the following (anti-)political message.

Now that the Olympic games are over, we are being inundated with press about the Democratic National Convention, the nomination of Barak Obama and the coming election, all of which preps us for our “civic duty” of voting.

For most, the questions are: What candidates should I vote for?  What initiatives should I vote for?  But these questions presuppose that you should vote.

To Vote or Not To Vote: THAT Is the Question

You can go to any political party, or to anyone who believes in voting, to learn why you should vote.  But where do you go to learn why you should not vote? Well, I’m glad you asked.  Your friendly, neighborhood LDS Anarchist will point you in the right direction:

Non-Voting Archive

To give you a taste of the many reasons against voting found in the non-voting archive, here is an excerpt of an essay by Lysander Spooner entitled, Against Woman Suffrage:

Women are human beings, and consequently have all the natural rights that any human beings can have. They have just as good a right to make laws as men have, and no better; AND THAT IS JUST NO RIGHT AT ALL. No human being, nor any number of human beings, have any right to make laws, and compel other human beings to obey them. To say that they have is to say that they are the masters and owners of those of whom they require such obedience.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

Next Anarchism/Anarchy article: The Root Cause of the Current Financial (Monetary) Crisis and Its Solution

Previous Anarchism/Anarchy article: Anarchy in Education

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Anarchy in action: congregational nullification

Jury Nullification

Jury nullification means making a law void by jury decision, in other words “the process whereby a jury in a criminal case effectively nullifies a law by acquitting a defendant regardless of the weight of evidence against him or her.”

Jury nullification is more specifically any rendering of a verdict by a trial jury, acquitting a criminal defendant despite the defendant’s violation of the letter of the law. This verdict need not disagree with the instructions by the judge concerning what the law is, but may disagree with an instruction, if given by the judge, that the jury is required to apply the law to the defendant if certain facts are found.

Although a jury’s refusal relates only to the particular case before it, if a pattern of such verdicts develops in response to repeated attempts to prosecute a statutory offense, it can have the practical effect of disabling the enforcement of the statute. “Jury nullification” is thus a means for the people to express opposition to an unpopular legislative enactment.

The jury system was established because it was felt that a panel of citizens, drawn at random from the community, and serving for too short a time to be corrupted, would be more likely to render a just verdict, through judging both the accused and the law, than officials who may be unduly influenced to follow merely the established law. Jury nullification is a reminder that the right to trial by one’s peers affords the public an opportunity to take a dissenting view about the justness of a statute or official practices.

(Taken from the Jury Nullification entry of the Wikipedia. See the entire entry for more information.)

Jury nullification occurs when a jury judges both the facts of a case and the law it is based upon. In modern times it doesn’t occur very often, perhaps because juries are not aware that they have this common law right or power due to modern judges not informing them of the entire jurisdiction of a jury. In fact, judges often do the opposite and give them instructions that they must apply the law. However, the truth is that juries do have this power regardless of what a corrupt judge may say.

Congregational Juries

Our system of church government consists of judges, courts and councils, with witnesses and advocacy, but apparently without juries. However, as all appointments/callings must be approved by the congregation through common consent vote before an appointment/calling is solidified, in reality and practice the congregational members are the juries of the church.

Again, any calling in the church needs to be ratified by the congregational jury. A name is read and a call to ratify is made to the members, who raise their hands in approbation or in opposition, or who do not raise their hands, at all. A count is made and if the voice of the people (the majority) is for the appointment, it goes through. If the voice of the people is against it, it does not go through. In this way the congregational jury renders a verdict of their approval or disapproval of the various appointments/callings. We call this vote sustaining. Nothing in the church happens, nor can happen, without a sustaining vote of the members of the congregation, as that would be tyranny and a usurpation of powers, because all things must be done with the consent of the congregation.

Congregational Nullification

There is, however, another way that the congregational jury renders a verdict. Sometimes policies or instructions are handed out to the members from their leaders without taking a vote. For example, recent First Presidency letters read in sacrament meeting contained instructions to the members concerning the passage of a constitutional amendment on marriage (for California saints) and sacrament meeting behavior, specifically, not using visual aids or asking the congregation to turn to a scripture while giving a talk. These instructions are similar to those received by trial juries from the presiding judge concerning how they are to apply the law to the case. In both instances, neither jury is instructed that they can pass judgment upon the judge’s instructions and discard them if wisdom so dictates.

Many saints get offended when instructions they feel are overbearing or tyrannical come down from their leaders. To prove their point, they’ll sometimes take actions that end up pitting the church against them, such as taking a public stand against the church. This is not the wisest course to take and may lead to their being disfellowshipped, excommunicated or even them just leaving on their own.

The Lord has given us the means to nip all tyranny in His church in the bud via the law of common consent. Just as trial jury nullification exists as a common law right, it also exists as a right of the congregational juries. Simply ignoring all instructions deemed to be unjust, unwise, overbearing, tyrannical or humiliating nullifies the instructions. End of story.

Most instructions given today by leaders are called “counsel.” When members are asked to do something, usually that is the very word used: ask. Anybody can ask anything they want of you. Asking you to do or not to do something does not rob you of your agency. It also does not obligate you to do the thing asked. Like trial juries, congregational juries have the choice to obey instructions received by them from the leaders without another thought, or they can render the instructions null and void by ignoring them.

Anarchy in Action

Both congregational nullification and the raising of the hands in approval/disapproval during a sustaining vote is anarchy in action. Ultimately, always, the people decide all matters of the church. The leaders can do nothing without the consent of the people.

Taking the two examples given above, for those saints who agree with the First Presidency letter on the marriage bill, they can sustain the letter’s instructions by donating time, means and effort to that cause. For those saints who disagree with the letter’s instructions, they can ignore the petition entirely and donate no time, means or effort to it. Just as during sustaining votes, members do not campaign other members to sway votes in favor of or against particular church callings, campaigning need not occur for non-voting uses of the law of common consent. Everything remains peaceful, ordered and anarchic, each man, woman and child of the church casting a verdict on the instructions by their actions.

In the second instance mentioned above, congregational nullification can also occur, should the people think the instructions are unneccessary or unjust. Or, congregational ratification can occur should the people think the instructions are wise and timely. All that is necessary is that each speaker either obey the instructions and stop using visual aids or asking the audience to open their scriptures, or disregard the instructions and use visual aids and ask the congregation to turn to such-and-such a verse.

The bishop or other leaders may attempt to correct a single person who ignores counsel or instruction, but if that person continues to ignore the counsel, or if more than one person ignores the counsel and it becomes apparent that the congregation has passed a verdict against the counsel, by ignoring it, then congregational nullification has occurred and that counsel is now null and void. There is nothing a leader can do with a group of people who refuse to ratify an instruction by obedience to it.

In my own experience, eventually even the most power-tripping leaders will throw up their hands in frustration because peaceful, ordered, anarchic congregational nullification cannot be stopped. No one can be tried for ignoring counsel or petitions. There is no law against it in the church. There are only laws against sin.

Use of Common Consent Stops Tyranny

Jury nullification drives leaders up the wall with frustration, as it limits their power and control over a congregation, but it is one of the means the Lord has set up to stop tyranny in His church. Used as a proper check to usurpation of power, it properly balances the church and puts all saints, leaders and members alike, on equal ground.

So, the next time you receive instructions from your religious leaders you do not agree with, even after prayer and fasting, instead of publicly fighting them and becoming an apostate, instead of striving to get other members in your camp and pit member against member or member against leader, or instead of trying to win the leader over to your cause (which never works), just apply the principle of congregational nullification and ignore the instructions.

Next Anarchism/Anarchy article: Anarchy in Education

Previous Anarchism/Anarchy article: The dissolution of the corporate LDS Church via “gay marriage”

Next Common Consent article: Apathy is not a problem, it’s a symptom and a solution

Previous Common Consent article: Power of the Law of Common Consent

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Poll: Who is the most prophetic?

We all know that President Thomas S. Monson will become the new President of the High Priesthood now that President Gordon B. Hinckley has passed on to the other side. The apostles will all unanimously vote for him and then the body of the LDS will all unanimously raise their hands to sustain that vote. If there are any dissenters, it will not be among the apostles, but among the body and it will be a small minority, nowhere near the 51% needed to stop the appointment. So, Monson is going to have this office. This is a no-brainer.

What I wonder, though, is who the average LDS would really choose if they could choose the “most prophetic person” for this position. By most prophetic, I mean the person most filled with the spirit of prophecy and revelation.

So, first, some background facts, and then the poll.

• The 12 apostles must unanimously choose the same person to fill the office of President of the High Priesthood. If there is one dissenting vote, the appointment does not go through. (See D&C 107: 25-29 below.)
• They may choose any male church member to fill that office. They need not choose the senior apostle. In fact, they need not choose an apostle, at all. Any male member of the church can be chosen, regardless of whether he has the priesthood or not. If he doesn’t have the priesthood, or holds the priesthood of Aaron, he can have the Melchizedek priesthood conferred upon him and qualify for the office. If he has the priesthood, but is an ordained elder, seventy or patriarch, he can be ordained a high priest and qualify for the office. Even a non-member can be selected, baptized, have the priesthood conferred upon him and then be ordained a high priest to qualify for the office, so in theory (if not in practice) the entire male population of the world is a potential candidate for this (or any other priesthood) office.
• The only ones who are barred from this office are women.
• Although the quorum of the twelve vote for the new President of the High Priesthood, the majority of the body of the saints (51%) must sustain the calling by vote, using the law of common consent. If 51% or more raise their hands in approval, the appointment goes through. If, however, 51% or more raise their hands in disapproval, the appointment does not go through and the apostles need to choose another man for the office, which then requires another sustaining vote from the members.
• Traditionally, the apostles always choose the senior apostle of Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the President of the Quorum) and then the members all vote unanimously to sustain that vote. No one ever breaks from this tradition, ever.

Now for the poll. Of all the people you know, who would make the most prophetic President of the High Priesthood? Again, I’m defining most prophetic as “most filled with the spirit of prophecy and revelation.” You can name anyone you want, whether an apostle, seventy, patriarch, elder, bishop, priest, teacher, deacon, un-ordained male or even a non-member who, in your opinion, is filled with the Spirit, as all of these people are potential candidates.

I am curious as to whether the body of members, if they could vote for the most prophetic person, would inevitably pick President Monson, or if they would choose someone else. To help, I will list the 14 apostles here, in case the person you would choose is among them, but you can list anyone you want.

Lastly, keep in mind that you should not give your opinion as to whom you think the Lord would pick, but only as to whom you personally consider the “most prophetic” person.

Thomas S. Monson

Henry B. Eyring

Boyd K. Packer

L. Tom Perry

Russell M. Nelson

Dallin H. Oaks

M. Russell Ballard

Joseph B. Wirthlin

Richard G. Scott

Robert D. Hales

Jeffrey R. Holland

Dieter F. Uchtdorf

David A. Bednar

Quentin L. Cook

The Seventy are also called to preach the gospel, and to be especial witnesses unto the Gentiles and in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in the duties of their calling. And they form a quorum, equal in authority to that of the Twelve special witnesses or Apostles just named. And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the unanimous voice of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other—a majority may form a quorum when circumstances render it impossible to be otherwise—unless this is the case, their decisions are not entitled to the same blessings which the decisions of a quorum of three presidents were anciently, who were ordained after the order of Melchizedek, and were righteous and holy men. (D&C 107: 25-29, emphasis mine.)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

A basic right denied

The Declaration of Independence, beginning with the second sentence, says the following:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. [Emphasis mine.]

The right of the people to (peacefully) abolish their government has been denied since the inception of the present forms of government. The system is set up so that if the majority of a population wants to abolish any government, city, state or federal, they must arm themselves to do it. There is no peaceful means available. As it is more likely that a people will submit to abuses than take up arms, (unless the abuses become extreme,) the present system continues on despite the vast amount of growing disaffection and apathy towards government.

Were we living in a just system that allowed the exercise of the right to abolish a government, our ballots would contain a final option under each office: NONE OF THE ABOVE.

Because “none of the above” does not exist on our ballot, elections are nothing but an instrument to perpetuate the existence of the state, despite the growing number of citizens who are tired of government intrusions into their lives.

A ballot lacking the option of “none of the above” is akin to a vote on items that will be brought along for a community, family camping trip. Here are the options, along with the instructions, “please choose only one” :

Tobacco

• a) Winston cigarettes

• b) Marlboro cigarettes

• c) Cuban cigars

Alcohol

• a) Jack Daniels

• b) Rum

• c) Bourbon

Coffee

• a) Star Bucks

• b) Columbian, fresh-roasted coffee

etc.

A Latter-day Saint that looks at that list of options is going to be livid. Had the simple option of “none of the above” been listed, the Latter-day Saints would have been able to vote that these things not be taken on the camping trip. But without such an option, and knowing that there will be tobacco, alcohol and coffee on the trip, what Latter-day Saint is going to take their family camping?

In the same way, elections are rigged to perpetuate statism. Because of these rigged ballots, the state propaganda machine for years has put out that it is our patriotic, civic duty to vote, that “if you don’t vote, you have no right to complain.” Actually, the reverse is true: only those who participate in the system have no right to complain about the results, since by voting they are agreeing to the rules of the game, that whoever wins the elections by majority vote is entitled to rule. In contrast, those who refuse to participate are the only ones who have the right to complain about both the results of an election and the game of voting itself.

Next Anarchism/Anarchy article: Lakota independence—prophecy starting to be fulfilled?

Previous Anarchism/Anarchy article: The prophetic counsel against having kings (rulers)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?

In our pre-mortal existence, we took sides as to who we would follow, Jesus or Lucifer. Two-thirds of us went with Jesus, while one-third went with Satan. Jesus had accepted the plan of the Father, while Satan had sought to amend it. The amendment was sufficiently attractive that one-third of us went with it. I’ve never been in a meeting that has fully discussed the ramifications of a winning vote by Lucifer (other than with what4anarchy.) I intend to publicly discuss this topic now in this post.

The universe consists of a family of gods, with angels attending them and other lesser creations. Each individual that achieves godhood, does so through the laws of the universe, which operate on the principle of agency, not coercion.

“The powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness….When we undertake … to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men,…the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.” (D&C 121: 36-37)

“No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy; that he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.” (D&C 121: 41-44)

The above principle is heavenly and applies equally to God as it does to man. God cannot use coercion ever, or he will cease to be God.

Each exalted individual in the family of gods was guaranteed their godhood forever. Should a single one of these gods lose his or her godhood, in other words, should any of them cease to be a god, all of them cease to be gods together. It is a domino chain that is only as strong as its weakest member. As there are no weak members, the chain remains strong forever. They remain gods because they desire to remain gods. And thus it is.

Nevertheless, there is a risk to godhood. Satan sought to exploit that risk. The family of gods work by the principle of agency, not by coercion. Contrary to what you may believe, God the Father accomplishes all things through free agents. Compulsion is anti-god, so to speak, as is lying, etc. So, if Satan can make any of the gods lie or commit anything contrary to their own laws, they all cease to be gods and the universe loses faith in them, stops honoring them, and all creation reverts back to what it was prior to creation, returning to outer darkness from which we all came.

But no god freely will commit an act that causes them to lose their power, which is understandable. So, the risk is minimal. Nevertheless, as they operate on the principle of agency, Satan sought to force the hand of God by taking advantage of the law of common consent. The law of common consent is a heavenly law, not an earthly invention. We voted for Jesus to be our Savior, after he was called of God to that holy office. God never forces anyone to do anything, so Jesus was not forced upon us. We could accept him or reject him. Satan understood that if the vote went his way, if 51% of us voted for him (Lucifer), that the plan of the Father would have been frustrated. So, there was a possibility that the Father could be frustrated, through the common consent of his children. God allows for this possibility and so God the Father and all other gods had their godhood put at risk during this voting time.

Satan didn’t want to just be the Savior, suffering for the sins of mankind. His intention was to do away with agency altogether. If agency were to be done away with, as it is guaranteed by God to all created things in the universe, it would have meant that God would have ceased to be God, as he would have been caught in a lie. All creation would have lost respect and honor for him. The God that promised heavenly Father his eternal exaltation would also cease to be a god, and a chain reaction would result, all gods losing all power. The result would have been the dissolution of the created universe. (See 2 Ne. 2: 13. If there is no God, all things must vanish away.) Everything in it would have returned into that lake of fire and brimstone, or what we now call outer darkness, only then it wouldn’t be an outer darkness, as there would be no inner light (the created universe) to distinguish between the two locations.

A common misconception that LDS have is that when Satan said, “wherefore, give me thine honor,” that he merely wanted the power of God. But it wasn’t like that, at all. Satan didn’t want the universe, all the gods, and everything else (including himself) to return to outer darkness. Yet, his amendment, had it been approved by vote, would have had that very result. And he knew this and so did we. So, he added a requirement to his amendment that was needed to make it work: he required that God worship him (honor him.)

If God worshiped Satan, then Satan beats God. The honor of all creation which is directed at God, the greatest of all, now becomes directed at the individual that beats God. So, when the amendment is enacted, agency becomes suspended, coercion rules, and God and every other member of the family of gods cease to be gods, the universe still has faith in one individual: Satan, the being who conquered all of god-dom.

Satan’s cunning plan wasn’t in that he would rule over this particular God (our heavenly Father,) but that the whole family of gods would be disintegrated and return to the lake of fire and brimstone. The created universe would still remain created, under a new system, a new principle, the principle of coercion, with only one single god, Lucifer, ruling everything. The universe would be reorganized according to Lucifer’s vision of an ideal universe.

So, it wasn’t that Lucifer wanted the honor of God, it was that he needed it to make his plan work. Without the honor of God, all created things revert back to that state prior to creation, including Lucifer himself.

The appeal of Lucifer’s plan was that no one, not a single particle, would return to outer darkness, from whence we all came prior to creation. The only victims in this plan would be the gods, who, through agency, allowed for the possibility of souls returning to outer darkness in misery. His selling points probably were that although God is loving, etc., it is not fair that a single soul should return to outer darkness, therefore, they (the gods) deserve this fate, as they have assigned this very fate to others. Or, he may have justified his amendment to the Father’s plan by saying that we would go into outer darkness and re-create the souls of the former gods, bringing them back into the universe so that they didn’t suffer for all eternity, though they would not obtain their former glory.

So, in our vote between Jesus and Satan, outer darkness and who would be cast into it played a big part of our decision-making process. In the Father’s plan, only sons of perdition would return to outer darkness, of their own agency, not being willing to repent. In Satan’s amendment to the plan, only the gods of the universe would return to outer darkness, having lost all power and being compelled to go, and not a single soul or particle (other than the family of gods) would go back into those outer regions.

We already know what happened. God the Father and the family of gods were before us, we could see them and know of their love for us, of their qualities, yet despite that tremendous influence, one-third of us sided with Satan and rebelled when the vote went in favor of Jesus and the Father’s plan of agency.

There is one more aspect of this topic that I will address in a follow-up post.

Next Deep Waters article: Deep Waters:Lehi’s model of the universe

Previous Deep Waters article: Deep Waters: How many wives? How many husbands?

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Why voting is so important to the State

In blogs everywhere, Christians are discussing the “Mitt Romney” issue. The Christians are applying the scriptures they find in the Bible to determine whether it is justifiable for them (being Christians) to vote for a Mormon (a non-Christian, in their view.) Everyone believes the state propaganda that “it is our patriotic, civic duty to vote” without questioning the origins or truthfulness of the statement. The state, though, doesn’t care whether you vote for a Christian, a Muslim or an atheist, only that you vote.

There is a great chasm between the way the Lord works in his church and the way the state operates. The Lord himself chooses the rulers of his church, but only with the common consent of the people. If the people disapprove, the person called does not get set apart. The law of common consent is practiced by voting, a hand up for, a hand up against, or no hand up, at all. The majority always decides the issue. Although these are religious offices of power, none of the offices are sought or campaigned for. Plus the “voice of the people” can veto anything and everything without limit, although currently, this voice is nearly always unanimous in the affirmative at all levels.

Now, let’s compare that to state offices. The state is a means of force or compulsion. All its offices are offices of power. How are the offices filled? Through people seeking them and campaigning for them. This is fundamentally different than how offices are filled in the Lord’s church.

To put this in better perspective, consider Jehovah and Lucifer, during the time when a savior was to be chosen. Two volunteers spoke up when the Father asked who he should send. One sought for the power of God (Satan – “wherefore, give me thine honor,”) while the other didn’t (Jesus – “the glory be thine forever.”) The Father chose the one who didn’t seek the power. Thus, the doctrine of seeking for power is satanic in nature. It is how the devil operates. It is the same doctrine used by the king-men of the Book of Mormon, or any group of individuals who desire to rule over men.

Now, back to Mitt (and all others running for election.) There are two ways to get elected in this country. One way is not to run for office, not to seek it, not to campaign for it, but the majority writes your name in anyway and you become the elected official which you can then accept or reject. That is one way. The other way is to run for office, campaign for it and seek it out as much as possible and then, on election day, discover that the people chose you to rule instead of others. That may not seem like much a difference, but it is. One way is the way of Jesus, the other way is the way of Satan.

Many people running for office, and those voting for them, will tend to think of elected officials and the seeking and campaigning involved to obtain these positions of power as merely another type of job and that this is the way these jobs are obtained. But state positions are not private positions. They are positions of power in that they wield the ability to throw you into prison, depriving you of life, liberty and property. Public office are offices of force, backed by the arm of the state. Private jobs are offices of negotiation. No private office carries the ability to jail you, deprive you of property or even life. These are fundamentally different offices.

Generally, those Americans who plan on voting during Election 2008 or any other election will vote for men and women who are power-seekers. No matter how honest and upright you may start out, once you begin seeking for power over the children of men, you come under the jurisdiction of the devil, for this is how he operates and one of the ways he can gain influence over men.

Now, to wrap up this post. The state understands that when people seek for power through political office and when people vote for these power-seekers, the system of rule that is currently set up remains established and the power can continue to be concentrated in the hands of those that rule. The state must keep the people divided into those that rule and those that are ruled by spreading propaganda among the masses that by participating in the elections, they will have a say in how the rulers rule over them and over everyone else. It is a doctrine of the slave choosing his master.

Only anarchy can change the status quo and remove the rulers, making all men equal, but anarchy has no chance among voters (who support the current system,) only among non-voters (those disaffected by the state.) As the state fears anarchy most of all, because it removes its power completely, it must encourage “get out the vote” campaigns.

Next Anarchism/Anarchy article: Free-church vs. state-church

Previous Anarchism/Anarchy article: Stateless in Somalia: How Clannish Anarchy Works

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist