The vast majority of the legislation being passed today has no basis in the legitimate power delegated to the Federal authority by the States in the Constitution. I've already discussed the vast quantity of 'regulation' being promulgated by unelected bureaucrats. Further, regardless of the lack of legitimacy of these rules and regulations, it is not possible for any single individual to comprehend even a tenth part of the laws and regulations the government wants him to respect.
When this country was founded, the basis of the law was English Common Law, and every literate person, which was the vast majority of the citizenry, understood what that meant. I mean that ALL of the people understood the basis for ALL of the rules, and it was not hard to study the Common Law in order to understand it in detail. There were various compilations of the common law available, but probably the most frequently encountered was Blackstone's "Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-1769)," published in 4 volumes., and still available today. ( See link HERE)
A literate person of average intelligence could probably read and understand 90+ % or more of those 4 volumes in less than 4 months; it was possible for someone to read the law, study it during their off hours under the supervision of an attorney, and take and pass the bar exam. I believe that it is still legal in Virginia to read for the Bar, although I am not aware of anyone having done it recently.
The common law applied to all, even to the King, and these laws were upheld by the vast majority of the citizenry and by the courts almost all of the time. "Life, Liberty and Property" were the watchwords of the Enlightenment, and everyone understood the importance of upholding those principles. Property was sancrosanct. While there were abuses of the even application of the rules, there was even in the worst cases an attempt to either conceal the favoritism or otherwise to conceal the violation.
Contrast this with the present state of affairs, when unelected bureaucrats pass regulations enforced as if they were legitimate legislation, enforcing these edicts on the working class and ignoring violations committed by the ruling class or their enforcers. Various political groups are either persecuted or favored, depending on who is in power and who is the scapegoat of the moment. At the present time, there isn't even any serious effort to hide what is being done. When confronted with this situation most folks know that something is very badly wrong, but have a hard time getting hold of the issue.
The essential question one needs to ask in this situation is, "Is the rule of a government the same thing as the rule of Law?"
Well, no. It's not the same thing at all. The function of a government is supposed to be to protect individual rights. Jefferson put it pretty well in the Declaration when he said that legitimate governments have the consent of the governed. In order for someone to consent to the rules, they have to know what the rules are. Any system in which it is impossible for an average person to fully comprehend all the rules is by definition NOT legitimate because it is impossible for someone to consent to something that they don't know or fully understand.
Voting does not constitute informed consent. Communist Russia had regular elections, and a great voter turnout. Adolf Hitler was elected Chancellor of Germany, and his extermination of the Jews was carried out lawfully. All the proper forms were observed. But again, that is not the rule of law.
What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is rule by government. So what is to be done about this situation? Consider your response carefully; much depends on your answer. *I* don't need to know what your answer is, but you do, O gentle reader.
With regard to all who serve the Light,