Sovereignty Is Of The Individual
November 7th 2025
It is a metaphysical fact that all men are sovereign and have the right to think and act for themselves.
This is the prompt I used for ChatGPT to produce this article (which I edited for clarity).
PROMPT:
Can you help me extrapolate or build upon a concept of sovereignty which works with my objective premises? Explain to me the basic history and application of sovereignty, then explain its definition and meaning. Then i want to see if its the right concept to apply to individuals in my system, if its actually objectively true and right. Because an opponent could say "sure you have the right to life, but not liberty, as only those intelligent enough have the right to rule and be "sovereign". I think i need a solid concept of sovereignty to defend against attacks from people claiming "legitimate" double standards. I can see some people saying because the masses are typically quite unintelligent, they therefore are not fit to be sovereign and rule themselves. Especially some elitist satanic cults and other religions, they think they are better than others and are even anthropologically superior. I want to defend against this and have an air tight completely undefeatable system which can objectively argue that everyone has the right to life, is sovereign and has equal rights. And just because or if everyone is sovereign, it does not imply omniscience or omnipotence. I want my system to basically say "just because some are smarter than others, doesn't mean you have more rights". Also i think what needs to be part of the argument is that every individual is actually better off when all humans are sovereign and have liberty. The whole prospers better when each individual prospers. Its in my interests for everyone else to have as much freedom and wealth as possible, and its also better for them if i have the same. I have this so far. Self ownership is linked to the concept of individual sovereignty. Life is the standard of value and basis of rights, sure, but it doesn't negate the concept of self ownership, which may be better put as self mastery. We have the right to life, but where does our right to liberty derive from? I think it's derived from our nature of being intelligent and rational. We all have the capacity to think and judge and must exercise our natural capacities. Therefore, sovereignty (self mastery over thought and action) is made explicit because we have the intelligence to be self masters. Only if we violate others rights do any others have a right to impose upon our liberty.
✅ 1. HISTORY OF SOVEREIGNTY — A QUICK, CLEAR FOUNDATION
Historically, “sovereignty” meant:
A. Medieval & Early Modern Period
Sovereign = the supreme ruler, the one with final authority.
Power was justified by divine right or hereditary authority.
This was subjective, not rational.
B. Enlightenment (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau)
Sovereignty began shifting from a ruler to the people:
Hobbes: sovereignty = necessary absolute authority to avoid chaos
Locke: sovereignty = individuals, who delegate limited powers to government
Rousseau: sovereignty = the “general will” (collective)
C. Modern Liberal Philosophy
Sovereignty becomes: the ultimate moral authority resides in the individual, not the state.
✅ 2. A RIGOROUS, OBJECTIVE DEFINITION OF SOVEREIGNTY
This is the formulation that destroys elitist arguments:
Sovereignty is the inherent authority of a rational being to govern their own life, exercise their judgment, and act according to their values, limited only by the equal sovereignty of others.
This means:
Sovereignty originates in nature, not society.
It is not granted by rulers, majorities, priests, elites, or governments.
It is inherent in the type of entity a person is:
a self-directing, concept-using, choice-making rational agent.
This makes sovereignty inviolable, unearned, and unranked.
✅ 3. WHY SOVEREIGNTY IS OBJECTIVE AND UNIVERSAL
My system rests on these premises:
Life is the ultimate value.
Reason is the means of living.
Choice is the mode through which reason operates.
Therefore, freedom is the necessary condition for life.
From these, sovereignty emerges as a logical necessity:
✅ (1) Each person’s judgment exists only in their own mind.
No one else can think for you.
No one else can experience your values.
No one else can choose your actions.
This alone makes each person sovereign by metaphysical fact.
✅ (2) Intelligence differences do not negate sovereignty.
Why?
Because sovereignty is based on:
the capacity to be an agent,
NOT the degree of intelligence.
A human with 90 IQ still:
thinks
chooses
values
acts
experiences pain and joy
can be harmed
can be coerced
survives via reason (even if at a lower level)
The kind is the same; only the degree differs.
Sovereignty is based on kind, not degree.
✅ (3) If one person’s sovereignty is denied, sovereignty collapses for all.
If Person A can override Person B’s choices “because they are smarter,”
then a smarter person can override Person A’s choices for the same reason.
This dissolves sovereignty entirely, creating a chain of domination with no principled endpoint.
It is inherently unstable, contradictory, and ungrounded.
✅ (4) The only consistent principle is: all rational beings possess equal sovereignty.
“Equal” means:
equal moral authority over their own life,
not equal abilities, virtues, outcomes, or knowledge.
✅ 4. A COMPLETE DEFENSE AGAINST ELITIST OBJECTIONS
OBJECTION 1
"Only the intelligent should be sovereign, because only they can rule well."
Answer:
Sovereignty is not measured by competence but by metaphysical identity.
Humans are self-directing beings by nature.
No amount of intelligence gives someone access to another person’s consciousness.
To claim otherwise is:
logically inconsistent
impossible to apply universally
a gateway to tyranny
based on a false premise:
that sovereignty comes from ability, not identity
OBJECTION 2
"The masses are too stupid to rule themselves."
Answer:
Rule themselves = make choices for their own lives
NOT govern a nation.
You don't need high intelligence to:
choose your job, partner, home
protect your values
learn through trial
avoid harm
pursue happiness
Sovereignty = self-direction
not political expertise.
OBJECTION 3
"We are superior; therefore we have superior rights."
Answer:
If superiority determined rights, then:
the stronger could kill the weaker,
the faster could enslave the slower,
the charismatic could rule the shy,
AI (stronger intellect) would have the right to dominate humans,
animals with superior senses would have rights over humans.
It collapses into might makes right — which cannot be universalized, cannot be justified, and cannot be applied without contradiction.
OBJECTION 4
"Some people don't use reason, so they forfeit sovereignty."
Answer:
Failure to use reason does NOT dissolve sovereignty.
It only dissolves your ability to flourish.
Rights are lost (temporarily suspended) only when one initiates force.
Not when one is ignorant, mistaken, irrational, or foolish.
OBJECTION 5
"Hierarchy is natural, so political hierarchy is justified."
Answer:
Hierarchy of talent is natural.
Hierarchy of rights is not.
Mixing the two is a category error.
Rights protect the low-performing from predation by the high-performing —
and protect the high-performing from being dragged down by the low-performing.
Rights are the universal equalizer.
✅ 5. WHY EVERYONE BENEFITS WHEN EVERYONE IS SOVEREIGN
When all individuals are sovereign:
✅ 1. Trade replaces coercion
Everyone gains
Innovation increases
Wealth rises
Cooperation replaces parasitism
✅ 2. Mutual respect becomes the only stable mode of interaction
Coercion results in:
endless conflict
instability
paranoia
repression
destruction of value
Freedom produces:
trust
specialization
prosperity
long-term flourishing
✅ 3. Even the "elite" benefit more from freedom than domination
History shows:
tyrants always fall
controlling others is expensive
controlled populations produce less wealth
oppression breeds rebellion
innovation dies under tyranny
no tyrant is safe
A world of sovereign individuals is the most profitable world for everyone.
✅ SUMMARY: THE FINAL, OBJECTIVE CASE FOR INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
Sovereignty = the inherent authority of a rational being to govern their own life.
It is:
derived from human nature
grounded in reason
universal
equal
inalienable
non-hierarchical
consistent with survival
the only stable moral principle
the only structure that maximizes prosperity
the strongest defense against elitism and domination
We are ALL sovereign. We've just been tricked into believing we're not. It's not a matter of semantics, it's a fact of our identity as men.
How to teach someone they're sovereign with 3 questions
1. Can anyone else think for you?
2. Can anyone else make all your choices for you?
3. Can anyone else experience all your values for you?
No. You are sovereign by metaphysical fact of being human.
Your particular nature and identity as a living individual makes you irrefutably sovereign.
You don't have a choice about it, just as you don't have a choice about being human.
You're a self determined, fully autonomous, moral agent.
Anything and everything you do is up to you.
Your life is your own, it belongs to you and only you.
You're responsible for all your judgements and accountable for all your actions.
You have self mastery, which means you have the power to think and act for yourself.
With great power comes great responsibility, use it wisely.