Ignore the common law (check that balances government corruption) and it will go away?

Does that fall into the category of failure to acknowledge history ensures a cycle of corruption which leads to violent revolution (also corruption) which leads to corruption?

Any so-called government that enforces arbitrary rules (such as subsidizing the African Slave Trade) is not a government, it is counterfeit, a fact of the matter, self-evident, inarguable, and routinely demonstrated by the criminal usurpers. To make the counterfeit government smaller is to remove the arbitrary nature of it, such as would be the case if the law was in force in America. Where is such an example, other than a white wash, or a desperate attempt by the criminals in office to throw the public a bone, a patsy, a useful idiot, thrown under the bus?

People will claim, falsely, that an example is the Civil War, whereby finally the African Slave Trade, an obviously criminal enterprise, was no longer The Law of the Land. People may also claim that finally the First Bank of the United States (a private corporation under a false federal flag) was finally done away with and also no longer supposedly The Law of the Land. Or the obviously unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts, were finally, once and for all, placed back into the genie bottle, also no longer The Law of the Land.

A private corporation was created in 1789 and placed in charge of the former free people, the former free and independent states, and the former Federal (voluntary) government, and it was called a single Nation from then on.

The Law of the Land actual was removed and replaced with a Profitable Monopoly run by criminals, and just ask them if you The People, you The Public, can accuse one of them, have an independent grand jury investigate them with all the legal jurisdiction afforded a common law grand jury, have them presented with a trial date, and have them face The People, you The Public, in a trial by jury which is a trial by the country, and see what they say to you in an official, arbitrary, response.

No, not since 1789, you can't help save the slaves from the slave masters, instead they will force you at gunpoint to return runaway slaves for capital punishment or worse: a life of slavery. No, not since 1789, you can't take the Central Banking Frauds to court, win the common-law suit, and put in motion a reduction of government, an end to the Federal Reserve Central Banking Fraud, no, they will say, that is not allowed. Only we the government can police our own, they will say, and they will say that with the same authority afforded to any other criminal Mob running an extortion racket.

Offer up arbitrary power and there will never be a shortage of criminals at each other's throats to take that prize.

"It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a man’s own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States." Lysander Spooner, Essay on The Trial by Jury, 1852

"They proved their effectiveness during the Colonial and Revolutionary periods in helping the colonists resist imperial interference. They provided a similar source of strength against outside pressure in the territories of the western United States, in the subject South following the Civil War, and in Mormon Utah. They frequently proved the only effective weapon against organized crime, malfeasance in office, and corruption in high places.
"But appreciation of the value of grand juries was always greater in times of crisis, and, during periods when threats to individual liberty were less obvious, legal reformers, efficiency experts, and a few who feared government by the people worked diligently to overthrow the institution. Proponents of the system, relying heavily on the democratic nature of the people's panel, on its role as a focal point for the expression of the public needs and the opportunity provided the individual citizen for direct participation in the enforcement of law, fought a losing battle. Opponents of the system leveled charges of inefficiency and tyranny against the panels of citizen investigators and pictured them as outmoded and expensive relics of the past. Charges of "star chamber" and "secret inquisition" helped discredit the institution in the eyes of the American people, and the crusade to abolish the grand jury, under the guise of bringing economy and efficiency to local government, succeeded in many states."
The People's Panel
The Grand Jury in the United States, 1634 - 1941
Richard D. Younger
Page 3

"Law enforcement in the Founders' time was a duty of every citizen. Citizens were expected to be armed and equipped to chase suspects on foot, on horse, or with wagon whenever summoned. And when called upon to enforce the laws of the state, citizens were to respond "not faintly and with lagging steps, but honestly and bravely and with whatever implements and facilities [were] convenient and at hand. Any person could act in the capacity of a constable without being one, and when summoned by a law enforcement officer, a private person became a temporary member of the police department. The law also presumed that any person acting in his public capacity as an officer was rightfully appointed."
The Conviction Factory, The Collapse of America's Criminal Courts, by Roger Roots
Law Enforcement as a Universal Duty
Page 42

"For decades before and after the Revolution, the adjudication of criminals in America was governed primarily by the rule of private prosecution: (1) victims of serious crimes approached a community grand jury, (2) the grand jury investigated the matter and issued an indictment only if it concluded that a crime should be charged, and (3) the victim himself or his representative (generally an attorney but sometimes a state attorney general) prosecuted the defendant before a petit jury of twelve men. Criminal actions were only a step away from civil actions - the only material difference being that criminal claims ostensibly involved an interest of the public at large as well as the victim. Private prosecutors acted under authority of the people and in the name of the state - but for their own vindication. The very term "prosecutor" meant criminal plaintiff and implied a private person. A government prosecutor was referred to as an attorney general and was a rare phenomenon in criminal cases at the time of the nation's founding. When a private individual prosecuted an action in the name of the state, the attorney general was required to allow the prosecutor to use his name - even if the attorney general himself did not approve of the action.
Private prosecution meant that criminal cases were for the most part limited by the need of crime victims for vindication. Crime victims held the keys to a potential defendant's fate and often negotiated the settlement of criminal cases. After a case was initiated in the name of the people, however, private prosecutors were prohibited from withdrawing the action pursuant to private agreement with the defendant. Court intervention was occasionally required to compel injured crime victims to appear against offenders in court and "not to make bargains to allow [defendants] to escape conviction, if they...repair the injury."
The Conviction Factory, The Collapse of America's Criminal Courts, by Roger Roots
Private Prosecutors
Page 40

I believe the future of education is on the internet utilizing private and public tutors, and remote secured testing sites.

Fact is that "Freedom" and "Liberty" frighten the hell out of most folks. Unawares of what it is they are actually demanding most people can be heard using phrases such as: "there ought to be a law" and "someone should do something about that" -

I woke my neighborhood when I was 16 years old handing out Goldwater brochures.

The Federal government has been infiltrated by the enemies of Freedom. Our children have been systematically brainwashed since the “Department of education” started setting national standards. Standards written for NYC and forced on all fifty states.
Leftist universities and media have become propaganda machines.
It’s time we the people start singing a unified theme