Federal (someday global?) Driver's license, should I get one?

The court cases sited regarding the right to travel were referring to a different class of citizens, but the premise is a correct one in that one should have the right to come and go as they please, by whatever means of modern conveyance they are able to acquire, so long as their exercise of the same doesn't impede the right(s) of another. It's a moral, easily understandable, precept. Unfortunately these are not times of moral abundance, nor are the legalities being imposed and enforced today rooted in morality, you're right... they're all commercial. Rape, murder, vandalism, mischief ... "driving without a license" all commercial charges merely given the appearance of morality (right and wrong).
The class of Citizens who had access to moral Law (in essence everyone white male not a ward of the state or incarcerated) began to see those rights eroded and undermined starting in 1917 and accelerating into the 20's. However participation was still "voluntary" (sound familiar to our current topic?) until 1933.
In 33 we got The new Deal, Gold confiscation act, social insecurity, the bank act of 1933 and the FDIC (which brought all local and regional banks under the Federal Reserve), etc. etc.
We started using notes of debt (Federal Reserve Notes) to discharge our obligations to pay instead of satisfying our obligations.
Once you lost the ability to satisfy your debts (gold and silver confiscation) and the ability to care for yourself into old age (social insecurity) you became a debtor & ward of the STATE, joining the ranks of the lower class citizens. Until 1850 you had to be land owners to even cast a vote.

So if that's what we lost the last time they offered a "voluntary" participation into a program, and we've all seen the right's continually and unceasingly eroded since then, my only question is what's around the corner on this one?
Are there really still people who believe politicians? Would you bet your life they're telling you the truth? Because the stakes could be that high and you may very well be doing just that.

Withstanding this currently "voluntary" option, even if creating the possibility of some minor personal inconvenience, certainly seems a worthwhile endeavor towards curbing a bludgeoning, ever overreaching and expanding entity, ...even if just to say "you're needed ... but not here. No Thanks.".

For those expressing the belief that "if you have nothing to hide why do you care if _________"
I will only say, if you don't believe in privacy why are there curtains and blinds on your windows or a door on the bathroom in your own house?

For those interested in an update, here was my experience at the DMV. I brought with me my passport and social security card just in case. When I approached the desk for a photo, the clerk asked me if I had one of the federal documents they'd asked me to bring (birth certificate, passport, etc.). I said, "I'd like the non-compliant license please". He said "alright, stand here for your picture. Neutral expression, don't smile". Apparently smiling for a driver's license picture is now 'frowned upon'. I guess the reason is when they submit the picture to the local media, you do indeed look 'thug life'. My plan if I get pulled over is to smile because the officer isn't likely to recognize me by my picture .

Well, that was it. No 'gold star' in the corner of my license or chip, but it does have printed on the top, "Not for Federal Identification". I have my passport for that which I do not carry. Therefore if someone wants to hop out of the country, they'll need more than my wallet to do so.