Snapshot of the State - Control Freak Giddiness

"Control" - Definition:

That which serves to check, restrain, or hinder; restraint.
Power or authority to check or restrain; restraining or regulating influence; superintendence; government; as, children should be under parental control.
To exercise restraining or governing influence over; to check; to counteract; to restrain; to regulate; to govern; to overpower.

Debating Militarists

Debating militarists can be very frustrating, but I believe worth the effort.

I despise the military as an institution. Of course, I share no love with its controlling state apparatus, as well. Those civilians who comprise the state are the controlling thugs of the operation. They are usually hidden and unapproachable. Lying is a big part of their profession, to the point of being pathological. They are usually too self-deluded to realize the immorality of their institution because of the monetary compensation they receive to strengthen and operate it. These folks I usually debate merely for the mental exercise, as the possibility of successfully converting them is virtually nil.

The military, however, is merely the armed wing of the state‘s bird of prey. It’s responsible for enforcing the evil edicts emanating from the civilian thugs.

I feel my chances for successful conversions are much higher with this group for the simple fact that they are being shot at. Risking your life requires constant affirmation that your decision to do so is sound. It’s part of the inner survival mechanism of human beings.

In my debates with militarists over the years (meaning enlisted military personnel, retirees, and their chicken hawk supporters) I’ve been able to recognize three distinct types of debaters:

1) The intelligent, articulate individual who vehemently disagrees with my anti-state position, but does so respectfully while eloquently outlining his position. These folks should be instantly recognized as worthy opponents and be returned the respect and civility they have given you. Chances are good you believed (and presented your belief system) exactly the same way, at one time. This should make it easier to draw your argument as you illustrate, point by point, how you were convinced your comparable belief system was false and immoral. Your chances of immediate success with this type of individual is low. But continue to be consistent and rational in your argument. More than likely this individual will have the integrity to recognize your argument has merit and is worth pondering.

The idea, at the very least, is to plant a seed. As that individual continually questions himself and debates others that seed will be cultivated. The trick is to expose the corrupt institution he is a part of without insulting the individual. You have to remind yourself that this is a thinking, cognitive person. If he wasn’t, he wouldn’t be debating you in the first place.

2) Those who have had an epiphany and agree with you to so some extent, but will attempt to rationalize the evils of this institution as necessary.

Some of these folks articulate your message and argument so well that you wonder how they were convinced to enlist in the first place. However, they still must be convinced of this institution’s lack of integrity and legitimacy. Direct them to resources where they can obtain the knowledge that will lead them to this inevitable conclusion. They must also be convinced that they are powerless to change or “reform” this homicidal organization. They must be persuaded that disengagement is the only rational action to take.

3) Those who vehemently disagree and pepper their illogical arguments and non sequiturs with profanity and insult.

When they respond with phrases such as “I love war” and “I run to the sound of gunfire” it is probably not a good idea to immediately continue debate. Leave time for a cooling off period for them, as well as you.

Why would you need time for cooling off? If you are like me, the first reaction to such blatant hostility is to return my own version, feeling no obligation to restrain myself as I pick apart their depraved, illogical arguments and express insults of my own. This is a complete waste of time. Any hope of intelligent debate is lost as both parties resort to out doing each other at creating clever insults. If you do eventually respond to such hostility, do so in a very tempered, even tone, presenting your argument in the most concise, understandable manner that you are capable of. If the response is still more hostility, write this individual off as a hopeless cause- for now. Keep hope in the possibility that you may have planted a seed, despite the antagonism.

I have walked this earth for over half a century and have been exposed to every kind of statist indoctrination imaginable and have also been around long enough to realize the existence and characteristics of that indoctrination.

I can only hope that afflicted, enslaved soldiers take the time to analyze their situation, continually seeking the truth. Hopefully they will finally realize the deceit their masters have perpetrated against them.

Most all of us have been victims of this brain washing. We were born as slaves of the state and conditioned in their schools to accept that notion as not only reality but as a definition of “freedom.” That process is stepped up a notch when one enlists in the military. Yes, this means an even harder shell to crack to complete a moral rebirth. But this individual also has the most to lose.

Many excuse war as a reality that cannot be eliminated, only adapted to. I disagree. War will certainly not be ended or even reduced through political involvement. War is a natural extension of politics. The only power an individual really has is over how he lives his life. Live your live in a peaceful, non-aggressive manner and your chances of not creating any strife are pretty strong. Next, encourage others to live the same way and prove to them (by your behavior) why this lifestyle is preferable over waging violence and intervening in other’s affairs. Peaceful involvement and action is infinitely more productive than conflict. Conflict merely breeds still more conflict. The more people who believe and live this way, the fewer potential combatants nation states have to recruit. The Golden Rule is not just a nice sounding theory. It works!

Wars cannot occur without willing participants. Tyrants without armies are impotent. The goal should be to prevent as many young people as possible from joining this institution. Likewise, it is absolutely necessary that we convince those presently enslaved to break free from this abusive relationship as soon as possible.

These folks (militarists) are already victims of the allure of nationalism. Let’s work to prevent them being eaten by the beast of war.

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

Snapshot of the State - Red Carpets for Mass Murderers

"All murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."

Voltaire

Too Late for Resistance

Nidal Hasan is causing a ruckus. The man accused of murdering 13 of his fellow slaves at the Ft Hood, Texas Military Plantation refuses to shave his beard in violation of a judge’s order.

The resistance toward his military master comes a bit too late for Mr. Hasan. Apparently he doesn’t understand the reality of his relationship; Once a slave, always a slave- even when condemned and cast off the plantation by his demonic master. Even choice of facial hair is restricted for life for those voluntarily and permanently enslaved by military “service.”

To stay true to his faith, Mr. Hasan chose his master’s method of action (killing) instead of merely refusing to longer serve that master and suffer the consequences. He could have sought Conscientious Objector status and given the opportunity to eloquently explain the reasons for his withdrawal and outline his master’s murderous activities that inspired such action.

Though he chose the wrong course of action, it can be argued that his choice to kill did expose some inconvenient truths.

Please remember, if he had just murdered the “right” people, Mr. Hasan would be lauded as a hero, not a pariah. He’d right now be receiving a pretty lil’ piece of tacky, scrap metal to hang on his chest instead of awaiting life imprisonment or execution. Killing is only evil in the eyes of the state if you victimize the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

Mr. Hasan’s murderous action helped expose just how impotent and incompetent the US military is as a defense agency. They are charged with “defending” others, yet cannot even protect themselves
from one of their own while in one of their own “secure” facilities. Hired assassins not even carrying a weapon? Pathetic!

On 9/11 this “defense” agency never lifted a finger to “defend” anyone. Yet, they never hesitate a moment to kill and destroy to satisfy the greed of international bankers and the blood lust of the Bush/Obama Regime and its adoring minions.

To avoid Mr. Hasan’s predicament, make sure you only kill for the state- the “right” people for the “right” reasons.

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

Snapshot of the State - Perverse Persistence

"And what'll you do now, my blue-eyed son?

And what'll you do now my darling young one?

I'm a-goin' back out 'fore the rain starts a-fallin'

I'll walk to the depths of the deepest dark forest

Where the people are a many and their hands are all empty

Where the pellets of poison are flooding their waters

Where the home in the valley meets the damp dirty prison

Where the executioner's face is always well hidden

Where hunger is ugly, where souls are forgotten

Where black is the color, where none is the number

And I'll tell it and speak it and think it and breathe it

And reflect it from the mountain so all souls can see it

Then I'll stand on the ocean until I start sinkin'

But I'll know my songs well before I start singin'

And it's a hard, it's a hard, it's a hard, and it's a hard

It's a hard rain's a-gonna fall."

Bob Dylan



'Secede' - Jumping Through Hoops

My video inspired several individuals to suggest methods to secede that are “legally enforceable,” as relates to that fictional abstract known as the US Government. Here is one such approach. These are all viable courses of action, if that is the direction you choose. But I still am bothered by the elemental question that continually goes through my head: By what authority does an individual or group of individuals claim rule and dominion over my life without my consent? There is none, of course, and such an illegitimate authority can only be enforced through fraud and violence.

When I am born into this world, am I born a free man or someone else’s property? The state has created a maze of legalese to distract you and cloud and hide this inconvenient question that the state can’t answer. I don’t understand why intelligent and awake people allow the state’s matrix of propaganda to obscure that basic question in people’s minds. The state creates these legal games to confuse its subjects and keep them oblivious to the simple, rational truths contained in the answers to such questions.

How can any individual or entity (that I had no part in creating) rightly claim me as their property and then require me to navigate through all sorts of hoops and obstacles and legal nonsense to regain a condition (freedom) that I was born into?

It’s no different or no less reprehensible than a chattel slave being required by his master to complete whatever perverse directives this despot can imagine, in order for the slave to win or “earn” his freedom- a freedom that was taken from him at birth! How is this slavish relationship any different than the relationship the state forces upon me? Why is the burden upon me to abolish or rectify this relationship-particularly since this entity claims to rule “by consent of the governed?”

Asking these questions exposes the reality of the state’s existence- it is a tyrannical, criminal band of thugs with a great public relations agent.

Any legitimate “contractual” arrangement with this beast is rather one sided. I’m expected to keep my end of any “agreement,” but the state rejects any demand that they keep theirs. They can change the terms of any “agreement” at any time and without any input or consent by me. That’s why I never opened a Roth IRA. I fully expect them to eventually change the rules so you’ll be paying taxes on that money twice! That’s of course, if they don’t nationalize (confiscate) everyone’s retirement money first.

The burden is placed upon the wrong party. As it is now, the individual is expected to prove why he is not a property of the state. It should be up to the state to prove such an abominating supposition.

Why should I spend my time fighting one legal fiction by replacing it with, or defensively using, another legal fiction? Even if that is successful, what is to stop the state from creating still another legal fiction that I must then counter? Where does it end? I am sovereign. I am born that way. I need no document or state decision to make that a reality. The fact of my sovereignty is confirmed by the fact of my birth as a conscious human being, a property of no one, nor any self-described ruling entity. If you believe otherwise, than you have to believe that all men are born as other’s property. You also then have to admit to the tyrannical nature of the entity that you legitimize and obey. And what does that say about you as a person?
 
Related posts:

‘Secede” - A Declaration is Only the First Step

‘Secede’ - Submission is Not Consent

‘Secede’ - The Constitution of No Authority

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

Snapshot of the State - Faith in Institutionalized Violence

“Government is an association of men who do violence to the rest of us.”

Leo Tolstoy

‘Secede’ - The Constitution of No Authority

A constitutionalist is one who believes that a Piece of Paper will protect one’s life and liberty from a predator disguised as a benevolent government master.

Some viewers of my video brought up the US Constitution. They either encouraged me to work for its restoration or claimed it to be a contractual authority preventing my secession.

I highly recommend everyone read the works of Lysander Spooner and his critique of the US Constitution. Not only does he prove such claims as spurious but he essentially destroys this document’s legitimacy in two sentences:

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain—that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

And he wrote this in 1867! Seeing what has happened in the years since, the above statement seems to be even more relevant today.

The US Constitution was written by a group of self-appointed elites in 1787. Among other illicit powers, it claimed that the US Government had the power to rob individuals. And not just individuals then alive and residing within the geographical boundaries “ruled” by the government, but any future, unborn individuals finding themselves living within those same arbitrary boundaries. In essence, the authors made the audacious proclamation that those not yet born are to be ruled by this new government and are bound by its constitution.

What gives the Founders (intelligent, educated individuals they may be) the gall, the temerity, the arrogance to rule me from the grave?

Please remember, that a constitution is not a contract. A constitution merely charges an institution with the power and responsibility to regulate itself- which any honest constitutionalist will have to admit requires a healthy dose of faith in the moral rectitude of his rulers. However, a contract is an agreement among two or more consenting parties who agree that definite consequences will be suffered by any party that violates this contract. All parties are aware of this responsibility and agree to be held accountable. If a dispute arises, a pre-determined, agreed to, third party decides the outcome of any disagreement- not a court operated by one of the parties involved in the dispute.

The fact that an institution is so feared by its creators that a regulating document is required indicates the admitted creation of a master/slave relationship. The expectation is that the master will be refrained from abusing its monopoly of power by obeying this regulating document. The hope is the master will regulate himself and hold himself accountable. In other words, the Constitution is written by my master to regulate my master, is interpreted by my master, and enforced by my master. In more cases than not, it is ignored by my master.

But if this particular master/slave relationship is so feared, why voluntarily get into such a relationship in the first place? This curious action seems eerily similar to a woman, on the eve of consenting to a relationship with a man, obtaining a restraining order as future protection. Are you sure, madam, this is a guy you want to spend time with?

It can be concluded then that a relationship with a state institution, no matter its regulating structure or guiding ideology, is not conducive to protecting an individual’s cherished, inalienable liberties. And it can also be reasoned that any such relationship with this institution cannot be considered valid without the explicit, non-coerced, contractual consent of the individual.

Related Posts:

‘Secede” - A Declaration is Only the First Step

‘Secede’ - Submission is Not Consent

‘Secede’ - Jumping Through Hoops
 

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

'Secede' - Submission is Not Consent

The state’s legitimacy only exists in the mind of those who accept it. To those that don’t, it is a fiction, a meaningless abstraction.

However, surviving in a state dominated world requires, in some cases, submission to this abstraction that also possesses overwhelming firepower to enforce that domination. But don’t confuse submission with consent.

When a robber sticks a gun to your head and demands your money, more than likely you will submit to such a demand, as you value your life more than whatever money you have on you. Of course, you have not consented to such a forced transaction and transfer of property, as the decision was made under duress and an undeniable threat to your life.

People try to tell me that having a social security number is some kind of contract with the US Government. Of course, this is bull since a gun was put to my head at the age of 15 to get one. No number meant no employment. I responded to the robber by submitting, but I most certainly did not consent to any kind of contract. You can’t be coerced into a contract. And I most certainly wasn’t knowledgeable enough at that age to consent to such an arrangement. Of course, today you are branded with this number at birth and are given absolutely no opportunity to opt out.

Many readers label me a “citizen” and insist I am therefore bound with certain obligations toward the ruling state that labels me as such.

“Citizen” is merely another word for “subject” or “slave” used by the state to designate and categorize you as their property, not the property of a competing state. The reality is that the state/citizen relationship is just a variation of the classic master/slave arrangement. But I am not the property of any state as I have not given consent to anyone to categorize me as such. Therefore, the issue of “citizenship” is irrelevant to me.

I approach the questions of self-proclaimed rulers from a philosophical view. Such a view can be articulated by asking two questions:

1) When I am born, am I born a free man or am
I born a subject/slave to another individual or a collective entity?
The answer to this question is either yes or no- there is no in between. You can’t be mostly free or a little enslaved.

If your answer is the latter, I then have to ask the next question:

2) Why? By what authority does such
a ruler have to make such a claim without my explicit consent?
By the divine proclamation of a god or some other supernatural entity? By the “authority” of a mob, manifested as a state sponsored and controlled election?

When the state puts a gun to my head, demanding obedience, I will most likely submit. However, I WILL NOT voluntarily petition and beg, by political or legal action, for the return of a personal possession (my individual sovereignty and liberty) that is already mine! The Magna Carta, eloquent document that it is, was an appeal to a self-proclaimed ruler to respect certain liberties already owned at birth by his self-proclaimed subjects. It was an appeal to a self-proclaimed king/ruler to give up a small part of his authority. But that authority was illegitimate from the day it was proclaimed!

Some readers mention the error of referring to the USG as a government, when it is technically a corporation; as if such a designation changes the fact that this body (by whatever name you call it) is a criminal organization that unjustly claims ownership over my life and body. As one reader reminded me: You are Sovereign. You are a Creator. A corporation is a creation. A creation cannot rule a Creator. Why is that so hard for so many to understand?

Government, state, corporation- give it whatever title you wish. They are all abstractions. I was NOT born a subject or slave to any such fictions created by others. Without my consent, they have no legitimate authority over me. The fact they can offer only violence in response to my resistance further strengthens this claim. Walmart is a corporation. If they claim me as their property, is that claim legitimate? Corporations don’t own people, people control corporations.

Related posts:

‘Secede” - A Declaration is Only the First Step

‘Secede’ - The Constitution of No Authority

‘Secede’ - Jumping Through Hoops

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

Snapshot of the State - Arrogance

"The world is made up for the most part of morons and natural tyrants, sure of themselves, strong in their own opinions, never doubting anything."

Clarence Darrow


‘Secede’ - A Declaration is Only the First Step

I received a lot of feedback after posting my latest video. I also received a number of recommendations on how to make such a declaration into a physical reality. From this I realized I should make clear the nature of such a personal declaration.

Please understand that this declaration/affirmation is just a first step. It must be followed with concrete action. Many folks contacted me offering a number of viable options to choose from. I think whatever plan of action you devise and execute is only limited by your creativity. If that runs out, you have the creativity of the entire human race to draw upon, which I believe is unlimited.

I remember years ago listening to personal improvement gurus. The one belief they had in common was the power of personal affirmation as the first step toward achieving a goal. Such an affirmation settles into your subconscious and directs conscious action toward achieving this goal. By sincerely creating a personal declaration of secession/independence, you have, in a sense, wired and programmed your subconscious toward directing conscious thought toward achieving your ambition.
This conscious thought manifests itself as ideas that materialize into action.

Though your plan of action is up to you, I would only caution against substituting your personal plan of action with joining a “movement” of some kind. Such movements are useful in locating and exchanging ideas with like minded individuals, but it would be unwise on counting on “mass produced” action to bring positive change to your particular, individual situation. Make sure you remain the director and not the directed. Don’t expect change (as it relates to you personally) to result from merely following and supporting the leadership of such a movement, even if they seem to share your interests and expectations.

The only real power an individual has is how he lives his life. Multiply this by millions and the result is change.

Related posts:

‘Secede’ Submission is Not Consent

‘Secede’ - The Constitution of No Authority

‘Secede’ - Jumping Through Hoops

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

Slaves Get New War Rags From Master

Some local folks who had their property rights violated by anarchist imposters have received brand, spanking new war rags courtesy of their loving master.

One of Uncle Sam’s local overseers/hired killers has blessed the victims with replacements to fly in proud exclamation of their political slavery.

Of course, the hired killer is also a slave, though of higher ranking. So what we have is this: One slave is replacing a symbol of slavery (owned by other slaves), paid for with money stolen from those very same slaves. And the Master (who stole that money with the help of higher ranking slaves) is credited with being loving, compassionate, and righteous for taking such action. Which, of course, further endears the slaves toward their master, who offer their continual supplication and obedience and strengthened reverence toward his goofy symbols.

And the beat goes on……

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

Another Reason to Dislike Rand Paul

I quit voting twelve years ago. Not long after, I removed my name from the voting registration roles. One nice benefit of doing that is that it clears your name from the party mailing lists of local and national, aspiring politi-gangsters. When election season arrives, you don’t have to waste precious time sifting and sorting through piles of obnoxious pamphlets, letters, brochures, and inserts sent by sociopaths proudly boasting how they are far better qualified to rule your life and property than their esteemed (but equally sociopathic) opponents.

Since then, the only political mailing list I was on was Ron Paul’s. He’s had my name since back in the late 1980’s when I subscribed to his gold newsletter. He had to give that up when he returned to Congress but I have since received his regular congressional newsletter. Recently, I opened my mailbox to find a letter from some gun rights organization I had never heard of. On the envelope and the form letter inside was Rand Paul’s name, boldly and prominently displayed. Obviously, Rand Paul had obtained my name from a list owned by his father’s campaign. If this alliance with the gun organization was Ron’s idea it would have been his name on the letterhead, not his conniving son’s.

About a week later, I find in my mailbox a letter from the Mitt Romney campaign. Though I didn’t bother to read it, I’m sure it glowingly bragged that the corporatist/facist, unprincipled Mittens was the obvious choice to rule me from the DC death pit. The only way his campaign could have received my address is from the smarmy opportunist named Rand Paul, who has already publicly abandoned his father to serve the interests of Mittens. Ron Paul has refrained (as of now) from making such an endorsement.

I’m sure the Mittens campaign will disperse my name down the chain of criminals that will serve underneath him and they will contact me begging for scraps to bolster their campaigns. So now, guess what I have to look forward to for at least the next four months? Why, cleaning political pornography out of my mailbox on a near daily basis, of course. All thanks to some arrogant, inconsiderate, state worshipping thug from Kentucky who would probably back stab his own father if it could possibly further his political career.

Oh, wait. He already done did that.

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

War Rags Vandalized

Some US flags were recently burned in a local suburb- an activity you would certainly wish to see more of. But in this case, the flags were not the property of those doing the burning.

While reading the report and sifting through the usual extremist, collectivist, claptrap phrases such as, “it’s everybody’s flag in America,” and “it’s a slap in the face for all Americans,” this quote caught my eye:

“The monetary value is nothing, but the patriotic value is all to me.”

That kind of says it all. These fools are more upset that their worshipped, demonic symbol was destroyed than they are about the infinitely more meaningful fact that their property rights were violated.

Their reverence toward the civic religion’s cloth banner is a stronger provocation of anger than the reality of trespass and destruction of their personal property. Their religious fanaticism regarding the mythical character of the God-State is the prime motivator for their indignation, rather than the unacceptable encroachment on their sovereign, personal space.

That fact tells me that they can thus be easily convinced by skilled, state propagandists to give up those property rights if it serves the interest of the state or even the protection of its goofy symbols. By making such a statement about value, they’ve exposed a spiritual weakness and lack of reason that state criminals will be more than willing to exploit.

Now that possibility should upset readers more than the incineration of a few war rags.

UPDATE TO THIS POST

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT

Independence? Ha!

In North Texas, the holiday previously known as “Independence Day” has apparently received a name change. It is now officially known as “No Refusal Weekend.”

“As a part of the enforcement push, anyone suspected of driving or boating while intoxicated, and who refuses to submit to a breathalyzer test, will have a search warrant issued against them for police to take a blood specimen.”

Please be aware that Johnny Law has now been trained at a “blood draw school,” used to train officers on how to take blood from suspects. So now, not only does Officer Un-Friendly have the skills of a baton, wielding, taser zapping, pepper spraying jack boot on his resume, he also is to be feared as a goddamned vampire! And you were worried about encountering face eating zombies!

Remember this while you wave your little war rag and watch fireworks on No Refusal Weekend- "The ‘terrorists’ hate us because we’re free.” I suppose that IS true, yet the “terrorists” are misidentified- they’re the ones with the badges and uniforms who claim to be the good guys! You know, the guys who hate you and your "freedom" so much they forcibly take your blood!

Why is it that on every state holiday, Big Brother gives us an explicit, overt, orgasmic display of tyranny? Is it because he is mad that he has to work on a holiday and takes his revenge out on the rest of us? Or is it the “spirit” of the holiday, itself, that emboldens him to seek ever more extreme and totalitarian actions?

Big Brother does NOT like the idea of “independence.” He has to remind us all just who is in charge. He will gladly and publicly humiliate you if he must. Get this idea of independence out of your head- YOU are the slave and HE is the master.

Resistance is Mandatory

No rulers

No masters

NO CONSENT