Because support of laws or the rule of law is an odd thing and you would expect those of us here to not support laws?
Sorry, the Anarchism forum is Reddit. 
3 Likes
It is good to see the youth of America educated in what reality is. She wasn’t harmed by the officer.
Come on, you can’t tell me you didn’t visualize Brittany from Daria when you heard her on the video. “Oh Kevvy, he wants to take my bag! How can you do that to a cheerleader sovereign citizen?”
5 Likes
Certainly.
Bond vs. UNITED STATES, 529 US 334 – 2000, The Supreme Court held that the American People are in fact Sovereign and not the States or the Government. The court went on to define that local, state and federal law enforcement officers were committing unlawful actions against the Sovereign People by the enforcement of the laws and are personally liable for their actions.
It’s in there somewhere!
1 Like
“I can’t access those documents because of National Security.”
This is always the crux of the matter, isn’t it?
1 Like
Not sure if this has been covered upstream, but what happens if a “sovereign citizen” had a grievance to address that was greater than them? By their own stupid rules, they’re kind of up the creek, are they not?
1 Like
Nah, they’re quite capable of being hypocritical and will typically use the US courts to sue (and many get some kind of welfare or assistance from the government). They rationalize it as being able to pick and choose which “contracts” they find valid and such, and that they only have to opt-in for the parts they like.
4 Likes
National debts. There is more than the borrowing.
So ask the question is it odious?
For example, what if a dictator in the 3rd world ran up debts? Should the population be on the hook? You’re arguing they should be.
Spending? Just fund that out of taxation. No need to borrow.
If you have some spending you want to bring forward, then the ‘investment’ that you spend the money on will generate the cash to pay the debt off. No need then to dump it on the unborn.
Since when was spending debt? The issue with debt is that you spend money on things other than Roads fireman etc.
I’m not conflating power with morality. I’m say that state’s use power in evil ways.
Should is the wrong question to ask, in every sense possible
Nope, its the right question.
So how about the state using your body parts for organ donation. We can take your parts and help lots of people. That’s your logic, we can harvest your heart, lungs kidneys, skin, eyes, liver. Clearly not in your interest, its in lots of people interests.
So when the state causes harm, what should happen?
I just hate it when people throw words like “rape” around without cause. Real victims need all the protection they can get, it’s not a toy.
2 Likes
Thanks, I’ll check out Reddit for that.
I should clarify, however, by saying I meant “to support all laws blindly”. Some laws are a good thing, I suppose. I think the concept of having laws to protect individual freedom from those who would abuse it is good, but the implementation seems to have turned out to be something else.
Given governments’ current ownership by big business, however, I just think it’s worth questioning the whole system. As I look throughout the world and history, I’m not finding many examples of societies governed by sets of laws that truly and purely serve the greater good . . seems like the process usually gets corrupted because those least qualified to set such laws, the power hungry, are the ones who push their way to such positions.
Maybe if we went to a system like the ancient Greeks (if my memory serves me right) where politicians are selected by a drawing instead of “elections”? Seems crazy but then again it’s hard to imagine a drawing finding two people worse than those who seem most likely to be the leader of the free world next yeat.
I appreciate your values. I just see the scale tipped farther in the opposite direction.
Civil asset forfeiture abuse (see the recent John Oliver video) , the thin blue line protecting murdering cops, the mass murder of thousands of innocents overseas based on lies like the Iraq WMD and the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the persecution of whistle blowers like Chelsea Manning while the perpetrators of the abuses made public go free, a never-ending “war on terror” which is self perpetuating by design because of blowback from families of innocents killed by the drone strikes ordered by our Nobel Peace Prize Winner (90% of drone deaths according to leaked documents reported by the Washington Times). . . . all that makes me skeptical that the system is working. It seems more designed to enrich the already rich and corrupt.
this topic, combined, oddly enough, with
has disappointed me. I’d like some antiauthoritarian articles please.
The sexism in a statement like that is just a little tedious, is all.
6 Likes
You’re responding to a different comment than @d_r’s Daria comment. Yes, this woman’s voice reminds me of Brittany from Daria, but the comment you’re responding to about the noxious, glass shattering voice is not even remotely amusing.
3 Likes
Right… I wasn’t responded to @d_r about sexism, because his statement wasn’t sexist. I was telling them why I responded to the first comment in the first place… I hope that they took it in that way.
6 Likes
You mean by the elite men who could vote, not the women or the slaves that the Greeks held?
7 Likes
The technical term for this is “sortition”.
1 Like
But just look how much better things were when there were slaves and women weren’t voting… good old days! /s
5 Likes
no, not that part, read the sentence.
Did I say copy everything they did? /annoyed
