Starve the beast - solutions

[norman]

Catherine Fitts has a pretty focused view of the big picture, and an opinion I agree with about what we have to do to stop it.

Running for the woods or the hills isn't going to cut it. They have to be stopped, and to do that we have to really understand what we are dealing with.


Dark Journalist & Catherine Austin Fitts CBDC Biometric Control Grid
30th November 2022

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=H_c3rudOE_c

FTX was an op' that got brought down in an op'. ( a CBDC marketing plan, perfect timing)

CBDC is a Digital Concentration Camp.

[Michel Leclerc]

Posted by Johan (Keyholder) (here)
The zeroth reminds me of the LETS. Lets would be more local, and it has been tried in many different places, with a changing success. It was popular in the nineties, now it is hardly around anymore.

LETS = Local Exchange Trading Systems (for more information, see this link: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l...stems-lets.asp

It is indeed like the LETS world Johan. As far as I remember the main issue with the LETS communities was that people with a negative token account (i.e. people who had consumed considerably more services than they had produced) tended to vanish all of a sudden. But that was due to two facts: typically they were only temporarily located in a LETS-covered community (being students at a university for instance) so that they would leave the community anyway, not having an incentive to stay – whereas in this type of community people have a strong incentive to stay (as they "live from the land" and intend to stay); second, In LETS communities the tokens are abstract counting units, in a way resembling digital money, whereas in this type of community the token in the bookkeeping ledger is the most real form of money imaginable: 1 working hour of a human life.

[palehorse]

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)
...
Then, once the game/system/community starts the first threshold is the generalisation of "abstract reciprocity”: the person you are helping (providing a service to) is rarely the person that is helping you. So "triangulation" is essential: A helps B who helps C who helps A. You need good bookkeeping. (A service in itself.)

The second threshold is how to translate/convert goods, raw materials into service. This is typically crucial now for the question "how do we pay the organic farmers we are getting our food from?": provisionally this is still done in euros, and the one hour of human life is valued as 20 euros – but as soon as the (minimal) (ac)counting infrastructure is there it may be easy: 1 basket of produce = 1 hour (probably).

Slightly more difficult is the third threshold: how to pay for the steel the blacksmith is using? The (theoretical) operational answer to that is that the community may border another community where there is a mini-steelworks (as there used to be in Communist China) working: as that community also works on the principle of 1 hour of human life is the counting unit both communities may agree on the same hour money for "inter-community trading" (and that is intrinsically so because all human life hours have the same value (no risk of inflation)): so instead of human A helps human B helps human C helps human A it may evolve into community X helps community Y helps community Z helps community A.
...
“You don’t possess anything and you will be happy” in a way – but without crooks and murderers.

Interesting specially regarding the third threshold, how would the community as a whole manage to pay tax on the land they are living on? how to deal with ownership (private corporation shares or just take advantage over public land? or what?) - Like in China, Malaysia and a few other places, where they have those autonomous regions or direct federal administration which is not really under the control of the country but belong inside the territory, in practical terms what would be the right move to accomplish such endeavor? would it be taxable like any other business?

A while ago I came across someone's post here on Avalon about a community in Paraguay, it was registered as a corporation and people interested in join would have to purchase their own share of the corporation.. would that be the best way? or anything else we may be missing?

I am asking all these questions because with the coming of CBDC, there will be a lot of restrictions for those who opted out.

I sympathize with what Zeroth or LETS promote, and I think even a merging between both would work even better, removing known issues, shaping a better system, etc..

But this bring a lot of things to the table, imagining the system's members, some could be foreign to that country, that would need some sort of special deal with local immigration, in order to keep everyone in the community legally inside that country, other options would be not allowing foreign in the community for the sake of simplicity and promote only local development. Also governments hate free market, the promotion of free market they do, has nothing to do with the original idea (they call it black market instead).

Again in regarding of the system LETS or Zeroth, the idea is great and it would require a good selection process to bring people in (it is not about the money, otherwise the community should look for a ROI sponsor), one would fully understand the rules of the game, specially understand that profits would not be part of this community.

The eternal question remains, how to deal with ownership to make such enterprise a real thing?

[ozmirage]

SHORT FORM : HE WHO CONSENTS CANNOT OBJECT. Voluntary slaves need not foment a slave revolt.

LONG FORM:

With all due respect, the original post is an example of the widespread confusion held by the (m)asses, thanks to the world’s greatest propaganda ministry.
And though what I write will probably be dismissed out of hand, please do not believe me - go read the law for yourself at any county courthouse law library. I am not infallible. The more eyes on the law, the better.
. . .

#1 DOLLAR BILLS (Federal Reserve Notes) are NOT FIAT. They are DEBT instruments. [Title 12 USC Sec 411] The question you should ask : WHO are the obligated parties on that debt?
#2 Everything government does TO YOU, is by your consent to be governed. If you do not know HOW & WHEN you consented, you may need to investigate further.
#3 Under the guaranteed REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT, all men are created equal (before the law - none higher) with Creator endowed rights that governments were instituted to secure - not tax, regulate nor trespass. Absent consent, governments are limited to adjudicating disputes, prosecuting criminals, and defending against all enemies, foreign or domestic. [Art 4, Sec 4, USCON]

= = = = =
CONSENT OF THE CITIZENRY

“ Our theory of government and governmental powers is wholly at variance with that urged by appellant herein. The rights of the individual are not derived from governmental agencies, either municipal, state or federal, or even from the Constitution. They exist inherently in every man, by endowment of the Creator, and are merely reaffirmed in the Constitution, and restricted only to the extent that they have been VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED BY THE CITIZENSHIP to the agencies of government. The people's rights are not derived from the government, but the government's authority comes from the people. The Constitution but states again these rights already existing, and when legislative encroachment by the nation, state, or municipality invade these original and permanent rights, it is the duty of the courts to so declare, and to afford the necessary relief. The fewer restrictions that surround the individual liberties of the citizen, except those for the preservation of the public health, safety, and morals, the more contented the people and the more successful the democracy.”
- - - City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944

https://casetext.com/case/city-of-dallas-v-mitchell-1
. . .
IN PLAIN INGLITCH - - -
The rights of the individual / national / non-citizen / inhabitant / non-resident are not derived from government, but are Creator endowed... (i.e., republican form of government)
But once consent to be governed is granted, via citizenship, that endowment has been surrendered / waived by the citizenry.

Why?

Because mandatory civic duties abrogate endowed natural rights, natural and personal liberty, absolute ownership of private property, etc, etc. That’s the consequence of migrating to their [socialist] democratic form of government, where a majority can legally persecute a minority... or tax the snot out of them.

It’s been part of the law since day one. Did you miss the part in the Declaration where they pledged “their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor”? All citizens are presumed to have made that same pledge. That’s how conscription / militia duty is 100% constitutional and not a violation of endowed rights and liberties... “Volunteers” don’t have any.

Now you have to ask the government to explain exactly from whom did they get the delegated power to impose citizenship upon infants who cannot consent, and thus via mandatory civic duties, ABROGATE THE ENDOWED RIGHTS that governments were instituted to secure.
(Or did the 14th amendment have very limited and specific jurisdiction that was not widely divulged, nor understood?)

THEIR PLAN

*All must be trained to ‘need’ money and embrace usury (interest)
*Can’t be independent, self reliant, or self sufficient
*Can’t tolerate any religion that teaches “Thou Shalt Not Steal - even if it’s the government doing it.”
*Deny the existence of Creator endowed rights, liberties, powers, and immunities as well as the republican form of government. Only accept democratic government granted ‘human rights’ and mandatory duties of citizenship.

Only then will the (m)asses demand to be enslaved for ‘security’ and ‘convenience’ trusting that the glorious collective will care for them, from cradle to grave.
Thanks to compulsory charity and confiscation of surplus, ‘everyone’ will share in poverty, except the glorious leadership (of course).

You can't dominate someone who's self sufficient. You can only dominate when you have something that someone else needs.
- - - Anonymous

"If America could be, once again, a nation of self-reliant farmers, craftsmen, hunters, ranchers, and artists, then the rich would have little power to dominate others. Neither to serve nor to rule: That was the American dream."
- - - Edward Abbey

FRAUD

If you were a victim of fraud, constructive fraud, misrepresentation or withholding of material fact, you have a ONE TIME "get out of Dodge" ticket and REVOKE your CONSENT (signature).

VITIATE. To impair; to make void or voidable; to cause to fail of force or effect. To destroy or annul, either entirely or in part, the legal efficacy and binding force of an act or instrument; as when it is said that FRAUD VITIATES A CONTRACT.
- - - Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 1572

WAIVE, v. To abandon, throw away, renounce, repudiate, or surrender a claim, a privilege, a right, or the opportunity to take advantage of some defect, irregularity, or wrong. To give up right or claim voluntarily.
A person is said to waive a benefit when he renounces or disclaims it, and he is said to waive a tort or injury when he abandons the remedy which the law gives him for it.
In order for one to "waive" a right, he must do it knowingly and be possessed of the facts. Barnhill v. Rubin, D.C.Tex., 46 F.Supp. 963, 966.
- - - Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., P. 1580

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fed...8/61/case.html

“There is no question of the general doctrine that fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments.”
- - - United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 61 (1878)

If you can SHOW fraud was used to get your consent, you can RENOUNCE the fraud and VOID all those pesky entanglements.

But you also have to surrender all claims to BENEFITS related to that FRAUD, or you void your denunciation, by your subsequent CONSENT.

REMEMBER, NO ENDOWED RIGHT IS TAXABLE. IF YOU DON’T EXERCISE REVENUE TAXABLE PRIVILEGES, YOU CAN’T BE SUBJECT TO A TAX.
IF YOU DON’T OWE TAXES, YOU DON’T NEED THEIR MONEY.
IF YOU ARE A SELF SUFFICIENT PROPERTY OWNER, YOU DON’T NEED PUBLIC CHARITY. (FICA / Socialist InSecurity)
. . .

" PERSONAL LIBERTY, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or NATURAL Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable."
- - - 16 Corpus Juris Secundum, Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987

...
NOTE: ONLY private property is constitutionally protected, whereas estate (aka “real estate” “real property” etc) is not. {Do not presume allodial title is equivalent to private property.}
CHECK your own state constitution and statutes for confirmation that private property is PROTECTED, while estate (held with qualified ownership is subject to ad valorem taxes). Verify that only "real estate" must be recorded and taxed.

No government, court, nor majority vote can change SACRED natural rights.
THAT is the difference between a democracy (with majority vrs minority) and a republican form, where the sovereign individual IS a majority of one.

“I firmly believe that the benevolent Creator designed the republican Form of Government for Man.”
- - - Statement of (14 April 1785), quoted in The Writings of Samuel Adams (1904) edited by Harry A. Cushing

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Samuel_Adams

GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people ... directly ...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695

“... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves..."
- - - Justice John Jay in Chisholm v. Georgia (2 U.S. 419 (1793))

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...CR_0002_0419_Z

NOTE: Citizens are not synonymous with THE PEOPLE. In fact, in the organic documents, they are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

The republican form is not perfect, but it the best form of government. No other nation on Earth has a republican form, where the people are sovereigns, served - not ruled - by governments instituted to secure rights.

Ironically, most Americans have been indoctrinated to embrace socialist democracy for the past 89 years, and thanks to the world's greatest propaganda ministry, millions have no memory of that which their forefathers fought and died to bestow upon them.

... and EVERYTHING is in the public record, available to all to read, so you can't even say the government is at fault. WE ARE TO BLAME FOR OUR OWN IGNORANCE, ARROGANCE, AND APATHY.

GO! GO READ LAW! PLEASE.

[p.s. - beware "patriot mythology" promulgated by the disinformation wing of the Ministry of Propaganda. If you cannot find it spelled out in the law, in harmony with the republican form, it's probably BOGUS. DO NOT FALL FOR IT.]

[ozmirage]

TRUST HONEST ABE - - -

"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Abraham_lincoln

As Lincoln reminds us, under the republican form, promised by the USCON, described by the Declaration of Independence, NO MAN (nor American government) is good enough to govern you without your consent. Without your consent, all that government is authorized to do is secure endowed (sacred) rights (prosecute trespass; adjudicate disputes; defend against enemies, foreign or domestic). And no endowed right can be subject to taxation, regulation or infringement. Why? Because all men have Creator endowed rights that governments were instituted to secure. Taxing a right would allow the government to diminish it by ever greater taxation.

But once consent is given, shut up, sit down, pay and obey.
It's too late to object. Mandatory civic duties void all endowed rights to life, liberty and absolute ownership of private property.




Geo.Wash. Sums it up nicely in 1783 - long before the constitution
. . .

“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”
- - - George Washington; "Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289.

[... Every citizen ... owes a portion of his property ... and services in defense ... in the militia ... from 18 to 50 years of age... ]

IN SHORT,
The American citizen has no endowed right to life, nor liberty, nor absolute ownership because, as a subject, he can be ordered to train, fight, and die, on command (militia duty), and was obligated to give up a portion of his property (qualified ownership of estate, via ad valorem taxes, etc). .. by his consent to be governed.
Shut up, sit down, pay and obey.

However, that does not negate the endowed rights of the sovereign American people (noncitizens / free inhabitants) who did not consent to be governed.
. . .
Make no mistake!
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to life.
• But citizens have no inalienable (endowed) right to life.
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to natural and personal liberty.
• But citizens have only civil and political liberty.
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to absolutely own private property (upon which you can pursue happiness without permission of a superior).
• But citizens have no private property, absolutely owned... a portion can be claimed by the government.

If you've consented to be a citizen, you have NO ENDOWED RIGHTS.
Zip. Nada. Bumpkiss. Empty Set. Nought.
Any presumption to the contrary is an error not supported by law nor court ruling.

The government can order you to train, fight, and die, on command.
The government can take a portion of your property -or wages - or whatever - as it sees fit.
All authorized by your consent to be a CITIZEN (state or U.S.). Citizens, like the Founders, have pledged their lives, property and sacred honor in service to others and to the government.
ONLY Non-citizen nationals (people) retain their endowed rights.
(The USCON complies with this, too. People have rights and powers. Citizens have privileges and immunities. And they’re mutually exclusive.)

IT HAS BEEN PART OF THE LAW SINCE DAY ONE.


Did government approved indoctrination compounds {compulsory schooling} fail to inform you?

[ozmirage]

Last note: Though one might think there is a refuge in a foreign land, only the united States of America have a republican form of government. And it is hard to believe, but the Feds and the State governments still honor the endowed rights of the sovereign people -what few remain.
In short, you want to migrate from the Peoples Democratic Socialist Republic (aka "United States") and return to the united States of America, wherein the sovereign people dwell.

"If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final."
- - - Calvin Coolidge, Speech on the Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence (1926)

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Calvin_Coolidge
. . .
Verify that your own state constitution repeats the self evident truths of the Declaration of Independence - STATUTE #1 of the Statutes at Large of the United States of America.

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION

Article I Declaration of Rights [Section 1 - Sec. 32]
( Article 1 adopted 1879. )

Section 1.
All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

PENNSYLVANIA CONSTITUTION
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...0&div=0&chpt=1
Article 1, Section 1. Inherent Rights of Mankind

All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.

OF course, if you consented - shut up, sit down, pay and obey.

[ozmirage]

I have not read all law, and am not infallible, but I have yet to find ONE LAW that violates the natural rights, natural or personal liberty, private property or inherent powers of the American national, free inhabitant, domiciled upon his private property within the boundaries of the United States of America.

However, there ARE voluminous rules, regulations, taxes, and penalties imposed on U.S. citizens / residents, duly enumerated (via FICA), engaged in usury, who reside at residences, registered as real estate, and are obligated to get permission (license) and / or pay taxes to live, work, travel, buy, sell, operate a business, transmit radio, fly a plane, trade in healthcare, buy medicine, cut hair, build a house, hunt, fish, marry, and / or own a dog.

[But according to the law, it was done by your consent, so no harm, no foul.]

In short, if one has not given consent, all that servant government can do is secure rights, as in prosecute those who deliberately injure the person and property of another. But once consent is given, all bets are off.

Do not believe me - go read the law for yourself.
Look up the legal definition for inhabitant, domicile, private property, endowed rights, inherent powers, and verify that no state dares trespass upon those endowments.

But don't confuse the sorry state of the subject citizen / resident with those who retained their Creator's endowment.

[ozmirage]

If you think you're too clever and smart to be "FOOLED" by the WGPM, here's a snippet that might wake you up.

“ I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say : Let the damned thing go down the drain!”
- - - Robert A. Heinlein; Guest of Honor Speech at the 29th World Science Fiction Convention, Seattle, Washington (1961)

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Robert_A._Heinlein

The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".

(If they’re not involuntary servitude, they MUST be voluntary. But they only apply to citizens. Did someone forget to tell Mr Heinlein that citizenship was voluntary in the USA?)

Ironically, Mr Heinlein’s condemnation of Selective Service derived from mandatory militia duty - a duty owed by all citizens - shows the success of the world’s greatest propaganda ministry.
(FYI - RAH was a graduate of the Annapolis Naval Academy)


...

Title 10 United States Code, Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of ALL able-bodied MALES at least 17 years of age and, ... under 45 years of age who are ... CITIZENS of the United States

...

Articles of Confederation, VI. (1777)
...every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.

...

Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON (1789)
Congress shall have power ... To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

...
If you’re a subject citizen, you are theirs to command.


It doesn't matter if you're a STATE citizen or FEDERAL citizen.

Pennsylvania General Assembly
Title 51, Part II, Chapter 3

The Militia
§ 301. Formation.
(a) Pennsylvania militia.--The militia of this Commonwealth shall consist of:
(1) all able-bodied citizens of the United States and all other able-bodied persons who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, residing within this Commonwealth, who are at least 17 years six months of age and, except as hereinafter provided, not more than 55 years of age;

[ozmirage]

If 51% of the "human resources" withdrew consent, restored their endowed rights, and dropped from the tax rolls, do you think that's enough to STARVE THE BEAST?
Especially, since the majority of the 49% who don't withdraw, are probably recipients, bureaucrats and beneficiaries of the PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC.

Best Case Scenario : 97% withdraw and 3% (who are civic minded and knowingly surrender their endowment to serve) are left running the vital duties of securing rights, adjudicating disputes and defending the nation from all enemies. With so diminished a budget and lack of subjects to rule, those in power will have little means to get into mischief.

Frankly, I don't expect any substantial number of Americans to bother to read their own laws, discover how and when they consented, and then withdraw that consent. After 89 years of pervasive indoctrination, who would expect any difference? Too many wish to believe the illusion that government works for THEM and they will eventually get FREE MONEY via SocSec.

[Michel Leclerc]

Posted by palehorse (here)

Posted by Michel Leclerc (here)
...
Then, once the game/system/community starts (...) but without crooks and murderers.

Interesting specially regarding the third threshold, how would the community as a whole manage to pay tax on the land they are living on?

(...)

Just to answer in part this first question pale horse (thank you for your thoughts).

It is important to understand that the community is not coextensive with a commune, a village, a small town – unlike the kibbutz or a monastery.

It resembles more a congregation of “monks living in the secular world”.. or of the members of a spiritual "hermandad”... their "group” is distributive and hence not necessarily contiguous to other groups although for practical purposes that would be convenient.

Imagine a village in which one third of the population would live according to those rules and two thirds not (which closely resembles the situation where, e.g., one third of the population is not jabbed and to thirds are. (A certain discreetness about this qualification is still the rule in today’s world: I may know the "vaccination status" of a close friend who lives 20 kms away but I may not know my neighbour’s.) That discretion may fade away as life or death decisions become more and more necessary in the biomedical-tyranny aspects of transhumanity’s society – and in the same way the question of how we acquire our food or certain services will gradually occupy the foreground as non adhering persons will notice that certain other persons they know do not reach for their mobile to pay.

It would probably be a soft transition. You may liken it to the way the first Christians lived amidst other people who had not converted. Jesus’ saying "give to Cesar what belongs to Cesar, and give to God what belongs to God” comes to mind. Increasingly people may feel attracted to a way of life in which more and more will be given to God as it “belongs to God”. What is left to the State, global or local, may still be there but is becomes increasingly insignificant. Imagine in the services field what faith in natural/holistic medicine will mean, or in the educational world what community schooling will mean. It may become dominant before the obsolescence or desertification of our present health and educational systems happen because of their own inertia.

As less and less money goes round, there will be less and less taxable. On the other hand, when the State retaliates by withdrawing money or lessening the minimal amount allocated to a "non complying person", that may become less and less important to that person because he or she in essence depends not on this State money that seemingly makes you happy but on the happiness shared thanks to a fair system.

[palehorse]

WOW that is a way more than what I was expecting to read in this thread, thanks @ozmirage and @Michel Leclerc and for all that contribute and read.

I would like to point out that I am not a tax payer in my home country (I am not American), neither where I'm living currently, I mean I have no annual declaration to the revenue office for more than 5 years now, and the assets I have is not my name except land in my home country which I don't pay tax either. I have no plans to return paying tax ever again. By now I am half ghost in this system, the only information they got about me is my passport/visa and 1 bank account that us used for legal stuffs only, I have no credit cards and no debits.

It will take some time for me to digest what @ozmirage wrote above.

The problem is much older and it was passed down the line, luck those who could see and take control over their ways of living, the majority definitely didn't, hence the mess we are into.

IF 51% consensus are reached, we could possibly turn the table, as in many consensus elsewhere, the majority win (isn't that what we call democracy?).. but who would authenticate that victory if it would not be centralized? Isn't that the same thing as just stop complaining with all the laws and regulations?

Anarchism comes to mind, I mean the real Anarchism not the bull**** depicted by the media with riots and ****, but long story short...

More people become aware of the horror of the situation, more technologies is introduced into their lives.. less and less people know how to do things on their own.. the digital world already destroyed so many beyond repair.

Not everybody, not even a small percentage of the imaginary 51% understand about "laws of man" including myself. I would not count on people become "educated" in laws in order to win a game like that.. it is a cheat game where money and power always win, the entire system is rigged and the problem persist and just get inflated, now that almost everything is digital, they can manipulate whatever they want the way they want. Honestly, it must be another way.

I am not counting on changing an entire rigged system (ditch it would be a better option than try to fix), but change ourselves and our immediately circle of friends/family/etc, becoming more conscious and aware about the situation and spread down our own blood line, and actually do something more practical, for instance we know the financial system is in the brink of big changes, and they will force us all to adopt their new digital currency, my original question for this thread was, what can we do about that when paper money is around anymore? Right now I don't know a single person/business that would accept silver or gold in exchange for groceries or services.

In the country side I know a community of locals around our piece of land and they barely use money, when they do is for something personal for themselves, they exchange services very often, like helping each other with ploughing the field, harvesting, fencing areas, etc.. the few things I noticed they need money to buy, was Oil Diesel, Engine Oil for machinery, some parts when necessary, tires, etc.. in general they barter a lot, specially about food, there is no shortage of anything.

[ozmirage]

Please note, that only AMERICA has a "republican form" of government, which is NOT synonymous with "republic."
The Peoples Republic of China IS a republic, but not a republican form.
Nor is the US Constitution the source of the republican form, ergo, it's not synonymous with a "constitutional republic."


Not 1 in 100,000 Americans can accurately define the republican form, its source and origin. This is due to the world's greatest propaganda ministry eradicating any knowledge of the republican form - despite it being in PLAIN SIGHT.


The actual law is available to the public in any county courthouse law library. But few bother to read and comprehend law. Frankly, even lawyers aren't taught law. They're taught procedure and argumentation over what they're allowed to argue. I have not found many court citations wherein someone is arguing about Creator endowed rights of the plaintiff or defendent. Invariably, the issue in controversy is some government PRIVILEGE derived from CONSENT of the governed.


This leads me to conclude that the servant government has no authority to tax, regulate nor trespass upon Creator endowed rights and liberties possessed by the sovereign people. Only the government granted privileges (aka "civil rights" and "political rights") are subject to and object of their legislation and jurisdiction.


REFERENCES

REPUBLIC - A commonwealth; That form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. In another sense, it signifies the state, independent of its form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 1302

...
1. A commonwealth
2. Administration open to citizens
[In other words, good little citizens / subjects must submit to the government.]
3. The state, regardless of its form of government

But that contradicts the republican form of government.
...

GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people,... directly...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695

In a republican form the people are the sovereigns - directly exercising the powers of sovereignty. Citizens, by definition, are subjects of a sovereign.
. . .

“... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are SOVEREIGNS WITHOUT SUBJECTS, and have none to govern but themselves.

“... In Europe, the sovereignty is generally ascribed to the Prince; here, it rests with the people; there, the sovereign actually administers the government; here, never in a single instance; our Governors are the agents of the [sovereign] people, and, at most, stand in the same relation to their sovereign [the people] in which regents in Europe stand to their sovereigns."
- - - Justice John Jay in Chisholm v. Georgia (2 U.S. 419 (1793))

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...CR_0002_0419_Z

RECAPPING - - -
1. People are the sovereigns
2. Governments are their servants (not unlike regents)
3. Citizens, who consented to be governed, are not sovereigns

I REPEAT : Citizens are NOT sovereigns

CITIZEN - ... Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associative capacity, have established or SUBMITTED themselves to the dominion of government for the promotion of the general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. p.244

"... the term 'citizen,' in the United States, is analogous to the term "SUBJECT" in the common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government. ... he who before was a "subject of the King" is now a citizen of the State."
- - - State v. Manuel, 20 N.C. 144 (1838)

SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425

(* clever joke - only one nation on Earth has a republican form)

CITIZENS have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of a sovereign government. Remember the founders who signed the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE? They pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to create, establish and serve the governments instituted to secure the endowed rights of the PEOPLE (sovereigns).
BUT THEY NO LONGER POSSESS THOSE RIGHTS, having pledged them away.
I repeat, no citizen has an endowed right to life, liberty, absolute ownership, inherent powers, etc, etc, etc, when he has consented to be governed.
Mandatory civic duties abrogate all endowed rights.
All that remain are the privileges granted BY government ("constitutional rights").

[ozmirage]

Posted by palehorse (here)
In the country side I know a community of locals around our piece of land and they barely use money, when they do is for something personal for themselves, they exchange services very often, like helping each other with ploughing the field, harvesting, fencing areas, etc.. the few things I noticed they need money to buy, was Oil Diesel, Engine Oil for machinery, some parts when necessary, tires, etc.. in general they barter a lot, specially about food, there is no shortage of anything.

GREAT EXAMPLE of sane prosperity - based on prodigious production of surplus goods and services, equitably traded and enjoyed. This is in contrast with MONEY MADNESS, where folks believe that "Making money" is how they can get RICH!

Of course, few folks know who controls the amount and value of money tokens. But suffice to say, any money token NOT created by the laborers or businesses that generate goods and services, is A SCAM TO ROB THEM.

That includes BitchCoin, all "cyber currencies", Federal Reserve NOTES, Euros, and any other bank issued or government issued medium of exchange.

Coincidentally, the US CONgress has no power to "create money." Pursuant to the USCON, Art 1, Sec 8, Sec 10, CONgress has the power to "coin money" (stamp bullion) or "borrow money." CONgress cannot create bullion. And if it did have a power to create money, why would it need the power to BORROW IT?
Ergo, American governments do not "print up money."
Never have and never will.
Can you guess what those green pieces of paper really are?

[ozmirage]

Americans restoring sovereignty is a valid remedy for individuals.
But what about a group?
As mentioned in the previous post, a COMMUNITY of folks who barter, would generate prodigious prosperity because they're isolated from the MONEY MAD system.

IMHO, solo survival is not a good long term solution.

Under existing American law, people have Creator endowed rights that governments were instituted to secure. There is no bar for people to mutually defend their persons, liberty and / or property from predators. You can build alliances composed of your family, your extended family, friends and neighbors. You can construct defensible fortified villages. You can cooperate and pool resources to accomplish projects that dwarf the capacity of any individual’s abilities.

And your intolerance of predators can range from opposing trespassers to shunning those who you find unacceptable, repulsive, repugnant or disgusting like socialist slavers. When you’re no longer compelled to participate in supporting evil (via socialism), they won’t have easy means to live at your expense, enforced by a predatory government and its stooges.


There are many examples of cooperative living throughout history : Kibbutz, Ashram, Monastery, Commune, Sacred Hoop, and so on.

My personal favorite : DUAL RING VILLAGE.

What is a "Dual Ring Village"?

Imagine a five story row of businesses (street level) and apartments above. Wrap into a ring. Do it again. Dual Ring Village.
Two ring buildings around a central park, separated by a ring road.

The characteristics that distinguish the Ring Village from other forms
of high population density mixed use development / housing are:

1. Non-linear ring (doughnut in a doughnut)
2. Stacked continuous balconies (think French Quarter, New Orleans)
3. Central park (Public round - not a public square)
4. Ground level reserved for enterprise, socializing, public access
5. Upper levels reserved for homes and small offices
6. Single gateway to control access (security option)
7. Close proximity to resources, parkland, social contact, and vocation
8. Ring street between the dual ring buildings (can't get lost!)
9. Rooftop garden and balcony planters, to add more greenery
10. Thick barrier exterior wall, providing protection from storm surge, flash flooding, mud slides, earthquake, snow drifts, ash fall, flying debris, stampedes, mutant zombie biker gangs, etc, etc.

Variations:
[] The central park can have enhanced security by limiting access from ground level enterprises - no doors facing the park. If access is limited to the gateway, there's a reduced threat to children left playing unattended. And if the inner gate is 180 degrees opposite of the main gate, the potential for a "snatch and run" is reduced.

[] Ring street can be configured as pedestrian mall... no outside vehicles allowed.

Engineering Benefits -

Curved wall - resistant to racking forces, earthquakes; encloses more area with less material; spills wind; increased strength.

A sturdy barrier wall can resist storm surge, floods, mudslides, flying debris, etc., further strengthened by partition walls between inner and outer walls. (Like Bamboo)

A high barrier wall protects from flash floods, and other unwanted intrusions.

A non-flammable wall protects from heat, fire, etc. (concrete skinned rammed earth, 2 meters / 6 feet thick)

The ring building, subdivided into apartments, provides more straight walls for more efficient use of space - unlike domes. And the ring has fewer exposed surfaces, reducing energy consumption for maintaining comfort.
A rectilinear building has six sides (4 walls, roof, floor). A ring building has four sides (2 walls, roof, floor). An apartment within a ring, may have as little as one surface directly exposed to the elements.

TO THOSE WHO THINK THAT GOING "OFF GRID" IN THEIR SOLO FARMETTES IS THE REMEDY
- - -
Though the stalwart solo family farm is a feature across America, it's actually not sustainable. Consider the simple fact that if the owners don't want to or can no longer farm, they're in trouble. The demise of the family farm and the rise of Agribiz is the consequence.

In the bulk of the world, farmers lived in villages, surrounded by their farmlands, to which they commuted. And you won't see too many corporate farms in those locations.

Check out Michelfeld or Bibersfeld, Germany, 49.096931° 9.677831°
on Google Earth to see an example of a countryside dotted with ag-villages. And as to "sustainability," I think you would agree that Europe has been sustaining itself for thousands of years.

Then compare that with a typical American agricultural area, dotted with isolated family farms.
For example, near the town of Hartsburg, IL. 40.249337° -89.440157°
You can see square after square of fields, with the isolated family farmhouse, each like a tiny island.

What happens if something goes wrong? If you were a farmer living in a farming village, you could get help - hire locals - or if you no longer wished to farm, you could find a new vocation in the village.

In short, the most effective long term remedy may be to form a cooperative community, housed within a fortified village, surrounded by fields, to which the farmers commute.

BUT how do you determine compatibility?

If you believe that what’s yours is yours, and what’s mine is mine, we may be good neighbors.
If you believe that what’s mine is also yours, we may not be good neighbors.
If you believe that what’s mine can be taken by government to give to you, you’re a socialist thief.


TOLERANCE OF PREDATORS IS UNMERCIFUL TO THEIR NEXT VICTIM.
That's all folks - - -


Mentioned here, too:
https://survivalblog.com/2013/04/24/letter-re-a-dual-ring-village/
https://survivalblog.com/2014/03/23/...-ring-village/
(The blog appears to have lost its cross links to the various blog posts)

https://www.survivalistboards.com/th.../post-19937754

[ozmirage]

In America's history, there can be found many examples of idealistic communities. Today, some are called "Intentional Communities." Some were based on religious orders and sects, like the Bruderhof, and the Shakers. Some were secular and socialist / communist (not to be confused with the totalitarian police states that relied on slavery to the state and theft by government).

And some were a mix of both religion and secularism - like the Israeli Kibbutz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIOl1RG6NbQ


CAVEAT - Kibbutzim were not perfect, and had several flaws, the biggest being communal upbringing of the children. It turned out that growing up in close proximity, tended to stifle "romantic" feelings. Invariably they sought marriage partners outside of their own Kibbutz "family". This, in turn, drained away a lot of talent from the community, as many left and did not return with their new spouses.

"Keeping the Kibbutz"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_the_Kibbutz
The film was broadcast nationally on PBS World and over 75 PBS stations, and continues to air on individual PBS stations.
Look Back to Galilee: Review: Keeping the Kibbutz

In "Keeping the Kibbutz" (PBS), interviews with old-timers explored what the Kibbutz once was, and what it had changed into, since the 1970s. Most mourned the change. Some preferred the old way even though they make "more" money under the privatized mode.

The overall sentiment was the feeling of communal caring, that no one was in competition with another, made life far better.

As one report noted, Kibbutzniks had a middle class lifestyle despite lower class jobs. Perhaps this is due to the lack of "skim" by bankers, etc.

Another interesting factor - folks became "skilled" or gained "careers" because no one else was available to do the job. One woman became a retail store manager. Another became a restaurant cook. Another became a dairy farmer. Another guy fixed bicycles and farm equipment. They just "fell into" the jobs, and became skilled over time. No worries about unemployment !

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz

Lessons / inferences from the Israeli Kibbutz
[] Zealots and idealists can achieve amazing successes
[] Learning from mistakes is crucial, learning from the mistakes of others is wise
[] Pioneering settlers should not be surprised by the poor quality of the lands they acquire cheaply
[] Being part of an interdependent group is better than being alone, though self reliant

Quickie Soundbite Summary
... Kibbutzim ...
[] Implementation of communism, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
[] A society dedicated to mutual aid and cooperation.
[] Joint ownership
...
Good points :
===> Strong bonds of an extended family; emotional and physical support mechanism
===> Kibbutzniks were unselfish and generous with their fellow members, in general
===> Successful at building group prosperity under trying conditions and with marginal resources
===> No widespread disparity in the standard of living - little in the way of envy or coveting other people’s property
===> Middle Class lifestyle despite peasant labor, access to economies of scale [large community pool, community dining, meeting hall, on-site school, child care, etc]

IMHO, their prosperity was partly based on not having to pay exorbitant "skim" to usurers / bankers nor socialist taxes to the State. So their own "socialist" taxes / duties were kept within their community, and progressively enriched them.

Bad Points :
<> Separation of children from parents into collective nurseries, and unforeseen consequences from close association of unrelated children (created ‘sibling bond’ that interfered with courting behavior in later life - they tended to marry outside their native kibbutz)
<> Gossip (everybody knew everybody’s business)
<> Grudges (friction within the kibbutz tended to fester)
<> “Democratic control” over group resources (susceptible to petty politics)
<> Pooled wages, lack of incentive for surplus, rigidity, inequitable pay***

*** anyone focused upon the money issue, may be infected with money madness. So it is natural that such folks would bristle at the notion that money and prices don't really matter.

Anyone seeking to design a COOPERATIVE COMMUNITY can learn a lot from examining the KIBBUTZ.

Frankly, society would be better off if it did form tight knit cooperatives and family clans, that cared for its membership, instead of expecting Big Brother to "do it for them."

[ozmirage]

FOUNDATION
In essence, we have Creator endowed rights (life, liberty, absolute ownership, inherent powers, etc) that are susceptible to attack, by nature, by predators, and by chance.

We seek to secure those rights and liberties, by our harmless efforts to provide shelter, food, and other necessities. In the process, we need access to land, clean water, fresh air, resources, fuel, tools, and have to deal with the aftermath - as in dealing with waste and pollution.

Under the law of love, harmless people generate goods and services, for themselves and for trade.

Equitable trade (barter) is acceptable to both parties, not necessarily equivalent in money tokens, nor measurable. Which is good - since no money token system in the history of mankind kept proportionality with the marketplace of goods and services. What government can't account for, it can't tax.

Money is not a measure of wealth nor prosperity. It only has power where it is scarce and in demand. And any money token NOT created by the local laborers / businesses, is a scam to rob them of their labor and property.

Prosperity is based on prodigious production of surplus usable goods and services, equitably traded and enjoyed. Doing more with less so more can enjoy is superior to doing less with more so few can enjoy.

TANSTAAFL * (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch)
Don't be fooled into seeking "freebies" - they invariably will cost far more - like enslavement to the state in order to get "entitlements". If you accept that governments can take from one to give to you, you must accept that the government can take from YOU, and give it to someone else - minus a cut for their (mis)management.

Collective ownership is a difficult and risky system, since shared responsibility is rarely achieved. People will often waste that which they are freely given, without any equitable effort or goods in trade, disrespecting those who sacrificed for their benefit. Whereas absolute ownership by one is clear and unambiguous. Perhaps the optimal path is cooperation, by individual owners, to pool labor and resources, to achieve their individual and group goals.

Voluntary charity by those who have prodigious surplus is far different from compulsory charity in a socialist system, where poverty is equally shared... excepting the elite members.

In essence, our individual goals should incorporate the need for access to or ownership of land upon which we can "pursue happiness" and fulfill our needs for survival, and to thrive and prosper.

Once we have a domicile, a permanent and legal home, we can build true prosperity, based on prodigious production of surplus, traded and enjoyed. (Beware subsistence - "just enough" - for any shortfall will be catastrophic)

And when we have prosperity based on surplus (not money), we can afford to be generous to those in need, based on our own criteria - not what a bureaucrat defines as needy.


Otherwise, we shall be impoverished, vagrants, and wanderers, without a place to call home, dependent upon the charity of others, and beholden to the benefactor.

[ozmirage]

PURSUE HAPPINESS
A teacher gave a balloon to every student, who had to inflate it, write their name on it and throw it in the hallway. The teacher then mixed all the balloons. The students were then given 5 minutes to find their own balloon. Despite a hectic search, no one found their balloon.

At that point, the teacher told the students to take the first balloon that they found and hand it to the person whose name was written on it. Within 5 minutes, everyone had their own balloon.

The teacher said to the students: "These balloons are like happiness. We will never find it if everyone is looking for their own. But if we care about other people's happiness, we'll find ours too."


May your day be filled with happiness.

[Michel Leclerc]

Posted by ozmirage (here)
PURSUE HAPPINESS
A teacher gave a balloon to every student, who had to inflate it, write their name on it and throw it in the hallway. The teacher then mixed all the balloons. The students were then given 5 minutes to find their own balloon. Despite a hectic search, no one found their balloon.

At that point, the teacher told the students to take the first balloon that they found and hand it to the person whose name was written on it. Within 5 minutes, everyone had their own balloon.

The teacher said to the students: "These balloons are like happiness. We will never find it if everyone is looking for their own. But if we care about other people's happiness, we'll find ours too."


May your day be filled with happiness.

Great Ozmirage! Thank you.

[All is one]

@ palehorse

Stop feeding the beast is already a very good direction to take.


I think the solution can also lie in, people themselves, coming together with ideas to create the new replacing systems.

Like the LETS (Local Exchange Trading) system is an example of how people can begin creating their own systems. (Although that system might still need some improvements here and there. But it is based on good principles. )

We would need more parallel systems opposite to all the different existing systems. This time the systems should all be made by the people for the people & based on good principles.

This will, I think, create the strongest foundation for any and all people trying to live different than the mainstream.


QUESTION: about SOVEREIGNTY

Does anyone know if would it be possible for a group of people or organization to claim their sovereignty once they have a completely functioning system?


For if enough people could come together to create a parallel system and this system is granted the same sovereignty as the system in place now.

The transition to a new world could begin.
One in which one is free to choose what path to take towards the future.

[Tiyaira]

Does anyone know if would it be possible for a group of people or organization to claim their sovereignty once they have a completely functioning system?

Yes, this is called self-determination. The group of you together are a society. Your system is the public authority or government of that society. As the creators/operators of that system, you are the sovereign in your society. It does not need to be completely functioning right away; you can be a monarchy in the beginning.


btw:

REPUBLIC - A commonwealth; That form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. In another sense, it signifies the state, independent of its form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 1302

Black's Law 6th ed. has an incorrect definition for Republic. Here is the definition from Black's Law 9th ed:

• A system of government in which the people hold sovereign power and elect representatives who exercise that power. It contrasts on the one hand with a pure democracy, in which the people or community as an organized whole wield the sovereign power of government, and on the other with the rule of one person (such as a king or dictator) or of an elite group (such as an oligarchy, aristocracy, or junta).

The key differentiator is the percentage of the population that manages the affairs of the society. The 6th ed. definition describes a democracy; the 9th ed. definition is more in alignment with The Law of Nations, but even then, it is not 100% correct either for it misallocates sovereignty.