70 Comments

I am encouraged to see more and more posts and comments that show the growing anger and resentment against the so-called "government" and those who run this racket. You have a wonderfully clear and easily understood way of exposing these scams Christopher, I truly hope your book gets a wider audience, it deserves to be widely read.

Expand full comment

Thank you. And I am seeing it too. Anarchism may soon become the world's fastest-growing ideology.

Expand full comment

Yea!!

Expand full comment

Governments are always run by power and control freaks. They seek to centralize everything. Our independence is that we can operate in a de-centralized mode which can abate their controls. This is why they are using smart phones and digital devices and cameras to try and track every human and every transaction and interaction.

Every time you opt out of the digital realm, you have increased your independence or maintained it. As of yet, it's not illegal to do so. Obey and government swallows you up. Resist and we have a chance to break free somewhere down the line.

Expand full comment

I agree as to your excellent description of their motivations and methods Crixcyon, and opting out is a great stragegy, however I think there are those who are able to use the digital realm and see it as a two edged sword. Yes, technology makes a more dangerous world because it increases power, but it does work both ways. For those of us who understand bitcoin and privacy related cryptos it has given those of us that are unbanked greater opportunities and growing abundance. The internet has awakened so many to what we are discussing here, I would not have found Christopher and this group if not for the digital realm. It is important though to learn how to increase your privacy and anonymity through such things as VPNs cryptography and encrypted email services like protonmail.com, not giving personal identifying info to social media sites, using pseudonyms and small "mistakes" on birthdates and so on. The bureaucrats and flunkys who are our foes are not all that capable and there are a lot of us out here. If a substantial number are all resisting and learning and using simple black market techniques it is not that hard to slip between the cracks. I know, I have been outside the system for a long time now and haven't filed income taxes for instance in 54 years and they have not come knocking on my door.

Expand full comment

Excellent points!!

Expand full comment

This entire argument is quotable. It shift the focus from legality to morality, basically opposing concepts. The number of lawyers is a function of the number of laws. Another way of saying that is, in a moral society no laws and no lawyers are necessary. And, what government makes no laws?

Expand full comment

Thank you—yes! That is my focus. I do not care what the laws say. I care what we ought to do!

Expand full comment

"The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the state." - Tacitus

Expand full comment

💯

The very notion of a parliament inventing laws is bad. I understand why it arose, but it is time to leave it in the dustbin of history, where it belongs.

Expand full comment

I ponder "legality..." The governments and the legal system are the same system, and We cannot be rid of one and retain the other. I did an article on this...

Calling a Legalate a Law (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/calling-a-legalate-a-law

Expand full comment

since you broached the subject! lol

there is "adverse possession" which is totally legal and in some states there are several routes to proceed. there are also state tax sales often once a year. words such as "squatter" and so many others have taken on derogatory moral meanings that are erroneous, inaccurate and crippling. a great tenant one day becomes a squatter 2 weeks later with or without justification beyond the declaration of that fkn word. the states are now buying up those lands that would be available to us and puts it under state, whole world, whole society agenda.

Expand full comment

Yeah, but it depends on the victim. Taking government land—great! But I own 20 acres of unimproved rural land. My ownership of it does not violate the Lockean Proviso. No one is starving or lacking land of their own because I own that. If someone takes it from me through adverse possession, they have committed a crime against me.

My wife's parents were snowbirds for a long time. Should someone take one of their modest homes just because they're not in it for five months?

Expand full comment

adverse possession involves abandoned properties. there are numerous of these. homes, barns in varying degrees, no heirs. to legally possess research is required and then possession must be exhibited by living there as yours, paying taxes. after 10 yrs you can receive the deed.

there are also more shady ways so if you truly own something you must act like you do. here, if somebody squatted on your land for 8 yrs with or without your consent....say you let someone use part or all of it as pasture...for free. after 8 years they could sue for ownership & it could be granted. these also involve easement claims. i dont know if that law has changed but this is as of 5 yrs ago.

i knew someone that owned property and rented it to a "friend". his words not mine. friend hadnt paid rent for years, like 4 or 5 at that time. was living, using & had even improved it in his time there. this guy hadnt been there in at least that long and part of the agreement was the tenant was looking after & safeguarding. the guy mentioned while talking he hadnt answered or returned any calls for quite some time. i am not sure he even heard what he said...

i said something & oh no he wouldnt, mumble mumble.

dont be like that^

there also was/is a way to possess by assuming and dumping a lot of money & making repairs & improvements requiring the owner to repay you to reclaim. realtors were doing that one. that is a fast track method. deed is faster. there were 2 method tracks and you cant start the 10 yr track & switch.

there is a lot of details to these and each has their own moral belief & codes as to how to proceed. abandoned, long vacant dwellings could be occupied & utilized instead of rotting.

also here on the state sales after 3 yrs the previous owner cannot claim but you must pay the taxes, after 5 yrs the taxes are wiped. here is my concern about land banks...will these still be available or will the county just keep them or sell at market value vs auction?

i have been researching/ working/writing other law & topics so I havent really dug into all these details. the propwrties are county specific and state and county laws, codes, etc are involved. private/public land wars may also be involved so such endeavors require research & diligence. i am now in a position to start saving money to purchase or prepare so i will begin researching details again soon.

squatters, looters are situational, legal judgement detailed definers. their broad general usage & acceptance as moral judgements of right or wrong is cutting good peoples throats out here. that is the tool of govt & corporate lawyers, power & control.

the words must be used correctly. we each must safeguard our own. we must know the details because the devil is in the details we dont know and "democracy" doesnt want us to know or remember.

Expand full comment

For sure there are situations where the morality lies on one side or the other. But often, the law itself is messed up.

My parents almost lost a strip of their property because the people next door had grown a hedge and it went partway onto the property and there was a ten year clock saying if they did not object, the strip where the hedge was would switch to the neighbors. That's too much, it seems to me.

Expand full comment

there has always been the law of the land & the law of the sea. these are 2 sets of natural law. ancient. common laws. we must know these things. to claim our rights we must know them.

or we unknowingly give or sell them away. 💙

Expand full comment

YES!!! that is easement.

these are very old laws. IF, we own something we must know the laws, regs & codes, the details of our RIGHTS.

that is liberty & sovereignty. custom, tradition & assumption is govt, whether instituted by society or formal.

Expand full comment

Or use a common-law process when a dispute occurs and have no positive/statute law whatsoever.

Expand full comment

if, i didnt have an idea that you and i are pretty much in the same book & pretty close to the same page, i would not be here, well yes I would coz i like to learn, but i would not say a word.

my point was not your use of the word moral or squatter.

my point is we need to understand these words & concepts down to details...we, meaning every single one of us.

do we really know what "property rights" means? i don't, yet. water rights, soil rights, air rights, mineral rights, lumber rights...

most of us grow up, think things are how we think things are and they are not.

most think they bought property but in reality, most own a couple of inches of top soil and structures a so many feet of air above it. that is it.

you have the right to use, improve & keep the land & structure in approved & appropriate condition.

easement, possession, use, land & water rights are very old laws on the books. original laws, detailed, common law foundational law.

principle law. that has been regulated, coded, applied, blah blah to what people think until the old law gets used in a way they dont like. then words are used to impress the public opinion what an idiot, slime wad, lazy, grifter, poor, criminal while they were totally following & within the details of the law..until the agreement changed. the law didnt, the agreement, the contract, consent changed.

shared water resources, river usage by those on either side of the bank, upstream, downstream...there are ancient, fought for, understood, foundational law details, common law that still exist, are buried under books of statute & administrative codes and we need to know them if we are going to claim any kind of real rights, sovereignty or liberty dont u think?

Expand full comment

morality must be understood for what it truly is. each religion, each religious society, each culture, neighborhood, city, even within neighborhoods each block can have its own & different moral code.

moral code determines proper, acceptable clothing, dating & marriage behaviour., etc.

moral codes are not principles. values are not principles. these differences & words matter. universal principles can be used to establish governance whether self or community.

Expand full comment

I hear you/point taken. In this case, I was referring specifically to the tiny number of moral principles that emanate from universal natural law.

Expand full comment

As long as I'm alive, I'm gonna live illegal 🏴‍☠️

Love you Bradley, see you soon homie.......

Expand full comment

I'm with you brother! Live free or die. Lawful is fine if they are true laws of nature. Illegal is the way to go when criminals rule.

Expand full comment

I think everything is very accurate. But I became painfully aware of one thing. Your work is excellent BUT it comes up against a problem.

While questioners can understand every sentence, the masses cannot make sense of it at all. They will stop reading after 2 or 3 sentences because it is foreign to them. Their semantics are not sufficient to enter this space of knowledge.

What we are sorely missing is the kicker that nudges everyone.

The fact is that everyone grows up in the system. They perceive the system as a law of nature - they know nothing else.

It is paradoxical, but young people are understandably happy when they get a passport. Now they can go to clubs, for example. The cage of the system is freedom in their reality. This leads to a completely distorted perception.

In reality, you become a free person by becoming a number in the system. The real reality is of course the other way around.

The kicker would actually always be very prominent if the question was put first: What are you and what can you do without a passport?

Expand full comment

The system is very hard to avoid. Extracting ourselves is going to be a slow process.

Regarding the masses—even if they all could understand it, a certain percentage of people will always be opposed. You could cure cancer while rescuing a baby from a flood and fighting off invading space aliens and you would still have detractors. So making something more comprehensible to everyone is not a panacea.

Along those lines, the average IQ (in the United States) is right around 100, which means half the people are below 100. Even a person with a 100 IQ struggles to grasp certain complex things, and it just gets worse below 100. There is simply no way I could make this graspable for everyone.

The best we can do is set an example that everyone can see is just plain better. Build something that proves itself. That sort of success is something that the lion's share of humanity can and will understand.

Expand full comment

Christopher, what do you mean by “All wars are bankers wars”?

Expand full comment

There is a school of thought that says that central banks and financiers are behind all wars. It's the next level up from Eisenhower's warning about the Military Industrial Complex.

But even if you remove the conspiracy aspect, it still only takes a moment to realize that no one benefits from war other than those who want more power (politicians), those who make weapons (military industrial complex), those who want the money supply to increase (central banks), and those who finance all of it (all banks and lenders).

And the banks benefit the most. They benefit when politicians get more power. They benefit because they are the financiers of massive military mobilizations. Not all politicians win out (the antiwar ones might not) and not all military contracts win out (just the ones who get the bids). But the whole banking/financing system wins every time.

And lenders were financing wars going back into ancient history…

Expand full comment

As a citizen of the Great Republic of Rough & Ready- I heartily endorse this message. And yes, Rough & Reasons is a real place. Just don’t believe the propaganda that we officially rejoined the Union because that is a LIE.

We may have faked a few bartenders into serving us liquor, but we are still as independent as ever.

Expand full comment

I certainly did not agree to (re)join any Union!

Expand full comment

👏👏👏

Thank you Christopher!!!!

Expand full comment

❤️

Expand full comment

🫶

Expand full comment

"...any entity with the authority to designate an entire group of people to be “illegal” is a fundamental problem." Hum.

Though as I've often noted I'm leaning toward Anarcho-capitalism I read that, looking at over ten million criminal aliens in our country right now, as a strong argument for, gasp, robust government.

Expand full comment

I have talked about this before. Two things.

1. A government state has a single border. If they decide to leave it porous, there is nothing you can do about it. And nearly every government in the West is intentionally leaving it porous. Government is not your friend when it comes to the border. They are the ones doing the importing.

2. By imagining an immigration free-for-all without government, you are imagining a scenario that would not longer exist. If the government disappears, the border disappears, but it is not replaced with nothing—it is replaced with a million borders. Everyone's property becomes defensible. No more government telling people they have to allow migrants tramping across their land. No more government punishing you for defending your property. In fact, your private protection agency will give you a discount on your premiums for it! No more millions of acres of government land that they can just tromp over, and you cant say boo about it. No more public parks they can encamp in. Everything is property rights. Everything is borders. Yeah, maybe the roads corporation that owns the highways lets them drive on it, if they have a car and can buy the transponder. But where are they going to go? And there's no more welfare either, so no one is paying them with your hard earned money. And that's a big magnet that brings them. So why would they come? They need a job. And if they have a job and property where they are welcomed, then who cares whether they are here? And there is no single "here" anymore anyway. There are free ancap regions. There are small polities. Think the Amish are going to let them become Amish?

Things go ancap and EVERYTHING changes. Incentives, borders, everything. No more one country with one border giving away welfare = no more hordes.

Expand full comment

Thanks Christopher, well said.

Sophisticated organised crime on a massive scale, they struggle in the limelight when faced with real terms and conditions.

I will do that if you will do this (make it horrible lol) as a flat refusal could render one belligerent, or aggressive, or in contempt, so keep it simple because they will never be able to produce a signed contract, it never existed in the first place, or a pay roll or wage slip, I would be a hundred percent sure they don't work for free, charge for a charge, sounds legit, make it count.000000000000000000.

My favourite terms and conditions are:

Hold your breath for ten minutes and then we have a deal.

Hop on one leg for three hours,one condition (small print) two seconds hops.

Pay me a million quid.

And I can't be any fairer than that...

Expand full comment

Right!

Here are my terms:

Dear Government,

You are not the boss of me.

The end.

Expand full comment

Epic...

Should be as easy as that but if needed always ask for two interpreters, one to convert legalese into Oxford English, then Oxford English back to Chinese sorry legalese, to be on the same page,lol.

Expand full comment

Or we could just secede!

Expand full comment

Done.

2012.

Lodged UCC1.

Have my receipt from Washington DC.

No lapse date.

I separated the dead entity from the living, just so there's no confusion, ever.

I like that though, good one.

Expand full comment

Can you tell us more about UCC1?

Expand full comment

Sorry in reply to the actual question, it's creates a wedge between the Man and the fiction, it doesn't separate them, hence correcting position.

Expand full comment

Yes, I could, but there's a better way, by correcting position, it's a lot of paper work there's a lot of departments, I'm looking for an easier way inside it, have the tools but the system is controlled by nepotism and no one knows anything because they're only there through nepotism, hard to have to learn somebody's entire job and read all Their contractual obligations so you can deal with them only to find out they haven't a clue what you're talking about, if this keeps going Christopher a few extended families will own everything.

Have information couldn't show you here, would probably have to post it in real life.

Kind regards.

Expand full comment

A Wonderful Exposure Christopher! God Bless!

Expand full comment

As a citizen of the Great Republic of Rough & Ready- I heartily endorse this message. And yes, Rough & Reasons is a real place. Just don’t believe the propaganda that we officially rejoined the Union because that is a LIE.

We may have faked a few bartenders into serving us liquor, but we are still as independent as ever.

Expand full comment

It would be really helpful to have a definition of independence as you seem to be using it for personal freedom and then again for organized collectivities such as states and regions? TO me the piece is unreadable because of that. Also would appreciate an artist's credit for the artwork at the end and or a caption describing what you think it represents, since it clearly is not a depiction of reality except in your mind and the specs you gave to the robot you commissioned to "create" it.

Expand full comment

The best way to describe independence would be a condition in which the individual human person's right of consent and self-determination is respected and not forcibly interfered with.

If you look here (https://christophercook.substack.com/p/human-constitution), specifically at Article II, Section 2, you will see a list of framework rights: ESTABLISH, JOIN, EXIT, SECEDE, AND REMAIN. These rights pertain closely to the concept of independence. A person can be independent. So can a polity. So even can a polity that you or I might consider illiberal in nature. So long as membership therein is not forced, and exit is respected, they can do what they want.

(Keep in mind also that this is one of a series of pieces all of which are building upon the previous. It makes more sense if one has been following along.)

As to the AI-created image at the end, it depicts the last thing I talked about (the mafia protection racket) and there is no one to credit since it was AI.

Expand full comment

I don't know if you care but you should probably block feds or troublemakers. 😜

Expand full comment

I do care. I went almost 18 months before I blocked anyone. I was proud of that. But some people's reach needs to be limited. Others are just @$$hats and no one needs to see their $h1t.

In this case, I was waiting to see. Some people are just having a bad day or whatever, and come off cranky, but a kind word can fix that.

Also, if you know of a list of actual f∑ds, please LMK.

Expand full comment

You are doing the right thing. Even my perfect self has cranky days. I wish I did have a list. These days, I think they recruit anybody from anywhere. No standards.

Expand full comment

"These days, I think they recruit anybody from anywhere. No standards."

—Have you heard Michael Malice talk about the release of the Stasi files and what it revealed about how many "ordinary" people will rat out their neighbors for no other reason that that they['re bored or want to feel special?

Expand full comment

Goodness I love the way your mind works Christopher!

Expand full comment

Thank you!

Expand full comment

You are most welcome Christopher! Thank you!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Oct 10
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Yes—leftists talked a good game for decades about freedom and self-determination, but when the rubber meets the road, they are authoritarians who hate freedom. (You see it in the same leftist lies about Prospéra, etc.)

Do you have any links to descriptions not made by lefties?

Expand full comment