I realize this is a long-established practice, but it is still wrong. Making something "legal" can't make it right- not even when the Supreme Courtjesters uphold it.
If you or I desperately want a certain piece of property, we must come up with the owner's asking price or find another piece of land. We can't force the owner to accept a bad deal. Disappointment stinks, but that is reality.
Government should not own land, much less steal it. (And, in fact "owns" nothing it didn't steal or "buy" with stolen money.) There is no such thing as "the common good" so using that excuse for theft is empty.
(From the archives. Originally posted September 05, 2006- slightly updated)
.
Real estate tax, specialuse tax, inheritance tax, and eminent domain all rest on the notion that property belongs to the king first- and tennants must pay for the privilege.
ReplyDelete"Allodial title" is the phrase for ownership independent of any superior claim
As tennant sharecroppers- boss man can charge rents and fees and toss us out-- because he claims it is his. Serfs do nit actually own anything.
Supremes/Congress shitcanned the notion of actual property to create the income tax.
And the schools stopped teaching about allodial property-because all your property is belong to the king. (mangled misquote)
According to Wikipedia- 'Allodial Land' is the opposite of 'Feudal Land Tenure'.
ReplyDeleteFeudal Tenure is how gov now claims ownership of your property. Understand their view of citizens as serfs, tenant farmers, sharecroppers; and their 'laws' claiming you don't have property rights.
Wasn't this gov constituted specifically to protect our property? Guess that didn't survive greedy collectivists and bureacrats (redundant).
As you began by defining "government" I thought of my quest to eliminate reification from my writing and speaking. Here's how Delmar England ( http://www.anarchism.net/anarchism_insanityasthesocialnorm.htm )describes it:
ReplyDeleteThe Lies of Language
"...One often hears, “Government initiates force,” or something similar. “Government” does not initiate force. “Government” is the initiation of force. It is each governmentalist who does the initiating of force. Positing “government” as a godhead, as an acting entity is a psychological escapism to deny the fact of individual coercive actions. Among other denials, it hides the fact that voting in a political election is an act of violence.
"...The language usage is literally saturated with “abstract entities” to psychologically shield the actor from self. Any agreement with and/or use of the language of disassociation is denial of Real Individual as the actor. It is the language of lies. Such concurrence with distorted language by word or deed serves to maintain the base philosophy and psychology of oppression.
"...Let it be further understood that those who volunteer for the system are not being coerced. They have agreed to the outcome; an outcome of certain conflict, conflict with other gangs and conflict within each gang as each seeks to rule via the centralized offensive force. The coerced are those who want no part of the insanity, but are compelled by “law” to participate upon penalty of punishment and/or death.
"...Do not take the language matter lightly..."
(end of quotation from "Insanity as the Social Norm)
Government does not exist. It is an abstract. As you state, "government" is an organization of individuals...
It is individuals who steal through their programs of "taxation" (and "inflation" and debasing media of exchange). It is individuals, not "governments", who beat the drums, lie and create false flags to promote wars and violence among the individuals in other lands ("nations", "countries" -- also abstract terms and non-existent).
If I'm going to be free, I have to start acting free. To act free is to speak free. Cumbersome as it seems at times, I've started naming individuals and ceased thinking of "state" as "it".
It ain't.
Sam
Sam,
ReplyDeleteI like! Every deed must have a doer. Embrace the active voice; eschew the passive.
Dave