Those who want you to doubt that anarchy (self-ownership and individual responsibility) is the best, most moral, and ethical way to live among others are asking you to accept that theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are perhaps better.
It's legalistic mumbo-jumbo. Magical thinking. Trying to use the right incantations of legalistic words and rituals to make the molesters leave you alone.
It may all be true, but you'll be murdered by government employees if you try to act on it and refuse to comply.
I think you're better off ignoring them rather than trying to use loopholes in their rules to make them treat you as a sovereign individual.
However, if I'm wrong, show me by following her advice and let me know how it goes.
Sorry to be so tardy, but I just found your reply to my question. I can now provide a definitive, personal answer to your reply. The short answer is that I appeared in court, followed Anna's advice, and the result was "Case Dismissed," in which the judge obviously was bending over backwards to avoid confronting the very simple question with which she was confronted. The details (and supporting document) are on my blog, at this link: https://everythingiknewwaswrong.blogspot.com/2019/10/my-recent-court-appearance-and-what-it.html
I'm glad it worked out. I doubt I would have the patience to play their game for that long-- staying aware of all the word-traps ("person" vs whatever) they can set. But, for a special subset of humanity, it seems it can work.
Same here! Do what's right all the time, with no exceptions!
ReplyDeleteAny comments on article 560 at annavonreitz dot com (How to Correct Your Political Status and Why)?
ReplyDeleteIt's legalistic mumbo-jumbo. Magical thinking. Trying to use the right incantations of legalistic words and rituals to make the molesters leave you alone.
DeleteIt may all be true, but you'll be murdered by government employees if you try to act on it and refuse to comply.
I think you're better off ignoring them rather than trying to use loopholes in their rules to make them treat you as a sovereign individual.
However, if I'm wrong, show me by following her advice and let me know how it goes.
Sorry to be so tardy, but I just found your reply to my question. I can now provide a definitive, personal answer to your reply. The short answer is that I appeared in court, followed Anna's advice, and the result was "Case Dismissed," in which the judge obviously was bending over backwards to avoid confronting the very simple question with which she was confronted. The details (and supporting document) are on my blog, at this link: https://everythingiknewwaswrong.blogspot.com/2019/10/my-recent-court-appearance-and-what-it.html
DeleteI'm glad it worked out.
DeleteI doubt I would have the patience to play their game for that long-- staying aware of all the word-traps ("person" vs whatever) they can set. But, for a special subset of humanity, it seems it can work.