Let Us Abandon The Titanic Ship of the State

'Self-government' means governing yourself, It means being ungoverned or free from the government of another person or persons.

If you are not your own governor, then you are governed. If you are not your own master, then you are a slave. If you elect or desire to be governed, then you elect or desire to be enslaved. He who votes himself a master votes himself a slave.

You yourself enslave yourself when you abandon yourself to a master. You have sold yourself to the devil and perhaps even Daniel Webster couldn't redeem you now.

The slave who votes out an old master and votes in a new one is nonetheless a slave. That a slave votes does not prove that he is free, but only that he is a voting slave. He rids himself of his old tyrant only by electing a new one.

If, however, he stops voting (electing) altogether, then he rids himself of both old and new tyrants and instead elects to be free.

If you give someone permission to command you, then that someone becomes your "commander-in-chief" and has that permission, power, or right only for as long as you do not retract your permission; and If you give your servant power to command you, then he is no longer your servant (but your master), and you have given yourself over to slavery.

You may well hire a supposed knowledgeable guide to conduct you through unfamiliar terrain, but are you thereby obligated to follow him?

Do you not rather always retain the option to withdraw from him at any point along the way and strike out on your own path?

But (on the other hand) you will assuredly be bitten for giving your dog dominion over yourself; and the citizen who cannot fire the corner cop on the spot has placed himself under arrest for neglecting to defend his own liberty (from the police, the people, and other oppressors). When you hire someone and then cannot fire him, then who's working for who?

A servant, who cannot be dismissed, terminated, discharged - is no servant.

Are political officials, then, really your servants? Your servant should do only and exactly as you command; to be and to remain your servants?

If someone is not answerable and obedient to you, then that someone is not your servant -(employee, agent, solicitor, lawyer, representative, legislator, premier, chairman, president, Commandant, commissioner, commissar, Judge, teacher, policeman, etc.), but you are his servant -if you must answer to and be obedient to him.

That political, official "servant" Is a usurper and traitor who will no longer obey orders - but instead begins to give them.

He is like the creature of that celebrated medical genius, Dr. Frankenstein, who (thinking to make life more pleasant for himself) unwittingly elected to create that leviathan monster who (as you well know) had the unfathomable ingratitude to leave the good doctor's laboratory in the most profound disarray.

You can vote 'em up, but you can't take 'em out (by voting) unless you vote the vote to end all votes - by ripping up the CONstitution. You will be ridding yourself of that sanctimonious legal rope around your neck, and taking the first step towards ridding yourself also of at least some of those bombs over your head. For your "duly elected", "legal" and "official" "servants" will not obey your command to diffuse and dismantle them.

So, if you really want it done; you will have to dismiss your disobedient, unfaithful and treacherous servants altogether and diffuse the bombs yourself. Indeed, "if you want anything done right (i.e. your own way), then you've got to do it yourself".

However, it is doubtful that these political terrorists (misnamed "public servants") would grant you permission to neutralize the bombs. No matter how humbly you beg, because it's these very weapons that make them such big shots (something they longed to be and crave to remain)- since it's their threatening fingers on the nuclear triggers (something they might rather pull than surrender).

A free man requires no permission; this alone makes him free; that's what freedom means. He who accepts permission is not free. The freeman becomes unfree the moment he accepts permission, permits, rights, etc. He who accepts permits or rights is subject to a permitter, and thus is not free (enslaved).

The free man, on the other hand, permits himself and is the sole source of all of his "rights". He may accept suggestions or advice (If he finds It profitable), but never duties, commands, permits or rights (i.e. subjection). He who keeps the commandments of another is necessarily the servant of that other.

If you voluntarily grant your "right" of self-ownership to a master, he retains it only until you take it back.

A slave is coercively obedient to a master only so long as he can be coerced into obedience. The slave gives himself the "right" of freedom only when he overpowers or escapes from his master.

He keeps his "right" of freedom only so long as he keeps his freedom - only so long as he can maintain it by fighting off would-be masters. The moment he is overpowered he loses (forfeits) his "right" of freedom for lacking the power to keep it.

Moral: No power-no "right"; because "right" is power. No one can give you your "rights"; you have to take them -- you have to give them to yourself...or you won't have any.

Others will always try to curtail your prerogatives -- i.e. to expand their own. Your power is your freedom's limit; you are as free as you are powerful. Increase your power (energy, capability, knowledge, etc.) and you are precisely that much more free.

When the papists imposed laws on non-papists we often heard complaints of "religious persecution" and demands for "freedom of religion, religious toleration", religious self-determination", "religious autonomy etc.

Now the politicians (voters) impose laws on non-politicians (non-voters) and no one cries apolitical persecution", no one demands "freedom of (from) politics, political toleration (of non-politicians), "political self-determination" and "political autonomy; (thank God for no one).

The religious fascists (papists) disallowed secession from church and the political fascists (communists - is democrats, republicans, liberals, conservatives est.) disallow secession from state. Since you no longer permit "god's representative" the priest to control your Life, (as you should not - because God has no representatives - never did... never will) why do you now permit the dictatorship of "the peoples' representative - the politician? Is It because you have no choice? (Be aware that "gods, "church", the peoples and Estates are Idols of Satan - complete with faithful worshippers and heretics.)

Churchmen (and statesmen) whipped up popular enthusiasm, support, and involvement in their church (and state) for the purpose of citing that very involvement. The involvement of as many as a plausible pretext for forcefully involving all - i.e. for disallowing non-membership and secession - the very heart and crux of liberty - to go your own way (with or without accompaniment).

Government for the maintenance of liberty? Would you believe wolves for the maintenance of sheep? Voting sanctions government, (a vote for anyone or anything - but state-dissolution - is a vote for government).

Hence, the governments ignoring non-voters; non-votes (their votes for secession - for freedom - for state dissolution), thus governments' voter-registration drives. To support their false clatters of popular support, (and so what even If they were popularly supported?) the governments' questionable voting statistics are usually stated in percentages and not in actual numbers of votes (but what's to stop them from fabricating numbers In response to criticism of this sort).

What is the percentage ratio of; Voters over inhabitants? No! Of voters over approved and registered inhabitants! What percentage of improved inhabitants (so-called "citizens") register, and vote? Even disregarding for the moment those barred from voting, (unapproved "illegal aliens", the young, the jailed, etc.), what's the proportion between registered eligibles and unregistered eligibles? - between actual and potential voters?-between voters and non voters?

In other words, what percentages of the people have already seceded from state (as people once seceded from church by not involving themselves therewith)? Here government Is silent or deceptive because they, don't want to expose their fraudulence and fascistic, coercive nature.

The vast majority does not vote. They know it's a dead end.

Can one starve-out a giant by feeding him? Therefore "the state" exists through the violation of the democratic principle of majority rule (the very Idol "It" cites to 'Justify' "Itself").

The majority does not wish to be citizens, but to be free of citizenship; to escape from statehood, to bust out of state prison, to secede. If the state prison officials really wanted the people (their prisoners) to vote their will and have their way, the option of state-dissolution would have to be Included on the voting ballot.

That would bring the citizenry out in droves to vote! (No doubt the very next election will provide just such an alternative for us all!)

According to current mythology, the "state", "the people", "society" or "humanity" is proprietor, while all humans-called "citizens" - are its property (along with everything else).

This new religion is hailed as "democracy", "anthropocracy", liberalism", "statism", "collectivism", "nationalism,"socialism", "communism", "humanism", "humanitarianism", "philanthropy", etc. (Did you bow your head at mention of these most holy names? good) Society or humanity, then, is imagined to be the new proprietor-the new lord-god.

Who is society (humanity)? No one! The baseball team is not one-but nine. The basketball team is not one-but -five (Society-humanity-everyone - all - are not one-they are many).

This fancied, singular, entity called "society" or "humanity" simply does not exist-never did and never will, there is no such animal-nor can one ever "evolve". However, the disillusioned (who are unaware of this) continue to believe and have faith in the unholy ghost of society "humanity) and so rave on that all property including humans, and other animals is society or "public" property and therefore belongs to no one.

"Public" property is not the citizen's-or else how could he be abducted, "tried" and jailed for trespassing on it? If society (humanity) is the sole proprietor, then all (humanity) are condemned to enslaved destitution. Apprehend this colossal folly! If society is the owner, then everyone is owned by society and must suffer "its" dictation. From this quicksand arises this extortion of taxes.

You are permitted to hold and to use what you call your property only so long as you can meet the demands of the "peoples"' extortion-ring. If you are unable or unwilling to ransom yourself and your estate- to pay your "tax-bill"- to satisfy the ravenous state-criminals-to pacify this "protection racket, then these mobsters confiscate "yours property (and perhaps even your person) in the lofty name of "the people".

These racketeering thugs conceal and 'sanctify' their crimes under and In the name of "the people". Just as priests (to this day) cloak and commit their sins behind and In the name of "god".

Unctuous legalism is ever a most secure fortification for organized criminal networks, declaring, "it is a crime" for sheep to be aloof from the Jaws of the wolf - their Jaws.

The law isn’t illegal...It is evil!

At what percent taxation did America become communist-totalitarianism, statist, fascist, legal - 10, 20, 33, 50, 66, 75%... what? Again, you are allowed to keep your bestowed portion of "the peoples' property", yet only for as long as you are lawful, grateful citizen and can also meet your demanded taxes, your rent; for society Is your landlord and owner. "Property tax" makes "land owners" tenants of the state - paying the state rent for the use of "its" property.

Property, then, Is not yours but Is "the state's", "the peoples", "society's", "humanity's" etc.... not yours- that's for sure!

Socialism (i.e. communism, humanism, democracy) makes everyone society's slave. No one is proprietor in the state-feudal system -but is instead property. And so society (the sole proprietor) disposes with you (its property) as it pleases.

Review for yourself all the other state-coercion's; witness "nationalization", conscription, censorship, forced indoctrination (so-called "education"), subpoenas, "jury duty", "eminent domain", obligatory, inflated and bogus state-counterfeit paper currency, gun and weapon outlawry and confiscation, etc., etc., etc.

Society wants you defenseless before its gun - the one pointed at your head. "It" wants to disarm you-so that you could never disarm It.

Thus far are the psychotic believers in "society" reduced. Since you condemn the lordship and dominion of an individual (e.g. God, king, queen, pope, etc), why then not that of a nothing? - a non-entity -a deceptive Idea - a delusion - a fancied being- "an Idol that neither walks nor talks-a nation-a state - a society- a humanity-a "majority will"?

The rule of all" (majority will) is the subjugation of all. Who Is this new god called "majority will"?

It is no one.

What is it then? Aside from being merely a statistic, it is a abstraction- a thought- a nothing-an illusion -an Imaginary Being. Who worships and has faith in this new idol?

Who but idolatrous lunatics? Aside from all this, why should the "majority will" (the desire and opinion of the majority) be imagined to be the wisest and therefore the most desirable to follow ("The road to destruction Is wide and well-traveled")?

Nol If you want the dumbest opinion-ask the majority ("Give us Barabbasl...Crucify Him").

If you truly want chaos - let democracy (communism, socialism) be your principle - let the mob rule, and "the glory that was Rome" is kaput, undone, passé, and very old hat.

The "majority will" Is the will of the majority (the major) the will of the numerically strongest faction, and is therefore the very incarnation of the "might is right" philosophy.

Demonocrazy (i.e. socialism, communism) is the conspiracy of the majority against all others. If all are bound to one another by some imaginary "social contract", and if the majority elects to jump into the lake (of fire), then you are doomed unless you can emancipate yourself from the crazed lemming herd, before it's too late to save your skin.

Consider swimming: only the unburdened individual does not sink ... the group --tied to one another- dragging each other down- dooming all!

The "liberty of the people" is the imprisonment of the people. The freer the society- the less free is the individual.

Is the lone voice in the crowd not drowned?

The brook is free to flow Its own way only because of Its separation from the river- otherwise It couldn't. Subjection to the "peoples' will" (the LAW) is enslavement of the person -the Individual …you. Obedience and subjection to law Is slavery, imprisonment. "Liberty within the bonds of law" is bondage - not liberty. Wherever there is law, freedom Is a crime - because freedom and law are opposites- like light and darkness; the more of one -the less of the other.

Freedom is against the law; freedom Is a criminal offense - as Is every attempt to get free.

The free man is a criminal.

Choose then what you would be - law abiding or free? Law for law's sake? Pick a law - any law? Lordship for lordship's sake? Pick a lord- any lord?...What madness! Americans, for Instance, are so insane, such thralls, such menials that they hate the very concept of freedom!

They are so Inured to their yoke of Zion (Satan) - so pleased to be Satan's "footstools" - that they think anarchy abominable.

What tasteless morons, and lurking threats to free and decent people everywhere are these poisoned, poisonous, arrogant, invasive, rampant and murderous demons!

U.S. out of North America (and elsewhere) now!

"National security" means your insecurity! The more secure the prison- the more insecure its prisoners (at the "mercy" of their abductors and tormentors).

The stronger the state - the weaker the citizen. Citizens are their own jailer's -their own oppressors; they oppress themselves and others also in the (democratic) process. Even the warden (the governor, Commandant, etc.) is imprisoned in the state prison though less confined than his wards.

Yes, the state is a prison; the governor- its warden, the state-officials - Its turnkeys, the citizens- its prisoners, and the "criminals" - Its disobedient prisoners in solitary confinement. Whether the master and his straw bosses be white, black, or In-between- all are "niggers" In the state-plantation. But has the slave a "duty" to obey his master? Only if he's a dutiful slave -a "good rigger"; only If he accepts "duty"-thereby enslaving himself.

A contract implies the consent of all the contractors. Can others (such as the dead) give your consent? Sell your soul? Obligate and bind you to their "sacred scripture" - their "constitution"?

Are you a slave, or your not? Surely only slaves, serfs, indentured servants and citizens are born into bondage - into binding contracts, signed by their improvident and treacherous "forefathers".

What a perverse idea of freedom!

Some heritage! Some inheritance! Does this arrangement displease you? Then cancel the inheritance; say "No thanks"; disown the "birthright"; tear up the constitutional "contract": and you are free to make your own arrangements - to arrange yourself. Would you then take care not to bind your self anew? Not to sign yourself away? To sell your soul? To legislate yourself (or allow yourself to be legislated) up a tree, down the river, into a cage, or up your ass? "And does one really profit in selling his soul even if he were to thereby gain the entire world?"

Would one give his voluntary consent to a displeasing deal? And what sort of a deal? A lifetime one? An eternal one? Cannot one cease consenting when one is no longer content with the deal? A man (through want) may sell himself to another (an employer), but his contentment, his consent, lasts only so long as he cannot get a better deal elsewhere or otherwise become his own employer. He sells his time, his effort; but his soul? His future? Perhaps...if he is a fool and a masochist...or simply a fibbing Joker.

An "unbreakable" contract, then, with the devil- by way of "church", "pope" ("Call no man "father"), "king", "state", "constitution", "law", "people", "society" or "humanity"? "Consent" to an offer you can't refuse isn't consent - it's extortion. The "free", "uncoerced" "contract" between the "state" (whatever that isn't) and the citizen is the same sort of "contract" an that between a master and his slave; and a coerced (or uncoerced) oath of loyalty to a slave-master is as spurious and laughable as one to a "god", a "king" (or "queen"), a "governor", a "state", a "constitution", a "law", a "society", a "people", a "humanity" or a "species" (a type of creature). Are not all vows, oaths, and promises false and laughable?

Can one truly guarantee and therefore fulfill an oath of - for example - eternal, constant and undying love to and for another? One is never constant or unchanging, but is, rather, in constant flux, and therefore his regard for others (and himself as well) changes constantly (however slightly - for better or worse) in and through time. One can truly neither give nor accept any promises whatsoever because one has no way of knowing for certain how he (or anyone else) will later feel or of what he (or anyone else) will be capable of in the future.

All vows, oaths and promises are Jive nonsense and a sham - Fatuous lies and nothing more.

Just because you've pledged allegiance to Satan every day of your life, that's no reason to do so tomorrow. Cannot you escape from Satan's snare? Must you forever honor your diabolical covenant? Do you tremble to contemplate the shirking of your demonic duties?

Do you fear to refuse to love, honor, and obey Sat-an? That's why God says: 'make no vow' because vows are of Satan, for Satan, and to Satan.

Through pledges of allegiance Satan attempts to bind you to him and make it a point of self-honor for you to continue your satanic support. Satan wants to make your apostasy from him (ie your very salvation) unconscionable to you.

He wants to enshrine his religion in your heart; he wants to make the way (his road -his very poison) inviolable, sacred, and holy to you so that you will poison not only yourself but also others. (such as your children, relatives, friends, etc .). Face it: Satan is a lot smarter than you are! But why not recognize, admit, and correct your past mistakes? Have you chained yourself to them? And must you continue to commit them? Why perpetuate Evil? Why pledge allegiance to evil old habits, customs, traditions, institutions or people?

Deliver yourself from Evil; don't con-demn yourself to itl Must you doom yourself to forever repeat past foolishness? Can't you learn, grow, progress, and correct yourself? Won't you permit yourself to use that head on your shoulders - making changes, alterations adjustments in yourself and elsewhere as they seem indicated to you?

Have you no capacity to think? If it's in your best interests, we forego critical analysis of whatever or whoever (especially yourself)? If it's no good for you, why doom yourself to forever dance to a past tune of your own or anyone else's; (and insofar as you dance to another's tune have you made that tune your own). Why condemn yourself to forever live according to past aims, ideals, resolutions, oaths, VOWS, pledged, dictates, laws, constitutions, scriptures, etc. that are presently (if not formerly) harmful to you? Don't damn yourself! Save yourself! Redeem yourself! Do good to yourself! ("Do what's good for you, or you're no good for anybody.")

Take no oath; make no promise; pledge no allegiance: and if you've already foresworn yourself...forget about it- renounce it- spit it out - emancipate yourself - let your freedom rings

True authority is that which you regard as expertise and which you, therefore. Perhaps seek to acquire and con-tract for.

For example, you take your malfunctioning motorcar to someone whom you think knows well how to fix it, Eric. False "authority" is that which regards itself as expertise - as excellence (or pretends to), and disregards or suppresses your negative evaluation as it imposes itself on you.

It constitutes and establishes an exclusive monopoly; you must take your car to its shop only) you don't seek to acquire it; it seeks to acquire you - forcibly and peremptorily (by "law", by "binding and indissoluble contract" etc.) and it obtains your contractual "con-sent" at knifepoint- if necessary.

Because you once "gave" your "consent" to the rapist - cannot you withdraw it when practicable? Must you be forever violated? and will you never kick the rapist out of your bed?

These unctuous, peremptory, and otherwise dishonorable individuals who dare to impose their "authority" maintain that their "authority" is necessary to prevent the "bad" from harming the "good" (ie their supporters - their nonresisting victims and their fellow plunderers) and that they, therefore, are "good shepherds".

Would you expect disguised wolves to howl or to bleat? -The nerve of these wolves! To maintain that you- the sheep - freely agreed to be "shepherded" by them!

One thing the political (or religious) wolves will never grant to their intended victims is the "right" to be, become, or remain free from them-in distanced safety. No! the flock must suffer their "protection".

Wolves will never allow sheep to be disunited and unattached from them - or else how could they prey? Therefore the sheep must emancipate themselves! Political and religious wolves try to make the sheep dependent on their "indispensable functions"; they obstruct, block, and bind everyone -that none may move without their "official" permission; they herd the sheep in their direction only, (towards ignorance, weakness, dependency exploitation, death) The sheep must all be corralled ("shepherded") together as one, before they can be collectively devoured; if even one were left free - what a "bad" example he would be! Yes, all must belong to the fold, (ie to the wolves- to the church -to the state) come on, let's escape her.

In the free camp life is fluid; there are no false "authorities" - no "officials", and people deal with each other and each other-as who they are, face to face, without masks and badges, without "official" pretense and role playing. This the (penal) "authorities" cannot abide, because their "supremacy" along with their confidence scam would be undone and they would then, perhaps, have to earn their living. They will therefore continue to say that their still-fifed, rigormortic, stagnant, inflexible, artificial, unnatural, peremptory, imposed, legislated, dictatorial, total-itarian, fascistic, "legal", "official" and lethal slave-labor prison camp is order and harmony itself - "heaven on earth" - "the best of all possible worlds"- the millennium" -and other such blatant lies. But can one ever draw true water from the well of falsehood?

Why are these my self-evident truths obvious to the simple and yet incomprehensible to the "educated"? Because the "educated" have been systematically miseducated, indoctrinated, stupefied, retarded, lobotomized. The old fool can't yet see through the blinders of his old school.

In what Political Congress are these my views regularly presented and espoused? Who speaks my words? Where is my "representative"?... Nowhere !

Therefore I have none...only MISrepresentatives who say they speak for me... and don't.

Anyone who claims to represent me is a fraud; only I can speak my mind; (I can't even trust someone to deliver a message for me without perverting it).

How can someone declare himself my herald? What presumptuous, usurpations impostors! "Representative government" is a formidable citadel of misrepresentation; those inside only usurp, gag, swindle, dispossess and abuse me (with extreme unction, even!). Also I don't want to accompany the crowd where they're going, ("The road to destruction is wide and well-traveled."); I much prefer to maintain my self-direction instead of having to follow the mob and/or 'their' tyrannical ''representatives, so what use have I for "representative government" or "parliamentary rules of procedure"? Am I Robert? No "parliament" is a house of whores and I've no use for their puppeteering, profiteering pimps either!

By Question Everything

Related:

The Great Cover-up and Total Control

The 'complete' Protocols

The Protocols of Zion in Modern English