• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

FOTL - Sovereign Citizens

INRM

Philosopher
I
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
5,505
What does that mean? Sovereign citizens? Does that mean every person is a nation unto themselves, or some other definition I'm not aware of?

If every person is a nation unto themselves, isn't that basically another word for anarchy?
 
Read the thread on it in the conspiracy section. It´s certainly long enough to explain everything.
 
A good thread is "The Freeman Movement and England", which is a thread on the implications of the movement in British law and culture started by someone who claims to be English but seems to use a lot of Americanisms and clearly doesn't understand anything about British law. And if it doesn't seem to make sense, that's because it's an accurate description of the movement.

Dave
 
Aha.. thanks. I Googled, read a fine lines, and was happy to keep it confined to the pile of conspiracy theories that I don't know anything about.
 
Denver said:
Aha.. thanks. I Googled, read a fine lines, and was happy to keep it confined to the pile of conspiracy theories that I don't know anything about.
Click to expand...

Ah, but FOTL is grand entertainment. Some of us are eagerly awaiting for Especially's suspension to expire to get another week of wonderfully pure crazy before he gets himself suspended again.
 
FOTL is my favorite conspiracy theory. Pure refined lunacy. Everything it says can be easily tested, AND IS, but the adherents to the cult refuse to accept the failure. They're now at the point of claiming being sent to prison over trivial charges (non-payment of a few hundred pounds in tax, for instance) is actually a victory. I cannot recommend the FOTL thread enough.
 
Can someone just explain the definition of sovereign citizen?

Because to me it sounds like a person stating that every person should be a nation unto him/herself and is just a fancy of them saying they're an anarchist without the negative stigma of anarchist.
 
INRM said:
Can someone just explain the definition of sovereign citizen?

Because to me it sounds like a person stating that every person should be a nation unto him/herself and is just a fancy of them saying they're an anarchist without the negative stigma of anarchist.
Click to expand...



Well, they would claim not to be anarchists, but for practical purposes, only FOTLs and anarchists would be able to tell the difference.


FOTLs have the (mistaken) belief that Statute Laws (as opposed to the Common Law) only apply to those who have "consented" to these Statute Laws. By "removing their consent", they think they can live without regard to these laws. The most common examples of the laws they want to avoid are not paying taxes, and not having car registrations or driver's licenses.
 
INRM said:
Can someone just explain the definition of sovereign citizen?
Click to expand...
That's the point: There is no definition. There is no explanation. The entire FOTL concept is pure gibberish. Not even its proponents can explain or define it--or at least, none of them ever have.

ETA: Just to be completely clear. INRM, you are asking for something that flatly does not exist. Repeated attempts by rational individuals to find it, often by direct questioning of FOTL proponents, has failed. If you can find a coherent explanation or definition, you'll be the first.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
So far, the answer appears to be "no".

If you manage to find a FOTLer who will give you a coherent explanation, please share it with the rest of us. Good luck.
Click to expand...



Ahem.

What is a freeman on the Land?


A Freeman-on-the-Land is a human being in a common law jurisdiction who lawfully revokes or denies consent to be represented and governed and exists completely free of all statutory restraints, obligations and restrictions.
Click to expand...

http://www.omega432.com/freeman.html


Being a freeman on the land is something that most of you have probably never heard of, but you should have. A freeman on the land is someone in a common law jurisdiction who lawfully refuses giving consent to be governed, therefore no statutory obligations or restrictions apply to that man or woman. No statute or act of government applies to a freeman on the land. By not consenting to be governed a freeman on the land is no longer eligible for the benefits of being a governed member of society, things like employment insurance, vehicle insurance and registration, welfare, government health insurance, and any other government system do not apply to a freeman on the land, but the benefits are easy to see.
Click to expand...

http://www.exploringinfinity.com/2010/01/important-freeman-on-the-land-definitions-and-information/



That you may think the definition is wrong, doesn't mean it doesn't exist at all.
 
So they want the right to secede from the laws of a nation or a society, and to not be governed by anybody?
 
Last edited:
INRM said:
So they want the right to secede from the laws of a nation or a society, and to not be governed by anybody?
Click to expand...
Yes. Some of the more die-hard adherents want to set up in their own sovereign territory, to be free of all the laws of the enclosing country. Of course, they're going to need a way of settling disputes, but we wonder how they're going to do that if one party refuses to contract with either the other party or a mediator. And since they are adverse to "statutes" (that is, laws that are written down), every time a dispute arises they'll have to re-invent the entire dispute resolution mechanism from scratch.
 
Being a freeman on the land is something that most of you have probably never heard of, but you should have. A freeman on the land is someone in a common law jurisdiction who lawfully refuses giving consent to be governed, therefore no statutory obligations or restrictions apply to that man or woman. No statute or act of government applies to a freeman on the land. By not consenting to be governed a freeman on the land is no longer eligible for the benefits of being a governed member of society, things like employment insurance, vehicle insurance and registration, welfare, government health insurance, and any other government system do not apply to a freeman on the land, but the benefits are easy to see.
Click to expand...

Dear God, it is like they read the law and intentionally got it all wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom