Think Free

We are told that we live in a free society. There is no greater test of freedom then being able to leave. In order to understand this idea better, we need to know some words and their definitions. First off, a society is a group of people joined together by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal. Notice how there is no mention of geographical area? Being in a certain geographical area might give you the right to join a society; however it cannot create an obligation to join. See that mutual consent part? Pay attention to it, it will become very important.

Now what is a statute? Is a statute law? The answer is yes and no. It is not the law, but it is a rule, which has the force of law, within a society. Statutes are the laws of a society. Outside of society, they have no effect at all.

I look at society as a house party, not a prison. At this party, there is food and music. We have a system set up which is supposed to determine what music is played and what food is served. This system is supposed to be democratic in nature, where the majority decides. Now if you don’t like the food, music, rules of the house, or the system designed to determine those things, you are perfectly free to leave. Maybe in the house (in society) you can’t smoke or own a gun. Does this mean you can’t do those things once you leave? Of course not! If you are no longer in the house, its rules no longer apply to you. These statutes which governments call laws, are all the laws of the society, or the house. Leave society, and these rules are no longer your laws. Those remaining behind will still have to obey them, you will not. Of course, you won’t be able to eat the food or listen to the music (collect benefits), either.

The simple fact is if this is a free society, we have the right to leave. If we do not have that right, it is neither free, nor a society. If our society was a house party, this is what we would see. At the food table, they are serving scraps and crumbs, while we hear them in the back kitchen whooping it up with their supplier friends (bankers). The music is either a Military March or a Polka. The waiters (government workers) are acting more and more like prison guards. There are mirrors everywhere, not enough seats and more than enough smoke. The door leading out of this party has been well hidden and hasn’t been opened for a long time. They might have even welded it shut. If we are to have a free society, then every once in a while, someone must leave. This will ensure that people know they are free to do so; someone must guard that door and ensure it opens easily. This will also allow those remaining in the house, to see what it’s like outside, without venturing forth themselves. If they decide its better outside, then they too are free to leave.

I intend to leave society. I am not moving physically, either. As a human being born in this country, I have the Common Law right to travel anywhere within it. I also have the right to join or not join societies as I see fit. I cannot be forced to consent. If I refuse to consent, none of the statutes everyone else calls laws will have the force of law with me.

I am leaving this party, not because I reject society, but because I wish to embrace it. I want a good one. One that is as free as can be. I reject the way in which this society deliberates, determines and acts for the common goal. I am not even sure we all have a common goal anymore. Those we elect to provide us with food and music are not doing their jobs. The servants are getting uppity and actually think they are in charge. The stole my family and did so unlawfully. The RCMP refuses to investigate them and the elected representatives are not doing their jobs. I am sick of the rules of this house, the meager portions and the blaring music. I will open this long closed door, stand on the other side and wave at you. I will do things lawfully that you cannot do, for you are still in the house.

When I am outside your society and therefore free of its rules, this does not mean there is no law. I do not claim the right to harm another human being, damage property, engage in fraud or extortion or break contracts. I will follow the Law. I just won’t give statutes created by governments the force of law. I will achieve this by constructively denying consent to be governed.

When I see that members of society once again have recourse to the Law and those we elect to ‘serve the food’ are serving more than they eat, when these statutes are less deceptive and I know that the door outside is wide open at all times instead of being so well hidden, when the servants are acting more like servants, when the portions are bigger and there is less reveling in the kitchen, when the RCMP are abiding by the law and willing to investigate government ministries, then I will consider rejoining.

When you see me traveling down the road in my automobile, exercising my Common Law right to travel, and I do not have a license, know I am not breaking the law. Please don’t moan about how we all have to follow the same rules. You are in a society, and I am not. You have consented and I have not. You have benefits that I do not. You are free to give up those benefits for more freedom, just as I will have done. Also, please do not think I am rejecting those staying behind in this society. Like a scout doing recon, I am giving up the security you enjoy, to ensure that you don’t lose your freedom. At the risk to myself, I am going outside to see what the weather is like. I am doing it for you. I will come back with a report. My actions will clear much of the smoke, and I might break a mirror or two on the way out.

Do not be angry with me for becoming aware of government deception, or for acting against it. If you insist on being angry then be angry with those who have hidden this door to freedom from you for so long. Be angry with those who tore apart a family and denied citizens recourse to the law. Be angry with the RCMP for refusing to investigate a government ministry just because it is a government ministry. Be angry with your elected representatives for refusing to address crimes within that same ministry. Be angry with them for using so much deception in their legislation. Be angry with the media for constantly referring to new statutes as laws, instead of telling you they are nothing more than the rules of society and that you are free to leave that society if you don’t like the new statute.

The freedom you will achieve by me opening this door and leaving society will cost you nothing and it will empower you over those who claim they are your government. If we are to have a free society, this door must be open at all times. There is not one person among you who can lawfully force me to consent to being governed, nor is there one among you who can lawfully apply society’s statutes to me when I am outside of society. – Robert Arthur Menard.


Esta y otras joyas sobre la libertad, la definición legal de Persona, la Ley y la actuación de igualdad…, podéis encontrarlas en Estoy prácticamente de acuerdo con todo el contenido del texto, salvo por el hecho de que no puedes decidir estar fuera de la sociedad y ocupar territorios (terreno físico) propiedad de esa sociedad de la que te has excluido, ni usar sus carreteras y otros servicios. El problema real, por tanto, es que no podemos elegir no formar parte de la sociedad, pues no hay lugar físico que no le pertenezca. Como todos hemos intuido más de una vez, no somos libres.

2 comentarios

  1. Por supuesto que no podemos salirnos de la Sociedad, podemos irnos de una sociedad a otra, pero la Sociedad es algo ontológico.

    Uno de los problemas de la teorización sobre la libertad consiste en tratar de definirla siempre desde términos estrictamente individuales. ¿Pero dónde es posible individualizar atómicamente a un individuo? ¿Ha nacido alguna vez uno de si mismo? ¿En qué momento ha estado solo? Incluso el niño salvaje de Roussseau nació de Otro.

    El ser humano se individualiza en su desarrollo pero este es siempre un proceso social.

    Creo que el situarse inicialmente en un universo de individualidades hace que se encare siempre el problema desde el deseo incondicionado externamente del individuo, como si ejercer la libertad es obtener el deseo, como si la voluntad fuese una máquina encadenada al desear.

    Por eso creo que la libertad no debe encararse desde lo individual más que en términos de decisión: ser libre consistiría entonces en poder elegir sin más condicionamiento que el propio. No hay una necesidad incondicional en la libertad sino un optar voluntariamente.

    El texto me parece que incide en el hecho de que lo social está situado dentro del avanico de opciones que podemos elegir. Uno no está fuera más que optando aún cuando físicamente viva dentro de la misma.

    En fin, eso creo.


  2. Thanks for the nice stuff.


Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Salir /  Cambiar )

Google photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google. Salir /  Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Salir /  Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Salir /  Cambiar )

Conectando a %s

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: