STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
How New Hampshire is Fighting for Independence
By Joe Jarvis - June 24, 2017

New Hampshire is in an abusive relationship, according to Carla Gericke, the President of Foundation for New Hampshire Independence. Uncle Sam won’t let New Hampshire leave; he arrests the citizens for victimless crimes, he overrides the legislature for policy and regulation, and he takes her money.

The state is a net payer of federal taxes, meaning they pay more federal taxes than they get back. When it comes to education alone, New Hampshire gets 30 cents on every dollar back. If the government is meant to be for and by the people, keeping that money local is a step in the right direction towards a more responsive government tailored to the people it serves.

Gericke claims that if New Hampshire became independent, it would be the wealthiest country on Earth per capita. The relationship between New Hampshire and the United States is not beneficial to New Hampshire, and some in the state want to go their own way to form a freer country.

Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving, according to Gericke, because he made liberals open to a conversation about secession. In fact, she hopes California will secede first so that New Hampshire can watch and learn. The goal is to become independent without having the tanks roll in from the USA.

Independence is not a strictly libertarian issue either, it is a local issue. In general, it is a positive to have your food come from local sources, to eat at local restaurants, and drink local beer. The closer government gets to the local level, the better it is. Unity on a national scale only creates controversy, violence, and resentment currently among people who don’t agree and shouldn’t have to.

Carla Gericke was once the President of the Free State Project, which seeks to move 20,000 freedom lovers to New Hampshire in order to influence the politics of the relatively small state. The project is based on a paper by Jason Sorens, who said that roughly 20,000 dedicated activists could influence the politics in a region of around a million people. That is why Gericke sees New Hampshire as a natural place to fight for freedom from an oppressive overlord who has grown too large and powerful, violating its own laws about letting states conduct their own business.

New Hampshire also has a clause in their Constitution that specifically prescribes revolution (though not necessarily violent) if the federal government violates their contract with the state, which they have clearly done. By talking to neighbors over a beer, New Hampshire Independence thinks they can present their case without coming off as crazy guerilla fighters. That is not what the movement is about. The movement is about control over your own life, which starts by moving the governing structure closer to home.

Each representative in the New Hampshire legislature represents 3,000 people; it is one of the largest and most decentralized legislatures in the world. This means the government is already primed to be responsive to the needs of the people. Like all American states, New Hampshire already has a governing structure in place that would avoid any power vacuums in the event they became independent. It really wouldn’t be such an upset in daily life, unless the USA went out of its way to make it difficult.

But perhaps people of all stripes can now find common ground to have this conversation. Now that the left hates the President, suddenly the idea of secession doesn’t sound so crazy. Americans can actually find more common ground by going our separate ways. Then people can all try different governing structures and ideas, allowing for experimentation in government that will let the best institutions emerge. And what we will likely find is that different governing structures make a lot of sense based on the region, culture, geography, resources, and the natural diversity which makes a one size fits all approach to governing a quagmire.

Of course, this is a long-term plan, and the first step of the process is the nullification of federal laws to make the state more independent. Already New Hampshire has seen some progress in this direction and has historically refused to play along with federal mandates. For instance, New Hampshire refused to implement a seatbelt law when the federal government held highway funds over their head. Yet still, New Hampshire has some of the highest rates of citizens wearing seatbelts.

New Hampshire has a seaport, a border with Canada, and two neighbor states which each have an independent flare. In fact, Arcadia has been talked about as a loose confederation between New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine. That way, the three states could enjoy free trade, safety in numbers, and open borders for easy travel.

Ideally, borders would remain open to the United States as well, but you never know how an abusive ex will react to emancipation. There is a precedent that those collecting social security can still collect their checks when living in foreign countries, and use American dollars, like Panama.

But Americans dollars are not sound currency, and New Hampshire Independence supports a free market of competing currencies. New Hampshire businesses were early adopters of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, and the state is host to many high-tech jobs in the IT and web development fields. Silver is already relatively widely accepted among businesses in the state.

Once one state secedes, there will be a domino effect with at least a dozen movements within the United States to get whole states, or parts of states to gain independence from a larger political body that does not represent the best interests of the people.

And once the precedent is set that it is okay to go your separate way peacefully, there is nothing to stop independence at a local level, and finally down to the individual.

A woman shouldn’t be forced to maintain a relationship with an abuser, and nor should people be forced into a group where the dominant controllers abuse them.

The United States government is abusing people and running roughshod over more local governing structures. It is time for a great divorce, and New Hampshire might just have the right ingredients to make that happen.

Tagged with: , , ,
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • joe_bob_gonzales

    independence is a good thought. however, I recently read where they were destroying monuments to former freedom fighters against centralized federal power in the southern states of the US. basically, that is just a reminder that if you begin this, failure is not really an option.

    (as an aside, ISIS and the lunatic Left seem to have a lot in common once you begin to analyze their actions. like destroying historical monuments and killing anyone who does not agree with them. enslaving and raping your children is probably coming along any day now…)

    anyway, to continue, the central federal government and its Masters have become a de facto national security/police state that is not in anyway responsive to the claims and needs of the people it claims to work for.

    but it sure likes giving Freedom away overseas anytime it does not like the actions of any particular government

    so good luck there, Arcadia. you have my support.

    and honestly, its probably just a matter of time before a financially and morally bankrupt government falls apart as it begins to fail delivery of all the promises it has made.

    just know that its gonna be messy for a while.

    • Mstrjack

      Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and the southern confederacy leaders were far from “freedom fighters”. Just read the Confederate Constitution. They were fighting to keep people enslaved (the exact opposite of liberty). They spent their entire lives oppressing people.

      • joe_bob_gonzales

        the Civil War of 1860 in the US was about states rights.

        as you say, read real history, not the government sanctioned garbage forced down the throat of the young by the government public indoctrination system. excuse me, the government education system.

        the war was based on economic issues far greater than a slavery system that was inefficient and that was on its way out. many other western countries outlawed slavery without resorting to a war that killed 620,000 soldiers. far more than in any other war the US has been involved in. so far.

        unlike say, the middle east and muslim countries where SLAVERY STILL EXISTS today.

        https://townhall.com/columnists/charlesjacobs/2017/02/23/ellison-ignores-africans-enslaved-in-muslim-lands-n2289727

        secondly, all else aside….. by the articles under which the states joined the “Union”, they had the Right to secede.

        specifically:

        Both the Articles of Confederation, adopted in 1781, and the United
        States Constitution, ratified in 1789, established a union of sovereign
        states under the governance of a federal system. This union was widely
        understood by both the states and the federal government to be
        voluntary, and the Constitution was interpreted to reinforce this
        perspective. At the same time, the founding fathers, particularly Thomas
        Jefferson, recognized the states’ right to secede. Although he did not
        advocate the exercise of that right, he acknowledged that the
        entitlement remained with the states and was a right that continued
        throughout the initial drafts of the Articles of Confederation, the
        Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

        • Col. Edward H. R. Green

          I am afraid that you are right about another civil war being inevitable between statists and their mistaken belief that they have a “right” to bully, rob, rule, enslave others to their ends, and people, including ,myself, who know that they have a right to live and act as free, peaceful, civil, sovereign individuals.

          • joe_bob_gonzales

            just to be clear, I dont advocate violence. especially against people who have way bigger and way many more guns than I do.

            it is a final resort, when all debate and discussion have failed. it is however, as you say, coming.

            when all the promises that were made fail to be delivered, we will begin to see massive civil insurrection.

            that said, the statists will never be satisfied until they control everything, and then when things collapse around them, blame everyone except themselves.

            thus, it is a Duty to resist the statists. their path has been trodden many times, and always with the same result. inevitable disaster and collapse and ruin of the average regular joe citizen. for the statists, even if they had control of everything, it would still not be enough. it seems like they have a mental illness.

            but somehow the statists always seem to do okay.

            like today, down in Venezuela: http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3212-as-venezuelans-starve-in-the-streets-the-elites-party-on

            and the late great bernie sanders and his delusional followers that he sold out. I read today that he and his wife are under investigation. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-and-jane-sanders-under-fbi-investigation-for-bank-fraud-hire-lawyers/

            hey, bernie sanders followers? are you feeling the burn…. up your a s s yet?

            there will be no happy ending on the current path of the US.

            and anyone who, in fact, has read history will understand this.

            for example, study Rome. in whose footsteps the West seems to be following.

            https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/1994/11/cj14n2-7.pdf

            ahhh (big sigh): FUBAR.

        • Centurian

          However it might be time to get the “slaves” off of the US Gubmint Plantation and stop stealing from the productive members of society to pay them off. Know many people on welfare and food stamps, living in government housing that are better off or contributing more than people with jobs that produce value?

        • Mstrjack

          “the Civil War of 1860 in the US was about states rights.”

          Garbage history! There is absolutely no basis in fact for that claim.

          In 1860, States allowed people to “own” other people. Utah allowed men to have multiple wives. Communities were allowed to exclude undesirables from their community if they wanted. Socialists were allowed to practice their philosophy.

          Nobody anywhere in the United States was proposing to end State’s rights in 1860. I do not know where that nonsense comes from but there is no historical basis in fact.

          • Hey You

            Seems like that nonsense was put in after the fact. Such is usual.

      • Centurian

        So tell me then why the emancipation proclamation only freed slaves in southern states, but northern ones?

        • Mstrjack

          Because Lincoln did not believe that the U.S. Constitution allowed the General government the authority to override the States right to slavery in States that remained true to the General government.

          Lincoln believed in States rights. Lincoln was a supporter of the Corwin Amendment which was a States rights amendment.

          Corwin Amendment
          “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.”

          When Lincoln emancipated the slaves in the Southern states, the Union army gained 28,000 black soldiers, who were former slaves, who fought to win the war for freedom for all.

          • Col. Edward H. R. Green

            Lincoln fought a war against states’ citizens’ right to secession, NOT freedom for slaves.

            Had he respected that right, and allowed disunion, which had no rubbish divine (supernatural) approbation, slave-enforcing states in the South, as well as the North, would have had to wrestle, perhaps via war, with the issue of slavery on their own. Abolitionists would have fought, ultimately successfully for its termination, given its moral, factual, and economic unsustainablility. Slavery’s backers and their racist supporters, lacking support from armed federal employees and their sympathetic laws (e.g. Jim Crow, etc.), would have to relent, or die.

          • Mstrjack

            I do not believe that Lincoln fought the war against states’ citizens’ right to secession. The Southern States indeed did not really secede. They revolted.

            Robert E. Lee
            “The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom, and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it were intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It is intended for perpetual union, so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government (not a compact) which can only be dissolved by revolution, or by the consent of all the people in convention assembled.”

            Secession is a peace act. The Southern Confederacy started shooting at people before Lincoln even swore the oath of office. They revolted with violence.

            Star of the West January 1861.

          • joe_bob_gonzales

            believe as you will, there is a strong case to be made that the north (the northern industrialist/banker powers who are really in charge) incited the South. that is, ft. sumter was a false flag event.

            _____

            South Carolina repeatedly called for Ft Sumter to be evacuated and
            Jefferson Davis sent delegates to Washington to offer to pay for the
            Federal property on southern lands, pay for the Southern part of the national
            debt, and negotiate a peaceful end. President Lincoln would not accept
            this as he was determined to not recognize secession as legal or that
            the Confederate States of America was a legitimate government.
            Throughout the war, he viewed them as rebellious insurgents but never as
            a foreign country. Lincoln claimed that there was no right to secession
            even though the U.S. was founded on a secessionist document known as
            the Declaration of Independence. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson authored resolutions for Kentucky and Virginia in 1798 that clearly support the founding philosophy of state’s sovereignty over the federal government.

            Lincoln himself stated on January 12, 1848, while criticizing President Polk over the way he was orchestrating the Mexican War, “Any
            people anywhere being inclined and having the power have the right to
            rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that
            suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right—a right
            which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right
            confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government
            may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may
            revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they
            inhabit.”

            Lincoln knew that he could not gain the Northern American public’s
            support for a war with the South if the north appeared as the aggressor.
            On March 4th, 1861 President Lincoln delivered his inauguration speech and claimed that the North would not invade the South without provocation. “In
            doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence; and there shall
            be none, unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power
            confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property
            and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and
            imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will
            be no invasion — no using of force against or among the people anywhere.
            Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality, shall be
            so great and so universal, as to prevent competent resident citizens
            from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force
            obnoxious strangers among the people for that object.”

            Lincoln needed that provocation to come from the South at all costs so that the Confederacy would be blamed for a war. The false flag of Ft. Sumter was set in motion.

            On April 4th Lincoln ordered a re-supply expedition led by Gustavus V Fox to be sent to Ft Sumter. Then Lincoln notified Governor Pickens “…to
            expect an attempt will be made to supply Fort-Sumpter [sic] with
            provisions only; and that, if such attempt be not resisted, no effort to
            throw in men, arms, or amunition, will be made, without further notice,
            or in case of an attack upon the Fort.”

            Governor Pickens and General Beauregard made repeated demands to
            Major Anderson to surrender and abandon the fort before the resupply
            arrived which he continued to refuse. The final demand came on April 11th to which Anderson replied he would leave the fort by noon on April 15th
            unless he received other orders from Lincoln or was resupplied. General
            Beauregard felt this response to be too conditional and unacceptable.
            They gave the fort a one hour notice and then began shelling with the
            opening shots of the civil war.

          • Mstrjack

            The fact remains that the South cheated the 1860 election and they lost anyway. Since they lost the election, they threw a fit, then revolted and claimed to secede, even though no one at the time was threating to take away any State’s rights.

            Abraham Lincoln even went so far as to support the Corwin Amendment which would have forever forbidden the Federal Government from interfering with State’s rights.

            Corwin Amendment
            “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.”

            The Southern Confederacy was set up in less than three months! Three months!! It was not a well thought out government and it was based on a violent powerful central government which REQUIRED all States to be slave states. Read: The Confederate Constitution ratified March 11, 1861. The Southern Confederacy was a horrible government based thoughly on violence.

            Then the Southern Confederacy’s very first act of governance was to bomb Fort Sumter. Their very first official act of governance was violence. YOU claim that the Union should have just given up the fort. I say that would not have mattered. The Southern Confederacy was based on violence.

            A good government, that embraced liberty for all, would have remained peaceful and worked things out. There was absolutely no reason to bomb Fort Sumter other than start a war.

            Abraham Lincoln had it right when he was very young.

            Lyceum Address – January 27, 1838
            “If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

            Indeed, 22 years later, the slave owning southerners set their minds to destroying the liberty set out in the Declaration of Independence and wrote a new constitution for the 1% upper class. Slave Owners. The Confederate Constitution was a precursor to the modern day tyranny we all have to put up with today.

          • Mstrjack

            Also, if Lincoln wanted war, then what was he doing with 1000 men to defend Washington City, a bankrupted treasury, an army scattered throughout the West, a Navy scattered across the globe in foreign waters, and a 74 year old General Scott, who had gout so bad he couldn’t ride a horse, in charge? That is proof that Lincoln did not want war. Lincoln did not prepare for war and thankfully the State militias did successfully defend the Union given to us by the founders.

        • Tom

          Lincoln did not have the authority to free the slaves. Grant had explained that official figures of battle participants failed to include slaves on the Southern side. They performed all the chores that Union privates did, but were not counted as part of the battle. That is why many battles appeared with the Union outnumbering the Confederates. The slaves were considered as wagons, mules, and other materiel. When the Union won a battle they could decommission the materiel captured, including the slaves. When the Confederates captured Union soldiers, they were prisoners of war, but on the Union side, the slaves were released from bondage. At least that is how I understand it so far.

    • GH

      Fundamentalists of all stripes…whether religious or political…have the same traits. None have the best interest of human beings in mind, they’re only interested in the power generated by getting their own way…like spoiled children. Members of such groups lack the maturity, courage and strength required for individualism. Never the less, thanks to what Daily Bell refers…or at least referred…to as the Internet Reformation, I think I’m seeing a welcomed trend toward citizens recognizing the benefits of being more locally and individually responsible. This despite the FedGov’s intense efforts to allow such a beautiful way of life.

      Yes, GO ARCADIA!! And then more.

      • GH

        Let me rephrase the last sentence above: “This despite the FedGov’s intense efforts to DISallow such a beautiful way of life.”

    • Jim Johnson

      Then she lost to Trump. We have 4 years to Gain our Republic back from Empire.

      • joe_bob_gonzales

        Jim, as much as I support your thoughts on recovery of the Republic, I regret to say that we passed that tipping point some time ago.

        trying to fix the current problems is like putting a band-aid on cancer.

        consider one small issue. the Tax code. it has 75,000 pages and growing, and the complexity of it is killing the economy.

        it benefits the rich and powerful who can lobby for special exemptions, hire hoards of tax attorneys, or keep their money off shore where it cant be taxed.

        apple computer alone holds over $250 billion dollars offshore.
        all US companies hold over 1.4 trillion overseas where it is not taxed. http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/14/news/tax-us-companies-offshore-cash/index.html

        that benefit, however, does not include you and me who are fully exposed to the Tax system.

        now, a simple solution is a Flat Tax of say, 10%. which would actually raise more money than the current system and take you and me about 10 minutes to file. But that means that corporations would pay more and you, dear fellow citizen, would pay less.

        but you and I know that a flat tax is NEVER gonna happen.

        because it does not benefit those in power.

        so, now you know, by extrapolation, that the systemic issues facing the country will never be solved.

        • Jim Johnson

          Yeah. We passed the gentle resolution to our indebtedness back in 2004 (Shadowstats), so even a flat tax will not address this. My intent is to see my neighborhood secure and fed and let what will come, come. I suspect the genius used to keep this economy floating this far will unleash on solutions for our common dilemma in this, starting with the collective genius found by Voting Americans in putting the best man for the Job in charge. I must believe God has held his hand, as we have yet to truly practice the original Constitutional Republic originally envisioned. We now have this incredible Internet Tool to immediately learn of Best Practices, kicking real solutions into high gear. I have had my “line in the sand” on my door step welcome mat. I now believe we can move it out to the County Line. That is an incredible development, exceeding my best prior expectations.

        • Libertarian Jerry

          Corporations don’t pay taxes. The taxes they pay are just added onto the price of the products or services they sell. This results in higher prices which are paid by the corporation’s customers. In essence its the consumer who pays the corporation’s taxes.

  • Dimitri Ledkovsky

    “Arcadia” invokes sort of a paradisiacal, pastoral land where Life Is Good. How many of those have we seen go down the tubes? If it became a somewhat spontaneous coming together then… maybe. But in this day and age it would probably provoke rage from within and without before it ever saw the light of day. Power grabs are usually ugly regardless of good intentions.

  • esqualido

    “[Donald Trump ] made liberals open to a conversation about secession. In fact, she hopes California will secede first so that New Hampshire can watch and learn. The goal is to become independent without having the tanks roll in from the USA.” (because, see, they have a clause in their constitution saying so- a lot of good that did South Carolina when they tried it. I still recall with amusement the article in Popular Mechanics, of all places (they seem to have evolved from helping guys use their tools to becoming a tool of the state, IMHO) about California Declaration of Independence and the subsequent air war between the fighter jets of the California Air National Guard vs. the United States Air Force (you can guess how that worked out)

  • GH

    Good article Joe! I was a supporter of the Free State Project back when it began. Weather and the dense population of the Northeast in general kept me from moving there…wimpy, I know. It’s great to hear they have made an impact! I do believe more and more people all around the country…even the world…are catching on to the old ideas of freedom, liberty and individualism (which is not simply living singularly, but groups of individually minded people). Please folks, do yourself a big favor: Dim (not close) your eyes to national and international “news” and open your eyes fully to what is happening…and can happen positively in your own community. That’s where you live…that’s where your heart is…make it better/freer/healthier. I’m seeing such things happen out here in the West…even in California!

    Neither the national government nor the international government (UN) will ever achieve the goals you want for your community. They don’t desire it; (nor have they any understanding as to how to bring it about if they did desire it) they abhor the notion, they don’t even want you thinking about it! Their tiny minds and rampant ego mania can’t stand even the idea of losing power and control over larger and larger volumes of population.

    Let’s get back to enjoying our own freedom, enjoying and working with our neighbors, and building healthy communities. Secession should be freely available for any state desiring it. In the meantime, simply paying attention to, and INSISTING on FedGov adherence to the 10th Amendment could work wonders.

  • Goldcoaster

    I wish you success.

  • Jonathan Halsey

    Actually, New Hampshire has the lowest rate of seatbelt use in the nation.

    • James Clander

      Well that doesn’t sound very clever -for all the obvious reasons.
      Certainly nothing to brag about. I wouldn’t ride in a M/V without one.

      • Col. Edward H. R. Green

        The point behind the absence of seat belt laws is that government does not own your body, or any area of your life. You alone own it; therefore, you are responsible for protecting it. Your rationally selfish concern for your own safety and well-being should serve as adequate reason for protecting yourself by wearing a seat belt, and NOT because those operating government dictate it by the enactment of a seat belt law.

        If you choose not to wear a seat belt and suffer injuries in an accident that you probably would not have suffered had you been wearing it, you pay for the consequences out of your own resources.

        One of the reasons for seat belt laws is that people have stupidly (and maliciously) demanded that government force everyone via coercive taxation to pick up the medical expenses that arise when someone gets into an accident. That coercive union of government and medical care, and of all other sectors of the economy, must be completely terminated.

    • lawmanjed

      How was this assertion determined?

    • Free_Able

      1 The data I understand is seatbelt use is higher than S. Dakota and Virgin Isl. 2014 stats

  • Jim Hogue

    Love to talk w Carla on the radio. Please let her know. See “Jim Hogue, The Vermont Secessionist” on Youtube or just google Jim Hogue VT.
    contact: 802 456 1123

  • Good luck to New Hampshire. We are also advocating small government in UK:
    http://harrogateagenda.org.uk/

  • Don Duncan

    Please expand on your claim that: “…unless the US went out of its way to make it more difficult.” A non-violent secession can’t fail. Tanks rolling in? So what? What is that going to do except make the US look like a bully. They can’t start killing people if they are not “protesting”, i.e., marching thought the streets “to show support”. The marches are not wise strategy or will they achieve anything political. They are outdated networking mechanisms. We have the ‘net.
    The strategy of not handing over funds to the US prevents the US from using the money for extortion.
    Free from US trade restrictions, the economy will boom.
    Free from the dollar, investment in a stable money system will come from everywhere.
    Free from federal law, the N.H. populace can start to free themselves from state law.

  • If these “New Hampshire Independence” folks (with whom I agree) think the U.S. government is going to idly stand by while NH secedes, they are dreaming! The POLITICIANS will not like it. The INTERNATIONAL BANKERS will NEVER allow it !!!!

    In 1933 the U.S. declared bankruptcy; and Roosevelt and Congress signed a
    contract with the Federal reserve and international bankers in which EVERYTHING
    in America was handed over to the bankers. ALL courts in the U.S. operate under
    “maritime-admiralty law” and the SOLE function of the judge is to ensure that moneys are collected to pay off the national debt. Each man and
    woman became a “person” and presumably a U.S. citizen – and thus a
    subject and an employee of the U.S. government. YOU became SURETY for the
    corporate U.S. for the International bankers. ALL “laws” (legislated
    acts; statutes) became CONTRACTS to which they PRESUME you consent. If you
    “violate” a statute such as getting a “speeding ticket”
    with a fine of of (let’s say) $250 USD, you go to a maritime-admiralty court as
    a DEBTOR — NOT as “defendant”. That is why the judge can issue a
    “guilty” verdict on his own, WITHOUT any trial by jury. (He is
    literally acting as a captain of a ship at sea who can do as he wishes; NOT as
    a judicial officer.)

    “In all penal actions for violations of statutes, the NATIONAL DEBT is the
    preexisting contract for purchase that influences the conscience of the judge
    in making his decisions. In those cases, the defendant is a U.S. citizen who
    cannot question the national debt. He is deemed to be the surety for the buyer
    (United States), and the prosecutor represents the seller (international
    lenders). A U.S. citizen who refuses to be a surety can be viewed as giving aid
    and comfort to enemies of the United States. That is the definition of treason.
    Once the U.S. citizen is found to be in treason, he can be viewed as a
    resident. Penal actions are against residents. It is the property of residents that can be seized and condemned and forfeited (confiscated).”
    “What Does Accepted For Value Mean” by The American Connection (2007)
    and the Uniformed Commercial Code (UCC).

    United States statutes (legislated acts) are designed to transfer private
    rights from the private to the public for public use – to pay the national debt. (UCC)

    • Jim Johnson

      Never tire in saying this. We need to hear it, then hear it again. Next stop is Jury Nullification education…

  • Mstrjack

    Before liberty can be achieved for the masses, liberty must be first understood.

    People who promote the non-aggression principle can not win in a fight against aggressive people. Fighting will not win. The only way to win against all the statist propaganda is a powerful public relations campaign. So far, the liberty movement is terrible at it.

  • Jim Johnson

    Own your Street. The Neighbors will follow on, then your Neighborhood, then County and so on. Seems to me our Original Design, and it works.

  • Praetor

    Independence is a good goal!

    But giving up a bigger monster (Fed) for a smaller (States) monster is just giving the smaller monster a chance to be big. If any one thinks the smaller monster called California State Government or Illinois State Government, is better then that bigger monster in DC, my opinion their fooling themselves. The DC Fed was small once, now look at it.

    We are at war with individuals who do not believe that individuals should have freedom and liberty, and that goes for the smaller monster. Independents starts with the individual.

    Make yourself independent free and liberated and prepare for all the monsters too explode, big and small.!!!

    • Take what you can get, starting with the low hanging fruit first.

  • Fireplace 1

    G0vernments throughout history fail to meet their promised obligations without exception. This happened with the Roman Empire, and it is happening with the Washington Empire. When Rome ran out of wealth to pay their soldiers, they allowed them to loot the cities. That crashed the economy, and the empire fell. Washington is allowing the bureaucracies (mostly the MIC) to loot the economy, and the results will be the same. When enough people lose confidence in the system, they will not buy the so-called “risk free” g0vernment bonds. Bonds not backed by any assets and unenforceable, because the g0vernment makes the rules.

    • Hey You

      Remember that the money in use in the USA says it’s backed by the USA government. It is backed by nothing except confidence in the USA government.
      I use it because I am sure that most people have confidence that the USA government will always survive; It won’t; no government ever has. But that’s the concept.

  • Steve Wilkins

    I must say I am quite impressed by the level of intelligent commentary found on this thread. On that basis alone I will come back to view. As for succession – good luck, I too will not wait with bated breath. It is unlikely to be allowed. In fact it is more likely that those seen as perpetrators will be dealt a violent blow if ever the attempt goes beyond discussion. Americans might note that your nation has more of the UN Sustainability plans enacted and prepared than ANY other nation on Earth. More even than Europe – which suggests the agenda we loving know as Agenda 21 is likely to be brought to pass across the “United” States first. Americans who dispute this status as first target for the implementation of the One World Government – or New World Order might do well to take note of the number of FEMA camps busy being manned and outfitted – over 800 I believe. No natural calamity has yet to justify their existence but they are well set up and reminiscent of concentration camps. Some – as in California, are extremely large and capable of taking many people into the loving arms of the Deep State. Just a thought. Watch and wait might be a good strategy – then again those ruled by fear become the slaves they hold in disdain. American exceptionalism must be a very hard concept or ‘ideal’ to hold onto under the present circumstances… and the rest of the world is truly holding its breath hoping it will run it course and die ignominiously. Like all empires run by greed, corruption and totalitarian corporate hegemony it deserves to be an example to the rest of us as it eats itself from within. I hope truly the American people survive the process with dignity. Your government however is obsolete and beyond mitigation – the sooner it relegates itself to annals of history the better for the world at large – it seems to be well on its way. Unfortunately that still leaves the rest of us to deal (the US citizens will have their hands full at home) with the original dark forces of the Vatican, the City of London bankers and – lest we forget – Zionist Israel, along with all the many henchmen and women it has created across the world. Quite a task for naive and gullible humanity to undertake – lets hope we have help. I suspect we do. the idea that we are alone in this enormous universe is becoming a laughable proposition. Be careful what you decide to believe in implicitly however… our catalyst for evolution is canny and for the most part remains 5 steps ahead strategically than the average sheeple. Wishing you well from afar.

  • D Bancroft

    Seatbelt use should be between the driver and their insurance company, not wearing a belt in an accident, less coverage for injuries.

  • Edward Smith

    Carla and the people working in all the pro liberty groups sprouting up in NH are doing a spectacular job of saving NH from what is happening to the rest of the world, I am forever indebted to all of them.

  • Xandasu

    God damn it, when will you people ever learn that folk activism does not work? https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/06/patri-friedman/beyond-folk-activism

    .No matter how many copies of Atlas Shrugged or John Locke’s writings you give to people, you will never convince the majority that your ideas work. Moral beliefs are innate to everyone. They’re not willing to change them because you made a good argument. And that’s disregarding the fact that most “libertarians” in New Hampshire are unprincipled sellouts, nihilists and focused on failed causes like this.

loading