I’ll start by saying I am sympathetic in the vaguest sense of what the so-called Freemen stand for. My anti-authoritarian streak has definitely been inflamed by a new wave of fascism that makes me superbly suspicious of political structures, and the Freemen on the Land, defined loosely by a desire to reject those structures, attempts to live my suspicions out.
Where we diverge is rather simple: I still believe, perhaps naively, that between transparency and making sure to chop up as much government authority across differently appointed sectors as you can, whilst restricting the capacity of money in politics, should be able to create a functional socialist society that mitigates the impact of the entitled and aggrieved who always fuck everything up. The Freemen, on the other hand, like to claim that laws don’t apply to them because they never agreed to them, so they do things like refuse to pay taxes or follow speed limits.
Thing is, I like taxes–as long as they’re being spent on infrastructure, humanitarian aid, education, healthcare, that sort of thing. More importantly, the speeding Freemen do happens on roads that everybody else is paying for… meaning if you want to be logically consistent in properly rejecting the government’s taxation, then you should also reject the government’s services and stop using roads and sidewalks as your personal fender. Freemen will refuse to pay taxes but rarely, if ever, actually reject government services.
Such was the case of the first Freeman, at least in Alberta, to be charged with a terrorism act by trying to place a lien on a police officer’s personal property–because the cop gave him a speeding ticket.
Allen Boisjoli, 45, of Vegreville is charged with intimidation of a justice system participant.
Boisjoli is accused of attempting to place a $225,000 lien on a police officer’s personal property after the police officer gave him a speeding ticket. While others have been charged with intimidation before, Edmonton Police believe it’s the first time where an incident has involved simply filing paperwork.
Det. Rae Gerrard said the documents Freemen present have no legal force, but are meant to make people in the system want to drop the case. Freemen or Sovereign citizens reject the notion that current laws have any force over them.
“The Freemen, and Mr. Boisjoli in particular in this case, they use a plethora of documents that mean absolutely nothing. They’re just cutting and pasting from all over the internet,” he said.
The investigation took eight months to complete, but Gerrard said it was worth pursuing.
“When we look at people who are attempting to subvert our entire criminal justice system for their own ends, than we have to see that as very serious,” he said.
…Thing is, if a justice system is broken–which is increasingly becoming apparent–defying that system is a worthwhile goal. But, as I’ve come to learn, you really have to set your rhetorical sights for the leaders and institutions, not the little guys. Shooting individual cops does fuck all for you except get you into deeper shit, you gotta aim higher–and ideally not with actual guns or weapons, because all that does is piss everyone off.
I don’t like the Freemen. They’re hypocritical, and also fucking idiots if they don’t understand that some laws are good. Like speed limits. Those are kinda important. It is true that laws can be bad, as can systems that maintain them, but that doesn’t excuse ripping 200 km/h through a school zone. Unfortunately that means you have to do the smart thing and assess given laws for their merit, which takes more effort than saying “I DON’T WANNA PAY TAXES!!” and trying to game the system with made up documents to antagonize a cop who fined you for doing a stupid fucking thing.
But that suspicion of authority… we share that, at least. Little else, apparently, like a shred of reason.
-Shiv
This.
Taxes are not some horrible government tyranny in and on themselves.
Taxes can be too high or too low, fair or unfair They can do a whole bunch of things like encouraging and discouraging certain behaviours. They can be spent wisely or foolishly. They cannot be abandoned.
Right now taxcodes are unfairly giving advantages to the rich and disadvantages to the poor. We need to change that.
Not just Freemen, though. All neo-libertarian/conservative fuckers I’ve ever met. They see the government as a self service institution with no check out where they pay. That’s for other people like you and me. Freemen just add an additional layer of irony to this.
Taxes are the price for civilisation. For welfare, education, health and society.
For having a nation at all really rather than just savagery and lone wolves fighting and killing for only selfish reasons?
Aren’t they?
(Also didn’t Rabbi Jesus hang around with tax collectors FWIW to some?)
Another point: it’s true that Thoreau practically single-handedly invented civil disobedience by protesting taxes that he thought were being spent on an unjust war and supporting slavery. But he did so by deliberately going to jail, in hopes that his incarceration would inspire others to change the laws he thought were unjust.
If you want to protest, you’ve got to be willing to do the time and build support, possibly from inside a jail cell or in court. Otherwise, you aren’t a civil protester — you’re just another criminal.
PS. When it comes to taxation, I kinda prefer the model used by the North-eastern European peninsular states e.g. Sweden, Denmark, Norway at least as I understand them – high taxes but also a really solid, strong safety net looking after people and the government providing lotsa services.
(& I say this as an Aussie.)
Yes and no. I think that going after so-called leaders in the police is a mistake. There is no amount of additional training, changes in culture, etc., that will fix our murder-by-police problem. Changing leadership will not fix this problem. The only thing that will fix our murder-by-police problem is to put the individual police who murder into jail. Perhaps a change in leadership can enact that change, but the change we need is a return of a personal responsibility and accountability, in order for the return of a proper deterrence effect. Power corrupts, and positions of power like being a cop attracts corrupt people. By far the only relevant reason why cops will choose to not abuse their power is if they know that their ass is personally on the line if they do so, e.g. deterrence effect.
Which the institutions that could potentially imprison murderous cops are notoriously reluctant to do. That suggests the changes need to be institutional at minimum.
Responding:
Agreed. I did say “yes and no”. Yes in the sense that there needs to be a change to the institution and/or the rules of the institution. No in the sense that the institution change must include placing personal responsibility on the person who commits the murder. Placing some minor accountability on the boss, i.e. firing the boss, won’t do much of anything, as long as the employees go without punishment. IMO, we need criminal culpability for murder, and nothing less, on the low level cops.