Petition to be free of government

[yellowdingo]

Petition to withhold consent to be governed

[Icyshadow]

Shame these petitions don't get any support. Would be interesting to see the end results of them passing.

[Numerian]

Isn't this something like the Freemen?

[Icyshadow]

Who or what is the Freemen?

[AnnoyingOrange]

What does that even mean in practice ?

[Icyshadow]

Probably a permit to be free of authority, in both a good and a bad context.

As an example of the bad, no support from social networks. On the good, no need to pay taxes.

[AnnoyingOrange]

That seems unrealistic, at best the scale at which we are governed could be dialed back some, but most governing is simply born out of a necessity for efficiency, you get to cast a vote and that's it. You do not get a vote every time you disagree with any one singular decision.

The alternative you suggest is anarchy, I do not see that turn out well.

EDIT: simply living in a country gives you access to most of the benefits, while some benefits could be withdrawn it would be fair to expect you to do your part still to maintain the country. Other than that, elections happen.. every 4 years or so.

[Numerian]

Icyshadow wrote:

Who or what is the Freemen?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

[yellowdingo]

Icyshadow wrote:

Who or what is the Freemen?

Here is hoping he isn't referencing DUNE.

[Orthos]

AnnoyingOrange wrote:

That seems unrealistic, at best the scale at which we are governed could be dialed back some, but most governing is simply born out of a necessity for efficiency, you get to cast a vote and that's it. You do not get a vote every time you disagree with any one singular decision.

The alternative you suggest is anarchy, I do not see that turn out well.

EDIT: simply living in a country gives you access to most of the benefits, while some benefits could be withdrawn it would be fair to expect you to do your part still to maintain the country. Other than that, elections happen.. every 4 years or so.

The main problem is that, for anyone who isn't satisfied with the available options, there's nowhere to go. All habitable land (and much uninhabitable, ie Antarctica) is claimed by one or another governmental group. Unlike in the past, when those unsatisfied with the powers-that-be could take the risks of living away from the support of civilization by heading to the freedom - from both governmental authority and governmental support - of and beyond the frontier. The Earth, such as it is, is all called dibs on.

The next option, then, becomes outside Earth... except that only large government-run and -funded organizations like NASA have the resources to get people there (and back, if necessary) and presumably will be eager to stake a claim on anything they find out there. Until individual, privately-owned, and safe space travel vehicles become inexpensive enough for people to own and operate without government funding, the space frontier will be pushed by those organizations, and their ever-expanding hold will grow with each step.

Since that's unfeasible for the foreseeable future outside SciFi, the only remaining option is to try to find a way to withdraw one's support of and dependence on governmental rule here on Earth.

PS: Let's be honest with ourselves. Elections these days are pretty much bunk. There aren't enough different options, or the options aren't different enough, to make any sort of lasting difference. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[thejeff]

Orthos wrote:

AnnoyingOrange wrote:

That seems unrealistic, at best the scale at which we are governed could be dialed back some, but most governing is simply born out of a necessity for efficiency, you get to cast a vote and that's it. You do not get a vote every time you disagree with any one singular decision.

The alternative you suggest is anarchy, I do not see that turn out well.

EDIT: simply living in a country gives you access to most of the benefits, while some benefits could be withdrawn it would be fair to expect you to do your part still to maintain the country. Other than that, elections happen.. every 4 years or so.

The main problem is that, for anyone who isn't satisfied with the available options, there's nowhere to go. All habitable land (and much uninhabitable, ie Antarctica) is claimed by one or another governmental group. Unlike in the past, when those unsatisfied with the powers-that-be could take the risks of living away from the support of civilization by heading to the freedom - from both governmental authority and governmental support - of and beyond the frontier. The Earth, such as it is, is all called dibs on.

And that's essentially been true for most of human history. Not so much prehistory, but for most of that the tribe was the government and getting along without the tribe was not a great idea.

In the last few thousand years where and when has there been habitable land not claimed by one government or another? If it existed, was it within reach of the average person "unsatisfied with the powers-that-be"?
The general answer is the American frontier, but that was a fairly short exception. Simply moving to the America only traded one government for another. Even the frontier territories were usually claimed, you were just farther from the day to day reach. And moving there was only really feasible because of the depopulation of the native population, largely due to disease - and later often enforced by the military.
Where else has there really been a frontier available to move to?

[Bitter Thorn]

yellowdingo wrote:

Petition to withhold consent to be governed

Cool.

You mis spelled "by" I believe.

Why do they want me to create an account?

I think it's a trap!

;)

[Orfamay Quest]

yellowdingo wrote:

Icyshadow wrote:

Who or what is the Freemen?

Here is hoping he isn't referencing DUNE.

He isn't. The "Freemen on the Land" (Wikipedia reference up above) are a followers of a particular legal theory suggesting that, because contract rules are governed by law, all law is governed by contract rules. (This, of course, is a blatant fallacy, but it actually by comparison one of the more sensible beliefs.)

Therefore, unless you explicitly consent to a rule, regulation, or law, it doesn't affect you. Did you ever consent to paying income tax? Well, then you don't have to. Did you ever consent to needing a license to drive? Well, then you don't need to? Did you ever consent to being arrested by the police for non-payment of taxes? Well, then, you can just tell them to go away.

Oddly enough, the last is actually correct. You can tell the police anything you like. You can tell the judge you do not consent to his jurisdiction, and that you do not accept any penalty for contempt of court he wishes to impose. Freedom of speech suggests that you can tell anyone almost anything. But neither the police nor the judge will pay much attention, and the next thing you can do is tell your new cell mate whether or not you consent to be raped....