Why the Sovereign and Patriot Movements are Wrong by Bill Buppert

“Each man must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, which course is patriotic and which isn’t.  You cannot shirk this and be a man.  To decide against your conviction is to be an unqualified and excusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let men label you as they may.” ~Mark Twain

 

“What signify a few lives in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”

– Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Col. William S. Smith (November 13, 1787)

The quote above is employed by members of the Patriot and Sovereign movements all the time to provide the basis for what ails them.  These movements tend to be comprised of a startling number of professionals (dentists, doctors, etc) and, as expected, a fair number of them are in the courts and prison system maintained by our rulers in DC and their satraps in the states.

I rarely, if ever, accept speaking invitations from Patriot or Sovereign groups whether clothed as militia or religionists.  I made that error early in my career but started to notice a disturbing trend of state idolatry, as long as it was their construct.

These are the same folk who divine guidance from touchstones as various as the Illuminati to the New World Order to issues of Constitutional steerage.  On occasion, they think we share common cause and in that they are mistaken.  When I lived in north Idaho, some people in the community became Sovereigns as a convenient means to avoid fulfilling contracts they had entered in to and discovered they could not fulfill such as payments on loans.  They would talk about the evils of the Uniform Commercial Code and the strawman government, debt elimination and “rescinding” your Socialist Security Number.  I find no profit or merit in any of these contentions but they may believe what they wish.  The worst mistake these adherents make is thinking that they can prevail in a judicial system formed, maintained and staffed by the State.  Somehow, their amazing and passionate legalistic formulations are going to convince the robed government employee on the dais and his minions that the powers invested in the State must be reduced or eliminated.  Good luck with that.  As a matter of fact, there is no precedent or antecedent for that historically in America.  The history of America has been one long march toward greater and more expansive collectivism.

We see the influence of Dominionism and its subsets in Christian Reconstructionism animating large swaths of the Patriot movement with some rather nasty offshoots like Christian IdentityGeorge Grant goes so far as to:

“Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ — to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness. But it is dominion we are after. Not just a voice. It is dominion we are after. Not just influence. It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time. It is dominion we are after. World conquest. That’s what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less… Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land — of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ.”

World domination issues indeed and a unique vision of the efficacy of Romans 13.  This is simply a sampling of the religious aspects of this collectivist ideology.  Yes, you heard that right.  I submit that the Patriot Movement, with very few exceptions, is peopled by folks who don’t want to be free of the state but simply wish to transform it into an instrument and hammer of force to compel others to submit to their ideology of how a government should be run.  I have written before of the infantile and asinine notions of some of the usual suspects mewling about returning to the “real Constitution”. There is no such animal.  What was birthed in 1791 is the reason we suffer under Leviathan government today.  That document is a blueprint for big government and the Federalists (they prevailed) were quite candid in the Federalist papers about that very thing.  Hamilton did not even need the king he longed for because his rabid collectivist vision came to pass…in spades.

I get the desire to be a sovereign citizen but the notion of going to the court system to plead for interpretations of ownership the State will never recognize and bait cops with supercilious and fruitless notions of independence is barking up the wrong tree.

This not about building a better government, a more just state and “getting the right people in office”, this is bigger than that that.  Much bigger.

This is about changing the paradigm to embrace one simple nostrum:  the violation of a man’s self-ownership who does not harm others is always wrong.  Period.  Not only is his consent inviolate but the initiation of aggression through force or fraud is always morally wrong.

The Patriot and Sovereignty movements embrace violence at the more extreme fringes of behavior and uniformly engage in what is arguably a greater sin:  the intellectual and spiritual justification of the initiation of force against others to form their version of governance which in the end will be just as bad as the worst variants we have seen on the North American continent.

And by the way, I despise the collectivist apologists and state fetishists at the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).  That particular entity has been the driving force magically transforming citizens who are fed up and subscribers to different ideologies in the same camp as domestic terrorists.  A pathetic and intellectually bankrupt organization whose closest analog in our history is the thugs Woodrow Wilson subsidized during WWI.

Civil disobedience begins most elementally in the conviction that your self-ownership is yours to dispose of as you wish and your greatest weapon is your refusal.

“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”  ~Voltaire

Copyright © 2011 by zerogov.com

Bill Buppert
thirdgun@hotmail.com
8 Comments
  • tx_oldone
    Posted at 10:27h, 08 June Reply

    “Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land — of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ.”
    I don’t believe the Christian politics are looking for the “conquest of the land” as you put it. They are looking for the Conquest of Man. They want man to come to the understanding of how much they need Christ in their hearts. We are Christian Patriots as well. The Constitution was “started” with the belief in God in their minds. Personally I will fight for the Constitution and what it stands for, and I will fight as a Chritian Warrior in mind, with my God’s protection. Freedom for all men is one thing that God is trying to give us if we believe in Him.

    If we desire the land it is for one reason and that is to protect our country.

    The “Laws of Men” are what got this country in trouble in the first place. Now it’s God’s turn. If we follow, in part, the laws of God and His Commandments we will get our country back…..my $.02 Thank you for allowing me the chance to rant.

    • Bill
      Posted at 10:53h, 08 June Reply

      I am not a religionist but find no fault with the Ten Commandments.

  • MoT
    Posted at 11:01h, 08 June Reply

    “…but started to notice a disturbing trend of state idolatry, as long as it was their construct.”

    Yes! I’ve said something similar for years, “People don’t seem to mind being slaves just so long as it’s THEIR slave master who holds the whip”

    You can hear these echoes time and again when someone wails and bemoans the evils of THE OTHER SIDE while playing the political game. A system that, like Las Vegas, is stacked against you. Except I respect Vegas infinitely more because people freely choose to go there. Mordor on the Potomac, on the other hand, desires to enslave all flesh into thinking they have a choice.

  • Bill
    Posted at 15:05h, 08 June Reply

    Kent,

    That is a brilliant video!

  • Chris
    Posted at 15:47h, 08 June Reply

    Of course Bill, it’s moral when THEY do it. Don’t you know that?

    The U.S Constitution Article 1 Section 8

    8.1 The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

    OK, all of you Constitutionalists, if the Government derives it’s JUST powers from the consent of the governed. Where does the power to tax come from? I can’t walk over to my neighbors house and demand he pay me taxes, therefore I couldn’t possibly give that right or power away, it’s impossible! You do realize the “power” to tax is the power to steal, right? Calling something that is immoral by a different name does not magically make it moral. Sorry.

    If you support the Constitution, you support my property being forcefully taken away from me for things you think are “good”. That is the very essence, the very heart of collectivism.

    I will make a bold claim. It does not matter how things like the roads, and defense are paid for. If the government starts off immoral, it will always be immoral. A man’s beliefs do not matter, his Christian moral set means nothing. You cannot put him into an immoral system and expect moral results. If you don’t have the moral right to go and rob your neighbor for what you think would be good, you don’t have the right to vote for someone to do it for you.

    Excuse the rant, Bill, but we’ve had quite a crowd lately. Just trying to get them thinking.

  • Robert
    Posted at 17:01h, 08 June Reply

    It may only be a quote from the movie “Micahel Collins”, but I’ve always found it to be eloquent: “We have a weapon more powerful… than any in the whole arsenal of the British Empire! That weapon… is our refusal! “

  • MoT
    Posted at 19:13h, 08 June Reply

    Chris, I’ve always wondered why is it that if we no longer “consent” to being robbed they continue to come after us? A silly rhetorical question that you and I already know the answer to but it begs to be asked. The hypocrisy is legion! This is why I ask people why they feel they are “free”? Or what freedoms do they or the military pretend to be defending? If you haven’t the freedom to say, “No”, and be left alone for saying as much then you aren’t really free at all. Are you? That’s all a lie.

  • Kent McManigal
    Posted at 07:11h, 09 June Reply

    But you know what, Lee, if it weren’t The State it would be something else. Maybe freelance thugs, maybe finances. There will always be some excuse to not be as free as you can imagine. So you might as well be as free as you can, within your rights (what I can “liberty”), right where you are now.

Post A Comment