SovereignLife Freedom Blog

Hardly a week goes by without my receiving an email from someone asking my advice or opinion on the steps required to achieve “sovereignty”. Such enquiries usually emanate from the USA, where there is a “sovereignty” movement.

However, there is a distinct difference between the basic tenets of the sovereignty movement and the concept of being a sovereign individual – although I can understand the confusion due to the use of the word “sovereign”.

There is a line of thought which believes a person can “opt out” of being a subject to the laws of a nation and declare sovereignty. This is to be achieved by following certain protocols and removing oneself from legal jurisdiction of the state.

I’m no expert in this theory and strategy, other than noting it relies on interpretation of various arcane laws or constitutional principles – whether you are a “person” or not, whether your name is printed in CAPITALS or not etc., and other difficult-to-get-your-head-around concepts and legal mazes.

I want to say, for the record, that I’m not convinced of the practicality of such a strategy – because, in the end, it relies on the state conceding such a position or declaration and literally leaving you alone.

In my experience states don’t “leave you alone”, particularly if you stand up and challenge them in some way. Like Irwin Schiff (father of Peter Schiff), who spent years in jail as a tax protester/evader. I’m certain he had good “legal” arguments as to why he was not required to pay income tax, but at the end of the day the government had the guns and put him away.

The obvious reason for the failure of his strategy was that he was challenging the status quo – demanding that he not pay tax, in a situation where the government must have his money in order to survive.

If there was any practical benefit in declaring oneself outside the tax system, then millions would do it, not just a few dedicated souls. But, just ask yourself the question - “Would any state tolerate a situation where thousands upon thousands (or even millions) of its own citizens used the “law” to remove themselves from the tax system?”

Of course not! They would simply change to law so there are no loopholes. The basic principle to understand when it comes to the government is that it enjoys the monopoly of “legal” force, and can do what it wants with you – if it so desires.

To me, it is impossible to assert any sovereignty over oneself while still in “prison”. And by that I mean you cannot avoid the state while remaining “in” the state. The very concept of sovereignty, when applied to living in a place where such sovereignty doesn’t exist, is bound to get you into trouble in the end.

On the other hand, I use the term “Sovereign Individual” as it was originally used in the book by the same name – “The Sovereign Individual”, by James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg. And this strategy involves removing yourself from the jurisdiction that is “enslaving” you. In other words, there is only one foolproof way of not paying tax to your government, and that is to cease being a resident for taxpaying purposes. And this involves leaving the country (or in the case of Americans, leaving the country and giving up citizenship).

The basic idea of being a Sovereign Individual involves using what has been termed the 3, 5 or 6 flag strategy – where you make use of different jurisdictions to achieve your desired ends. You consider the whole world your “home” and set yourself up as an international citizen by way of using these “flags” to your own advantage.