How To Make Your Court Case Irrelevant - Introducing Steemin' Marc Stevens' 'No State Project'.
I have known about @marcstevens for longer than I can recall - For years he has been working hard at exposing the fraudulent nature of national judicial systems and the alleged authority that they rely on. Not only does he expose the scam, but he acts on the theory in courts too - Big-up to Marc!
Unable to prove jurisdiction
A curious fact emerges when we study the alleged constitutions of alleged nation states and their court systems - they typically base their 'power' on an assumption that they actually have that power! As it turns out, when we correctly challenge and expose their mythical claim to power - it vanishes and they are left exposed and may then be triggered into fight or flight modes!
Marc Stevens describes himself on Steemit as a Vegan Anarchist - so that immediately lets me know where his heart is at - namely 'respect for free will'. Despite the intimidating form presented by our monstrous court systems, their torture cages and profit based 'justice' systems - Marc consistently uses his knowledge of their weak-points to have all manner of cases dismissed in courts around the world!
In short, if the court cannot prove that it has the jurisdiction to hear the court case, then it cannot proceed. This effectively means that if the court cannot be proven to have authority to act in control of the 'defendant' in some way, then they cannot do so and all we need to typically do is challenge the assumption that an individual is 'subject' to the decisions of a court just because he/she resides in the region that is alleged to be covered by that court.
Strawman Legal Fictions and Bogus Constitutions
There are numerous other interesting side topics with regards the legality of the courts themselves, such as how our 'legal names' are actually 'legal fictions' in legal terminology, which means that when we use the name 'Mr J. Smith' we are agreeing that we ARE the legal fiction (manufactured legal entity) and not a living human being. This has profound implications in a court room, since we are effectively renouncing common law (in a common law jurisdiction) and accepting statute law. This in itself is something that most of us have no idea about.. Yet Marc's message is even more potent still. While it has been seen on film that 'Judges' have often literally run out of court rooms once these details have been exposed (inferring their own criminality and malicious intent by sitting as a 'judge'), Marc's approach completely nullifies the entire process and to date he has had quite a lot of success!
In his own words
Marc is actually a user of Steemit, so I suggest following him here to check out his latest info and updates. He also has a website at MarcStevens.net.
Here's a few of his videos that I have saved over the years:
Got Comments?
Does this help you relax about our imbalanced situation on Earth? Let us know in the comments below. Thanks.
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Steemit T-shirts, Hoodies and Many Other Steemit Inspired Products are On Sale Now
Buy your "Steemit, Dreamit, Memeit, Teamit" T-Shirts, Gifts & Other Clothing Here.
Great Share! Thanks for the introduction to Marc!
I've been asking a lot of questions about 'Social Contracts' and 'Trust'....'Jurisdiction'.....'Authority'......'Status'......'Capacity'....'Standing'
Will explore the vids - thanks again. will likely write a post and will reference your post here too. This is a topic that is indeed worth pushing. It is quite fascinating how much there is to the legal system...that mostly is not understand by the participants here. Pretty easy to have passively consented when you didn't know what you were doing...
Oh the ironies run deep :)
Thanks for Playing with @worldclassplayer
You are welcome! Thanks for your comment and support. :)
Thanks @ura-soul! You can't hear this things enough! Always learning :)
You are welcome! Every moment is an opportunity for enlightenment :)
Best when you least expect it ;)
Hey @ura-soul , would love to offer to come onto my podcast sometime.
It is about people doing remarkable things, whether entrepreneurs or not.
Where we talk about what you are doing, believe in and what difference you are making in the world.
It is part youtube channel where the mission is to help 1,000,000 entrepreneurs become remarkable, and the podcast acts as a way to share stories and connect with people.
Here is the playlist of the existing episodes: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5CpCNPna6p95oJfKPew0N3ZT0k-khdgg
It is audio only over skype. Would love you to come on the show and talk about yourself. Does this sound of interest to you?
I see, ok - I am happy to do that, yes - thanks for the offer. You can email me at [email protected] to arrange the details. :)
Email sent.
Interesting thoughts. Authoritarians dissolve in the face of language and the power of spirit. Maybe we can build on this in the crypto world.
As I understand, eos, the next generation system following on from Steemit is intended to 'make government irrelevant'! So we shall see how that plays out!
Thanks for posting, I appreciate it.
You are welcome! It seems Steemit is a bit heavy on the capitalism and light on the anarcho ;)
Thanks for being you!
@Ura-Soul... Thank You for the Heads-Up on Marc Stevens !!
Have looked into these concepts of Jurisdiction but alas am not a lawyer BUT Your Post helps considerably in de-mystifying the obscure ways that our court system works illegally...
Will definitely look into Marc's work... Just Followed @MarcStevens...
Thanks Again... Cheers !!
You are welcome, I have a lot of material on these subjects - but Marc's approach is probably the easiest to understand.
Just because you don't like that the State enforces the laws created by society doesn't mean society is illegal. Please read this before giving away your hard earned money to this snake oil salesman.
https://steemit.com/anarchy/@adconner/jurisdiction-where-does-it-come-from
I have never ever heard the term 'right of conquest' in all my explorations of this subject. I suspect that most humans will consider that no such right exists as it is akin to 'the right to murder and overpower' - which obviously doesn't exist.
You appear to be saying that the alleged 'right to conquest' is some kind of natural right - is that your claim here?
As far as giving money to anyone, as far as I am aware - no-one has asked for money.
What is your understanding of the reality that numerous court cases have been thrown out based on marc's shared ideas regarding jurisdiction?
My take on the court cases that Marc Stevens and his followers have won are wins based one of the following. A. An inexperienced prosecutor who doesn't know from where his jurisdiction comes from (not from the consent of the governed) but by the original "Conquest" by the American Colonialists over the British Army in America and The Indian and Mexican territories. 2. Lazy People who don't want to spend the time arguing with radical partially or uneducated people over petty crimes. 3. Other loopholes in the law that actually exhonerated the defendant but not expressed at dismissal 4. Jury Nulification although Im not personally aware of number 4 as to have actually happened to Marc or any of his followers.
There is no such thing as Voluntarism. The State rules with impunity and no such idea existed prior to the U.S. coming into existence, that the consent of the governed Is necessary to govern although the will of the People is a hard thing to ignore when staring down a million pitchforks.
The Legitimacy of the US government does not rest in our consent but in its ability to defend itself, the fealty of its soldiers to the fiction of the rule of law rather than a Monarch and its recognition of and by other nations who do business with it as a sovereign entity. Otherwise the Native Americans have the legitimacy of government as the original occupiers. But the world's other recognized sovereigns - recognize the US Republic as the Legitimate Sovereign Jurisdiction over the lands it claims.
Research "Conquest" in Black's Law and International Law.
They all ask for donations. Time and Money. Its snake oil cures for legal woes😁. There is a guy on here named Danilo asking for $150 per hour to train them on Vokubtaryism.
I do not recall hearing Marc asking for money - but even if he did, that is his business in a world that attempts to enforce financial control on everyone. I can guarantee he would be asking for a tiny fraction of the cost of a mainstream member of the 'law society'.
Small amounts from a lot of dupes adds up. There's a sucker born every minute and Marc is trying to talk to them all.
Unfortunately there are a lot of real lawyers who don't understand history any better than he does and I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt because if he knows the truth and peddles this idea of living under an illegitimate regime based on lack of consent - then that would be hypocrisy and I would not want to accuse anyone of that.
War and Rebellion become legitimate when you win territory. Ask Bashar Al Assad about losing parts of Syria to Kurd rebels; made legitimate by the US, and Saudi Arabia.
No form of control of the will of others is legitimate.
What is your definition of legitimate? Just because you don't like it doesn't make it illegitimate.
There is no such thing as Voluntarism. The State rules with impunity and no such idea existed prior to the U.S. coming into existence, that the consent of the governed Is necessary to govern although the will of the People is a hard thing to ignore when staring down a million pitchforks.
The Legitimacy of the US government does not rest in our consent but in its ability to defend itself, the fealty of its soldiers to the fiction of the rule of law rather than a Monarch and its recognition of and by other nations who do business with it as a sovereign entity. Otherwise the Native Americans have the legitimacy of government as the original occupiers. But the world's other recognized sovereigns - recognize the US Republic as the Legitimate Sovereign Jurisdiction over the lands it claims.
Research "Conquest" in Black's Law and International Law.
https://steemit.com/philosophy/@adconner/hell-is-paved-by-good-intentions
The definition of legitimate is: Conforming to the Law or to Rules.
Therefore Anarchy is "illegitimate" as defined by the "Dictionary". Lol. Have a good day.
legitimacy does not require any form of logical rules to be adhered to from a specific source. anarchy does not preclude the individual from making his/her own rules for his/her own life and in his/her own way. therefore it can be said that since it is imbalanced and against natural law for one being to control another, the only legitimacy can come from self governance and the decisions which uphold that.
you need to consider the bigger picture here.
Talk to Webster.
The Right of Conquest is the original Natural Law.
So the guy whose moral code is might makes right is calling me a snake oil salesman? Wow, call into a live broadcast http://marcstevens.net. And nice strawman, I don't claim society doesn't exist, citizens and states don't.
I didn't say might has right. "Conquest" is how our title to our property Is made legitimate and defended against the claims of others including against those whose lands were Taken and sold off to me and you. It's neither right nor wrong.
But if you have to live in a world of right and wrong, you're wrong for attempting to convince people their government is illegitimate because they didn't personally choose it.
I don't have the oratory talents that you have. So not going to subject myself to any verbal abuse. But make no mistake, our government doesn't rely on our individual consent but it does do so collectively. Or was supposed to. I'm not claiming our government is perfect and certain things need to be put back into balance again, namely the resident : representative Ratio needs to be increased back to 1:30,000 using modern technology, it can happen again.
https://steemit.com/anarchy/@adconner/jurisdiction-where-does-it-come-from
I verbally abuse people on my radio show? You have any proof of that? I have been accused of abusing my audience by not cutting calls soon enough, but not abusing my callers.
That's Wasn't an accusation of past abuse. But I see that you like to ask questions. I have a two Part question for you.
I don't think Marc should answer that question because he doesn't want you firing giant pink unicorns at his house and killing him. Obviously, I'm not saying you've done it before ;)
I wasn't asking for his address. And I don't think he's too worried about pink unicorns even if they are giants but you've prolly got one chained in your basement extracting balance juice for your nutrimedicals biz. Hahahahaha.
Moral Code is a function of the Law. Period. And is just as much of a fiction as the law itself.
But that doesn't mean either one are illegitimate.
The Legitimacy of the US government does not rest in our consent but in its ability to defend itself, the fealty of its soldiers to the fiction of the rule of law rather than a Monarch and its recognition of and by other nations who do business with it as a sovereign entity. Otherwise the Native Americans have the legitimacy of government as the original occupiers. But the world's other recognized sovereigns - recognize the US Republic as the Legitimate Sovereign Jurisdiction over the lands it claims.
Research "Conquest" in Black's Law and International Law.
..... if I accused you of saying society doesn't exist then I stand corrected. The State And its Citizens exist because of the fealty professed by its soldiers. For without it we have no legitimate title to our property and Law is the ficticious moral code we live by.
Interesting post
please check my post too if you have some free time
thanks
great post.