When I became aware of Common Law about 3 years ago I was very sceptical - silly to think it would make an adversary to back off! Thanks for these great and helpful articles.
Thanks for the comment - glad you found the articles helpful! There definitely should have been a 'not' in there you're right! Miri's blog is definitely a good one, I like the detail she goes into and I thought she explained the flaws with the 'common law' approach really well
Thanks I really appreciate it! (I have corrected the error as well - I thought I had corrected it before but obviously forgot to save the edit!) Hopefully I will be able to add some more constructive suggestions as 2024 continues...
Why does the majority cling to a legal, fictional identity when they don’t even own the identity? It is very easy to prove we don’t own these legal fictional identities. Common law can only work if the majority realise the difference, that the entire legal system that rules /controls is fraudulent.
Uncomfortable reading for a naïve newbie dissident like myself in both essays. The common “law gurus” have been hard at work in my area and lead many down a useless and costly path. However, a small but solid group has emerged and we are learning quickly. With help from people like yourself Charlie we are starting to win some battles.
Thanks Paul I really appreciate it, sorry for the ridiculously late reply as well! Hopefully more people will start to think critically about these kind of utopian 'solutions' so we can actually start to have a real impact on things eventually!
Hi Charlie, someone just sent me your article in The Light - with which I largely agree - save for the fact that the 'common law' which the people of whom you speak refer to is not common law (largely) but merchant law, contract law and general trickery (you differentiate between the two clearly in your common law cult articles). I would really like to have a conversation with you, and it would be great to put you in touch with William Keyte who speaks on the common law constitution. I look forward to hearing from you if this is of interest. I hope so :)
Hi Lou, apologies for the late reply. I guess I hesitated because I'm not really much of an 'expert' on either type of common law (fake or real lol!). I simply got so frustrated with seeing it being used to steer people down an obviously futile (and possibly costly) path so I decided to explain why I think it is mistaken. But I don't know how much else I have to offer on this topic (although I do intend to learn more)!
This was exactly why Robert Mernard's worldfreemensociety forums died. Never mind Robert's methods which didn't work, and repeatedly stirred up drama and controversy with the powers-to-be. The forums got infiltrated and repeatedly derailed. The infiltrator was even made a moderator. That's where everyone got chased off the forums.
Sounds about right Joe! There are definitely some sketchy characters involved in these kind of circles - although with some its hard to tell whether money, ego or (secret) allegiance is their main motivation!
When I became aware of Common Law about 3 years ago I was very sceptical - silly to think it would make an adversary to back off! Thanks for these great and helpful articles.
I found you via (your comment under) Miri AF's article, which I'd recommend to people, she gives some current impactful examples. https://miri.substack.com/p/the-law-giveth-and-it-taketh-away/comment/41388344
(I wonder should there be a NOT in "2 Maximilien Robespierre - although please note that I am suggesting his approach was the correct one either!" ?.)
Thanks for the comment - glad you found the articles helpful! There definitely should have been a 'not' in there you're right! Miri's blog is definitely a good one, I like the detail she goes into and I thought she explained the flaws with the 'common law' approach really well
I've read again these two articles - priceless, not just re "common law" but applying to community building generally.
(My pedantic side spotted that the 'not' is still missing).
Thanks I really appreciate it! (I have corrected the error as well - I thought I had corrected it before but obviously forgot to save the edit!) Hopefully I will be able to add some more constructive suggestions as 2024 continues...
Why does the majority cling to a legal, fictional identity when they don’t even own the identity? It is very easy to prove we don’t own these legal fictional identities. Common law can only work if the majority realise the difference, that the entire legal system that rules /controls is fraudulent.
Uncomfortable reading for a naïve newbie dissident like myself in both essays. The common “law gurus” have been hard at work in my area and lead many down a useless and costly path. However, a small but solid group has emerged and we are learning quickly. With help from people like yourself Charlie we are starting to win some battles.
Thanks Paul I really appreciate it, sorry for the ridiculously late reply as well! Hopefully more people will start to think critically about these kind of utopian 'solutions' so we can actually start to have a real impact on things eventually!
This, and part 1 - most excellent analysis, thankyou...
Thanks Lou, I really appreciate it!
Hi Charlie, someone just sent me your article in The Light - with which I largely agree - save for the fact that the 'common law' which the people of whom you speak refer to is not common law (largely) but merchant law, contract law and general trickery (you differentiate between the two clearly in your common law cult articles). I would really like to have a conversation with you, and it would be great to put you in touch with William Keyte who speaks on the common law constitution. I look forward to hearing from you if this is of interest. I hope so :)
Hi Lou, apologies for the late reply. I guess I hesitated because I'm not really much of an 'expert' on either type of common law (fake or real lol!). I simply got so frustrated with seeing it being used to steer people down an obviously futile (and possibly costly) path so I decided to explain why I think it is mistaken. But I don't know how much else I have to offer on this topic (although I do intend to learn more)!
This was exactly why Robert Mernard's worldfreemensociety forums died. Never mind Robert's methods which didn't work, and repeatedly stirred up drama and controversy with the powers-to-be. The forums got infiltrated and repeatedly derailed. The infiltrator was even made a moderator. That's where everyone got chased off the forums.
Sounds about right Joe! There are definitely some sketchy characters involved in these kind of circles - although with some its hard to tell whether money, ego or (secret) allegiance is their main motivation!