Guest Column: Free Doreen Hendrickson… and the American 300 Million!

Posted on May 9, 2016 by Brian Wright

Spread World Net Daily’s latest piece on judicial tyranny imposed on innocent mom
by Shane Trejo, Pete Hendrickson, et al

“In a case with major implications for free speech and due process, an appeal by Doreen Hendrickson, a mother jailed last year on “contempt of court” charges for refusing a federal court order to perjure herself, was officially denied.

“The court claimed that it did not have to rule on the illegality or unconstitutionality of the court order that was supposedly violated, or on whether it was appropriate for the trial court to instruct the jury not to consider the legality of the demands.

“If the ruling is allowed to stand, observers and legal experts warned of potentially devastating consequences to the rule of law, due process of law, judicial integrity, freedom of speech, and all of Americans’ constitutionally protected rights.

“Basically, the government can now force anyone to say anything, under oath, critics of the ruling observed. The attorney representing Hendrickson, Mark Cedrone, even compared the government’s efforts to force his client to say what the government wants to Islamic Shariah law demanding the affirmation of Allah.” Continue reading →

Guest Column: The Canton Movement

Posted on March 4, 2013 by Brian Wright

Whenever a government becomes destructive…
by Dwight Johnson

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. — from the Declaration of Independence

The following column is a compilation from Dwight Johnson’s Website, The Canton Movement (http://www.cantonmovement.com). I caught up with Dwight roughly a year and a half ago, finding his development of the idea of panarchy—freedom of choice in government—to be a simple and practical method for moving away from coercive government with minimal blood, sweat, and tears.

If done right, implementation can result in going to bed one night under our gangster government’s thumb and waking up the next morning a free person, with others, protected from the gangsters by a common, mutual defense agreement of the honest. IMHO panarchy and the cantonization process are the final piece of the puzzle for those who deny consent to gangster compulsory government—which we discussed in the guest column, Imagine There’s No Congress, by Jim Babka last week.

The Political Mess

Politicians are people who make friends for themselves with other people’s money. With money from taxpayers. With your money.

We are supposed to have governments of representational democracy. The truth is that politicians get themselves elected in a very tightly-controlled system that limits the viable parties to two. The electoral process ensures that someone will get elected to office, even if the electorate is not particularly happy with either candidate, increasingly voting for the lesser of two evils, or just not voting at all out of frustration. Continue reading →

Guest Column: Imagine There’s No Congress

Posted on February 25, 2013 by Brian Wright

Rolling down the road on the deconsent bandwagon
by Jim Babka

You don’t need government when you have one another.
— Russell Means

I regard this column by Jim, and the two that preceded it ([1] and [2]), as a significant contribution to best strategy for countering—at the grass roots level—the Leviathan State. Essentially we counter via denial of consent (DOC) through insistence on the Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP) as he and others, chiefly the Libertarian Enterprise and Rational Review Program, have named it… or the Sacred Nonaggression Principle (SNaP), as I have named it. Jim and I have exchanged thoughts on DOC. My only significant complementary idea is to finesse the transition to the New Paradigm of nonaggression by cultivating practical ‘freedom of choice’ of government, otherwise known as panarchy. After all, government isn’t the problem per se, rather compulsive, coercive government. As people opt out of the current system by choosing their own government-service providers (or none)—under umbrella of a yet-to-be-written Universal Nonaggression Protocol—our criminal state dies a quick, sure death with minimal collateral damage. — Brian Wright, ed, 2/25/2013 Continue reading →