Guest Column: “I Withdraw Allegiance from da Feds”

New era of citizen involvement: letting go
by Jim Babka and Perry Willis, Consent Chronicles

Yesterday we shared evidence that NSA spying really is being used for domestic purposes. We asked you to contemplate whether the time had come to declare the federal “government” a criminal entity and to withdraw allegiance from it. We asked you to consider discussing this question with your friends.

We told you we would launch a new campaign about this today. (https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/allegiance/) We just wrote Congress using this new campaign. The hardwired message for this campaign reads: Continue reading

Guest Column: The Canton Movement

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

Rolling down the road on the deconsent bandwagon
by Jim Babka

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

Denial of Consent

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

Guest Column: Deny Consent

Obamacare criminal ruling means ‘open rebellion’
by Willis and Babka, Downsize DC (DDC)


Deny ConsentThis direction was a long time coming from Downsize DC, and your humble Coffee Coaster proprietor certainly applauds it. Writing my several DDC email letters to Congress over the past two years, I invariably state something to the effect:

WHAT YOU, MR./MS. LEGISLATOR HAVE DONE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND I HEREBY DIRECT YOU TO TURN YOURSELF IN TO THE SERGEANT-AT-ARMS FOR TREASON.

Actually, not a single issue that DDC has raised is even close to being unclear as to Constitutional legitimacy. Which means Continue reading

Guest Column: Downsize DC vs. NDAA Detention

District court issues injunction against NDAA detention
by Jim Babka


Downsize DCCan you handle another victory? We’ve had a bunch this year. Now here’s one more:

We just won a big verdict in the Chris Hedges case against the legalized kidnapping provisions of the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Remember, Hedges meets with and writes stories about terrorists. Continue reading