"In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields of Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom." ~ Braveheart
Government: Indicted (Book Review #6)
Column by Alex R. Knight III.
Exclusive to STR
It’s now been almost 11 years since the publication and release of Marc Stevens’ first book, Adventures in Legal Land, a volume which has heretofore – along with Marc’s radio show – served as a primary point of reference for Voluntaryists and others seeking to stop bureaucratic attacks by The Man in his own government courts.
But late 2013 just saw Marc issue a much more compendious work, which has a decade’s worth of additional hands-on experience, and literal trial and error, to claim as both an addendum and sequel to the first book.
Government: Indicted is over 550 pages of legal analysis and actual examples of the conduct of bureaucrats, both in one-on-one dialogues and in government courtrooms, along with an in-depth study of their psychology – this latter aspect of which was only touched upon in a very general sense in the preceding title. In addition, the new volume provides an abundance of recommended and now time-tested procedures for dealing with government bureaucrats, in everything from traffic fines to IRS tax cases.
The essential tenets of Marc’s strategy are – like libertarianism itself – not complex. They consist of repeatedly asking a short series of very simple and rational questions:
*What facts and evidence do you rely upon to prove that the Constitution and code apply?
*What, factually, is the (plaintiff) “state”?
*What facts and evidence do you rely upon in your assertion that I’m a “taxpayer” with “taxable income.”
*Do you have witnesses with first-hand personal knowledge of any of this, and if so, what facts and evidence do they rely upon?
The very fact that no bureaucrat can answer these questions in any meaningful way demonstrates a simple but chilling truth to the uninitiated: That the whole of government “law,” and the system that enforces it, is naught but a cynical lie. A game of domination and theft run by the cunning and pure deceit of psychopaths and sociopaths. An evil house of cards, backed up by lethal weaponry and physical violence.
Marc puts this into his own words at the beginning of Part One, page 45, where he begins discussing the difference between mala in se violations of “law” (those in which there is an actual injured party), and those which are mala prohibita: “I’ve had bureaucrats tell me clients are not accused of any wrongdoing, they’re accused of non-compliance. That’s what bureaucrats are after, not protecting people, but control. They want to control behavior and they will kill you to get compliance.”
It’s hard to imagine a more urgent case for the elimination of political governance, but this is a book replete with such conclusions, based on actual examples and irrefutable logic. For a taste of just a very short one, here’s part of page 174:
“I got this from a Ms. Garret with the IRS on 2 July 2012 when I asked about facts a client was a taxpayer with taxable income: ‘I don’t have to discuss the facts I rely on!’
“Oh, but you are allowed to hide them from me? Most adults, and certainly anyone older than seven, will recognize the agent’s statement as a dodge. That’s why they need guns. ‘Under all that paperwork is a gun.’”
And indeed this realization is the essence of understanding the typical government bureaucrat’s totally anti-social lack of concern or empathy for those whom they target for destruction by taxing, fining, harassing, prosecuting, and jailing them. Us, that is. We who are not part of any government clique, and who moreover oppose the existence of such monopolized cadres of aggression. Dens of tyrants who do not continue to exist through voluntary support, but through tribute paid at gunpoint.
To clarify further the practical basis of Marc’s approach towards getting government attacks thrown out of their own courts, we can have a look at page 290:
“So for a prosecutor to argue there is a case or cause against us, they have to go by the facts in evidence. With a traffic complaint, what facts are there to support his argument that there is jurisdiction, that the laws apply, or that he represents a true adversary against us?”
Again, more of the government scam laid bare by the posing of some very plain and foundational questions. Note that Marc isn’t challenging the “laws,” statutes, or regulations on the basis of actual content – he’s calling into question their wholesale applicability to begin with. In other words, as Thoreau of course counseled, dispensing with the leaves and branches, and striking the root.
The full content of Government: Indicted is far too voluminous to do much more than scratch the surface of here. From jury selection processes, to out-of-court measures that can be taken in order to further the fruition of a voluntary society, it's a treasure-trove of valuable information that should intellectually arm any activist or government victim with the tools needed to mount an effective defense. Of course, Marc nowhere claims that these methods are 100% foolproof: Given the inherently criminal and duplicitous nature of government-monopolized courts, there is always ample chance that anyone can be viciously railroaded, charged with contempt, or otherwise decimated by the mendacity of the lunatics running their own asylum. That said, there are a large number of success stories – many of them stunning and encouraging – and at either event . . . it is all the more reason why the existence of the government system and concept must be fought now more voraciously than ever.
I’ll close by saying this isn’t merely a book you should want to have, but one I honestly believe every modern libertarian anarchist needs. I found it a most illuminating eye-opener, even for the well-seasoned.
Enough said here. I can almost taste the collapse of government. Go ahead and get yourself a copy, and dig in.