"Corporate" US

[GMac]

Hey, folks, I'm new; a long-time watcher of militias & such (since 1993) and have been fascinated by the "patriot"/SC argle bargle collected here, though I don't understand a lot of the deep legal concepts. I do have a couple questions, though -

1) I keep seeing the assertion that the US is some kind of "corporation" that has declared bankruptcy and willed all citizens as collateral yadda yadda, therefore CAPITAL LETTERS and such. What's the deal? Has anyone specified what this corporation supposedly does, other than oppress? Is it just "corporations = BAD"?

2) When did this supposedly happen? I've seen at least 3 dates asserted for the incorporation: 1791, 1861 and 1891. Is there any "consensus" on this, or is it one of those things that just gets pulled out of fundaments randomly by different sovcit-types?

[Pottapaug1938]

The short answer is that this is all hogwash, and not worth the trouble to refute it (which we have already done, many times, in previous threads here).

[arayder]

GMac, if you are really into this you can find expressions of the theories at various sovcit websites which explain the theories (lame though they are) better than anyone can repeat here.

I agree that the theories have been refuted here and at countless other forums.

[AndyK]

Two-part answer.

The "USA is bankrupt" claim relates to a speech delivered (actually read into the record) by a Congressional Representative trying to make a point. It has absolutely no more significance than the annual pardoning of a turkey or two.

The "Corporate USA" usually relates to the establishment of a municipal corporation to govern the District of Columbia. This then gets twisted into ..... Also, some no-life sovereignorami wasted huge amounts of time and discovered that there exists a "USA Corporation" based in Delaware (an office for handling the Delaware affairs of out-of-state incorporators) which thereby proves that the USA is a corporation. Also, references to various legitimate federal corporations regularly get skewed into ....

[Pottapaug1938]

I might add that a lot of things get placed into the Congressional Record by Senators or Congressmen which have little or no basis in fact, but which are there because someone wants it there.

[arayder]

I think it's interesting to note that the corporate America theory doesn't explain states entering the union, after the supposed incorporation dates, in accordence with Article 4, via a process that doesn't match the corporate theory.

[GMac]

I think it's interesting to note that the corporate America theory doesn't explain states entering the union, after the supposed incorporation dates, in accordance with Article 4, via a process that doesn't match the corporate theory.

Lack of internal consistency in sovcit theories?

I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked.

BTW, I was trying to stay out of the fever swamp as far as my questions went; I know I could "go to the source" but I wanted to see if there was anywhere sane addressing the issue. I hang around Rational Wiki as well, but their articles on freemen and sovruns seem to lack a lot of detail.

[arayder]

The lack of detail, is IMHO, in part due to the fact that sovcit gurus and wannabe gurus (ones just seeking the truth) are constantly adding new spin to old tired theories as they get debunked or turned back in the courts.

So keeping up with new woo is chore.

[GMac]

sovcit gurus and wannabe gurus (ones just seeking the truth) are constantly adding new spin to old tired theories as they get debunked or turned back in the courts.

So it's tweak the colors you need to sign things in and the magic words you need to say until the process actually works? Sounds like science - except a kind of stupid, pointless one that'll never produce results.

[Patriotdiscussions]

sovcit gurus and wannabe gurus (ones just seeking the truth) are constantly adding new spin to old tired theories as they get debunked or turned back in the courts.

So it's tweak the colors you need to sign things in and the magic words you need to say until the process actually works? Sounds like science - except a kind of stupid, pointless one that'll never produce results.

Exactly, so just keep on living the dream.

[GMac]

So it's tweak the colors you need to sign things in and the magic words you need to say until the process actually works? Sounds like science - except a kind of stupid, pointless one that'll never produce results.

Exactly, so just keep on living the dream.

Reading comprehension, how does it fricking work?

[JamesVincent]

So it's tweak the colors you need to sign things in and the magic words you need to say until the process actually works? Sounds like science - except a kind of stupid, pointless one that'll never produce results.

Exactly, so just keep on living the dream.

Reading comprehension, how does it fricking work?

He would be the last one to ask that question of.

[arayder]

So it's tweak the colors you need to sign things in and the magic words you need to say until the process actually works? Sounds like science - except a kind of stupid, pointless one that'll never produce results.

Exactly, so just keep on living the dream.

Reading comprehension, how does it fricking work?

The sovcit drill is to do enough "the government ain't got no authority over me" jaw jacking to make it look like they walk the walk.

If a sovcit actually does his/her stuff in court he/she can depend on the fact that most courts aren't going to jail them for parking tickets. Tax cases usually take years to be resolved.

This means most sovcits can pretend they ruled in court as long as they walk out of the court room. The Canadian version of the sovcit (the freeman on the land) tends to mouth off a good bit more in court and for that reason often gets a night or two in jail for his trouble before the trial even starts.

There have been a few U.S. cases recently of real nasty criminals unsuccessfully using sovcit arguments in court after being busted for beating their kids or killing somebody.

[littleFred]

Some SovCits claim the entire USA belongs to the UK. Or to just the city of London. If true, that would render moot any questions over whether the USA is a corporation.

But those are old memes. A more current one is that names are evil. Cast off your name and be free! I've just heard a guy say that the word "name" should be pronounced "en-em-ee". "Enemy", geddit? No, I didn't either.

[LPC]

1) I keep seeing the assertion that the US is some kind of "corporation" that has declared bankruptcy and willed all citizens as collateral yadda yadda, therefore CAPITAL LETTERS and such. What's the deal? Has anyone specified what this corporation supposedly does, other than oppress? Is it just "corporations = BAD"?

My judgment is that it's a way of demeaning something you don't like, or what you want to feel superior to. Like referring to women as "girls" and African-Americans as "boys."

What are usually referred to as "corporations" are private enterprises with limited powers. Like the local dry cleaners. Much smaller and more feeble than governments.

Truth be told, governments have a lot of the attributes of corporations. They are not persons in the usual sense of the word, but they have the power to sue and be sued, enter into contracts, own property, and otherwise act like legal "persons." But governments have powers that ordinary business corporations will never have, such as the power to enact laws and punish the offenders of those law.

Which is why sovcits want to think of governments as corporations, because they want to undermine and de-legitimize the power of governments to punish the violations of laws.

2) When did this supposedly happen? I've seen at least 3 dates asserted for the incorporation: 1791, 1861 and 1891. Is there any "consensus" on this, or is it one of those things that just gets pulled out of fundaments randomly by different sovcit-types?

The date that the federal government was de-legitimized (because that's the point of the corporation/bankruptcy narrative) very much depends on what flavor of mythology you favor.

[notorial dissent]

I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that they do not understand what a corporation is, or that there are in fact several flavors of corporation, not all created alike. Anymore than they comprehend that there is any validity to corporations names having to be in all caps, when in fact they do not, and never did. To some ignorance is bliss, to others it is a life style. In any event, it is all sovcit nonsense, of which there is so very much.

[Patriotdiscussions]

What's a juristic person?

[LPC]

What's a juristic person?

You mean, like, one of the characters from the movie about the dinosaurs?

[arayder]

Jeff Goldbloom, wasn't it?

[arayder]

Truth be told, governments have a lot of the attributes of corporations. They are not persons in the usual sense of the word, but they have the power to sue and be sued, enter into contracts, own property, and otherwise act like legal "persons." But governments have powers that ordinary business corporations will never have, such as the power to enact laws and punish the offenders of those law.

Which is why sovcits want to think of governments as corporations, because they want to undermine and de-legitimize the power of governments to punish the violations of laws.

Well said.

Freemen and sovcits want to believe they can escape the certainty of the law by ending their supposed contractual relationship with the government the same way they fire the bug man.

In the end they are wrong in their assumption that all relationships are contractual.