Robert Menard
 
 Do not let those who are not members of the government make claims 
which disempower you, and somehow magically empower the government.  It 
is ignorant fear mongering, and is simply false information being 
spread.
 
 It began with your parents giving you YOUR name.  
Before it ever existed on any piece of paper, it was given to you.  It 
existed then, and you were the first owner, holder, and user. 
 
 The act of registration does not ''give it' (hand over) to the Crown.  
It is true the act of registration establishes an association, which the
 identifier points to.   It is used as an identifier and establishes 
that there exists a person with certain rights and duties.  This does 
not mean that its use will always identify that same person.  An ‘arrow 
sign’ does not create a destination.  It can point to it, if it already 
exists, but it does not create one if it doesn’t.  A sign saying ‘Carson
 City 20 Miles’ planted in the middle of nowhere will not cause a city 
to magically pop up 20 miles distant.  The city must exist first, then 
you can point to it. 
 
 The government has never claimed they own
 our names, and when asked will deny it.  Why disempower yourself by 
claiming that what is clearly YOURS, belongs to someone else, when they 
have never made that claim?  Nanny CAN’T FLY, and your name is not 
somehow their magical property.
 
 Both the name and the human named, pre-existed the person created by registration.
 
 When you were a child your name was one thing.  Your parents used it, 
your schools and friends used it.  The government used it.  Now that you
 are an adult, those people who once had authority over you, can still 
use your name, but they can’t claim that because you are using the same 
name, they have the same level of authority over you.  It is ludicrous 
to claim otherwise.  Of course, if you went back to school as a student,
 AND MAINTAINED YOUR ASSOCIATIONS, they would have that same level of 
authority.  The name itself does not create the association.
 
 
Saying “I am not that name!” to avoid duties and responsibilities when 
there is still an association, is very childish.  One can keep their 
name, and change their associations, thus their duties and obligations. 
 
 My name is Robert Arthur Menard.  That is what my name was when I was a
 child of the Province.  It is what my name is now that I am a 
Freeman-on-the-Land. Using my name does not automatically make me one or
 the other.  Although others have the same name as I do, I own mine, and
 no government agent or operator has ever tried to claim any ownership 
over it.  I have heard others who claim the government owns our names, 
if they were used for registration, but they have never brought any 
proof.  People in the government have clearly rejected the concept that 
they own everyone’s names, and do not act as owners of them.  But still 
people ignorantly spread this concept.
 
 The confusion arises 
because of a basic logical fallacy.  The name is used to identify 
someone, and is one thing, and is used to point to their status or 
associations.  Their person.  Which is another thing. Which in most 
cases identifies a child of the Province.  A ward.   Use of the name 
does not establish the association, nor does denying the name break it 
if it already exists.  Denying the name when there is still an 
association is very childish.  It is akin to closing one’s eyes and 
saying “You can’t see me.”.  The goal is to change our associations so 
that the name (the exact same name) no longer points to a bonded child 
of the Province, but to a Freeman.  You do not accomplish that by 
abandoning the very thing you were given as an infant by your parents to
 facilitate that.  Just because a name is needed to establish an 
association, does not mean use of that name establishes one.
 
 If
 I wanted to disempower the people of the Freedom movement, I would 
share ideas that are untrue but are seemingly justified on the surface, 
and cause them to abandon those things which could actually empower 
them. I would try to get them to abandon their names and persons, as 
they would then be abandoning their wealth others are holding in trust. 
 I would get them to believe the name itself creates the person and 
evidences an association, instead of just being an identifier thereof.  I
 would present to them a wholly useless tactic, like denying being ‘the 
name’, which does not change their status as a child or ward, merely 
identifies them as a petulant, ignorant and belligerent one.  I would 
not get them looking at the associations created, and how to change 
those, while keeping their name.  No I would ask they abandon that 
first.  Many would fail to distinguish between the person (the rights 
and duties created by association) and the name (the identifier of the 
person created with the association) and will try unsuccessfully to 
avoid the latter by abandoning the former.  They will be like travellers
 on a road, who think they can avoid a distant city by simply taking 
down the sign which points to it. 
 
 If you believe that the 
government owns your name, and you have NO PROOF that the government has
 ever made that claim; if you believe you can avoid duties and 
obligations established by associations merely by abandoning the name 
but not changing your associations and status as a child of the 
province; if you do not distinguish between a person and its name, or a 
thing and its name; then you are not a force of empowerment for the 
people.   The ideas you share are harmful, false and wrong.
 
 
When you were registered as an infant the government put you in diapers.
  Good thing for an infant, but not needed as an adult.  You can remove 
them, but you need to learn to use the toilet and wipe your arse.  You 
need to be able to prove you can do that, and Magical Nanny will stop 
trying to nanny you. However removing your diaper all by yourself, 
(abandoning your name and rejecting the person) without learning to use 
the toilet and wipe your arse, (establish a new person with greater 
rights and duties as a Free adult) means you will still be seen as a 
child, and Nanny can and will put you back in a diaper, lest you start 
smearing your faeces all over the common walls.  
 
 There are 
some absolutely ludicrous arguments floating around, the idea of 
government owning our names being near the top of the list.  It would be
 so easy to prove.  Simply make a public claim that you own your name, 
and see if ANYONE disputes it, and if they don’t, establish sole 
ownership as a function of law. You will find no one in the government 
will dispute that claim. They will not seek to claim ownership, for the 
simple reason that they do not own it, and they do not need to own it, 
nor have you accept it, in order to hold you accountable to the person 
identified by it. 
 
 Deny the name all you want.  The association
 which identifies you as a child of the province will still be in 
existence, and your tactic identifies you as someone worthy of being 
treated as a child.  You will be shooting yourself in your own foot. 
 
 Stop making claims that disempower yourself.  If the people in the 
government want to claim they own your name, LET THEM DO IT!  Do not do 
it for them like it is a fait accompli.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

 
No comments:
Post a Comment