Attack the Hive, Not the Bees

It seems that every debate among libertarians eventually breaks down to the “purist” versus “pragmatic” approach. The purist approach is a tough line to sell to most people, simply because Americans have been duped into the Republicrat – Demolican political spectrum farce. If you want your constitutionally protected (note I didn’t say granted) rights to be respected by any law enforcement, you’ll get the ‘extremist’ label faster than Bush can say, “What Abu Ghraib torture?”

I tend to be a purist at heart. I don’t swat bees while sitting at the picnic table. I get a can of Raid and take those little suckers out John-Woo-style (can in each hand, diving to the right, and in slow motion). You can swat bees endlessly. But if you are merely kill one here and one there, you’ll give up like most disheartened libertarians have.

Of course, and example is in order. Let’s take a topic that pisses off ever libertarian – excessively high TAXES. Now, we know that the average American is getting hosed approximately 30+ percent on the income tax alone. We know for a fact that getting a long term tax cut from our beloved congress is not going to happen when their own numbers show a 7 trillion dollar debt and 45.9 trillion (see pg 16 of the pdf) dollars in outstanding liabilities! This 45.9 trillion dollars that is already earmarked to be paid out with funds they don’t have. What on earth makes you believe taxes will go down?

Trying to swat away the inevitable tax increases seems like an endless endeavor on our already limited libertarian base. So, what is the “hive” in this case? Is there a silver bullet? A can of Raid?

But of course, my dear libertarians! It’s called (drum roll please) the LAW. If you’ve actually read the constitution, relevant sections of the internal revenue code, and have a basic grasp of jurisdiction, you’ll find that there is no law making ordinary people, like you, liable for such a tax. In fact, you make yourself liable by claim only (thanks to your signature on w4).

Now comes the sad news. The powers that be don’t want to hear it. They obviously benefit by duping and forcing people to abide by these nonexistent liabilities. And before I get super-sized from “extremist” the category to “anarchist”, let me quickly point out that most of the infrastructure of our government is supported by imposts, duties, and excises. The income tax only pays off debt to the federal reserve (more on that on another post). They will try to get the money from you anyway, and even the most knowledgeable Citizens will have trouble fending them off (but that is changing).

Obviously, you probably have questions, contentions, and rebuttals galore regarding this issue. There are books ranging from 20 pages to 1800 pages documenting the history and legal issues. My favorite, due to accuracy and brevity, is the federal zone by Paul Mitchell. Give the first few chapters a read before making bold claims.

I hope this example serves as an eye opener to the libertarians that read this site. Many problems that face libertarians today have an Achilles heel, yet few are even aware they exist. Now are you just gonna swat bees for years and years, or are you gonna RAID on their ass?

Hope you enjoyed my first post here on the “Hammer of Truth”. I look forward to getting the awakening the masses. Forward this along to friends and help spread the word.

  1. “Now are you just gonna swat bees for years and years, or are you gonna RAID on their ass?”

    Are you talking about the next armed revolution? Get serious. You’re not motivating anyone in the “practical” group by suggesting everyone stop paying taxes. We are not martyrs to be pawned off for the sake of a small crowd cheering. You need a bigger crowd paying attention for something productive to happen.

    Then you can have your “all taxation = theft” argument. And then you can scare them away with something that they don’t desire in the first place.

    We’re not living in 1787 anymore my friend, certain things have changed in the way our government should operate.

    Kill the people with common sense I say. CATO does it all the time and still remain principled libertarians. At least they’re on TV with an audience. When was the last time we had an audience. Your no taxation rhetoric has fallen on deaf ears. There’s a reason why the “purist” and “pragmatist” argument is coming up now so much.

  2. I have been told that you must give up your social security number in order to be fully exempt from income taxes. A nice catch-22 in my opinion, try getting a job or a house without it.

    Well if you find a way for us to keep more of our money (legal of course), let us know which country I should be putting it in as well. I would assume some place in Europe by now…. look at that Euro climb.

  3. Al Caholic,

    Armed revolution? No no no… well, hopefully things won’t get that bad.

    Martyrs? Well 1000 apologies for even suggesting such a thing, but until the powers that be show law to me and others in the tax honesty movement, I can only assume that they are operating under color of law and defrauding the American people. So keep paying your taxes, but at least realize that you are under no “legal” obligation to.

    It’s bad enough having to live with unconstitutional laws that are on the books. It’s made worse when they just do whatever they want unchecked. It is the people that keep the government in check by challenging authority. The constitution is not self enforcing.

    Sure, it’s not 1787. So what? Reread the declaration of independence sometime. Notice any similarities?

    Fallen on deaf ears? That’s untrue. As of 1996, the GAO review stated that no enforcement action was taken on 54.1 million potential nonfilers. Elsewhere, I’ve read as many as 20% don’t file. So what sort of numbers are you looking for?

    “In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” – Mark Twain

  4. OpenTorrent

    So why not look it up yourself and confirm? As for getting a job/house without it: It’s possible, just time consuming and annoying. You have to pick your battles, and some might not be worth fighting. The government banks on that. They know that most humans will inherently take the path of least resistance because they don’t want to cut into their Tee time at the course or getting to the bar in time to catch the Sox game.

    But, what if I told you there was a 100% risk free way to keep all the money you’re currently paying in income taxes? Sounds interesting eh?

    Keep dreaming. Freedom is not a spectator sport, the government is merely going to say “my bad, but I got you so good for all those years! hahaha.” They are hurting right now, because the internet has allowed the masses to educate themselves about the law far better than any library ever has.

    But regarding your question on where to store your money. Sure, looking offshore will help protect you from any potential confiscation. More details on that later…

  5. Before taking action based on Mr. Rajter’s post, I’d suggest that people read the information found here.

    There’s a comprehensive (and well-cited) list of debunkings for the frivolous arguments put forth.

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    …don’t be fooled…

  6. LOL. Thanks Mr. X. Citing the “mighty” quatloos.

    I encourage people to read their forum, and see the type of people that hang out there. Pure disinfo.


  7. The LP is sucking their thumbs and praising the existence of the true entity… the corporation.

    Naw…. to be serious…. if they don’t go that is a smarter move… visiting Crawford is PR building. That is the only reason Sharpton and Sheen are there. Intelligent folks know this is a simple ploy for more personal marketing.

    -shifting gears-
    Modern “quotable” phrases vomitted by these charlatans are not off the cuff and true anymore, they are political marketing and taglines (and usually written by another). They are made to dupe the ignorant individual into thinking these people are intelligent and qualified to be OUR representatives.

    They are not mine. I am hard pressed to call on someone who can represent me. Is there a politician out there that promotes swinging, sodomy, nudity, natural drug use and free thought? If not then I guess I am SOL.

    I am joking a bit…. but guess what…. freedom dictates that what you and I do in our own homes is none of anyone elses business. I do my own work, I pay for my own home, I f*ck my own wife and we can enjoy whatever we want, feel free to f*ck your wife in the manner the 2 of you agree. Stay out of my bedroom, unless you are invited.

  8. Dear Mr. Rajter,
    Dismissing an argument based on the quality of people who hang out in a website’s forums is the sort of ad hominem attack that I wouldn’t expect from someone in the tax protest movement, given the ‘type of people that hang out there.’

    If you have a response to the citations of statutory and case law, please produce them.

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    …nothing up my sleeve…

  9. Yeah, I’ve read Brushaber. What proposition are you citing Brushaber in support of?

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    …has a funny feeling…

  10. Also, just as an FYI for those unfamiliar with the topic, a small excerpt from the introduction to the Quatloos site (emphasis in original):

    Why These Arguments Can’t Help You

    We’re going to show you here why these arguments can’t help you — and most likely will do you harm — whether or not they are true. That is, we’re going to suppose for the sake of argument that these (demonstrably false) theories are true: In other words, we’re going to pretend that the Internal Revenue Code has no effect, and that all actions undertaken pursuant to it are illegal.

    The problem is that NO COURT HAS HELD OR WILL HOLD THAT THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE IS INVALID OR THAT THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE LACKS POWER TO LEVY OR COLLECT INCOME TAXES. See, e.g., Joseph Adam’s The Tax Protestor Hall of Fame. Literally hundreds of folks have tried these arguments over the last several years. ALL of these folks have lost, and many of these folks have been sanctioned or fined for advocating a “frivolous” theory to the court.

    So, let’s assume that you buy some of this hokey material, and you either don’t declare your income to the IRS, under whatever reason, or else you hide your money in a “Pure Trust” or other fictional legal unicorn. The IRS then comes and assesses taxes and stiff fines on you and garnishes your wages and seizes all your assets to pay for the assessments and fines. You then go into court and assert whatever screwy theory you’ve been sold as your defense against the IRS. Now, you might be (in your own mind) 100% correct. The problem is that there is a 100% chance that the court will not agree with you, and you will lose everything you have.

    So, the upshot is: Even if you believe this anti-IRS crap, don’t use these theories for planning because they have a 100% chance of failure. These theories are not going to protect your assets, period, and anyone who tells you differently is a liar. You are going to get fined and sanctioned, and these fines and sanctions most likely will not be dischargeable in a bankruptcy proceeding, so they will follow you for your entire life until paid.

    Just something to think about if you’re considering acting upon information about the supposed illegality of the income tax.

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    …caveat emptor…

  11. Mr. X–whoever that may be–quotes whole sections of a website that has incorrect information on it. To quote “NO COURT HAS HELD OR WILL HOLD THAT THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE IS INVALID OR THAT THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE LACKS POWER TO LEVY OR COLLECT INCOME TAXES” is a tactic of using fear to disinform and mislead. The issue isn’t whether the IRC is “invalid” but who it actually applies to, i.e., who is liable, and where has Congress indeed imposed an “income” tax. And the IRS certainly does have “power” to “collect income taxes”…which means it is certainly legitimate for them to collect where they have (limited) actual jurisdiction to do so. Beyond that…lets just say “power” and *authority* are two different things.
    All of this aside, why would anyone continue to defend a system of taxation which is
    a. unfair

    b. burdensome both in the amount paid itself and in the cost to present a yearly or quarterly report of it in such a way that will decrease the likelihood of a confrontation with government

    c. steals the fruits of one’s labor and creates a condition of involuntary servitude

    d. is used to manipulate the behavior of individuals and organizations

    e. is irresponsibly administered and

    f. is an integral part of increasingly out-of-control government spending and debt?

    Perhaps if someone made a living from that system of taxation. It only requires a blind eye.

  12. Dear Doug,
    I see that you’ve deleted my comment from your blog, as is your prerogative. I thought it was pertinent to note that other people had followed the advice you recommended and had penalties assessed and liens levied on their property.

    Seriously, feel free to protest all you want, but don’t tell other people that there won’t be consequences, since all of the evidence indicates that there will be.

    As to Scott’s comment, the quote is accurate. The tax protester arguments about the applicability of the code have been ruled frivolous and will result in the person who uses them getting extra penalties for advancing them. This is a fact that people ought to know before they take actions that contravene the established case law. If you still want to take those actions after being fully informed, so be it.

    Just to clarify, I do not support the current tax system at all. I agree with all of your contentions (a)-(f) and would like to see reforms. Wanting reforms and pretending that the law is not what it is are two different things. One can fight injustice without denying that the injustice exists.

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X


  13. I requested a meeting with agents Jackson and Poole to ascertain what law authorized them to do what they were doing. At this meeting, I asked the agents to show me the law that authorized them to examine my books and records. I also asked them to show me the law that authorized Mr. Jackson to send out Summonses. It is clear from the transcript of the meeting that they were unable to identify any law that authorized them to do anything.


  14. Dear Doug,
    None of your links do anything to persuade me (or anyone else) that following the advice of the ‘tax honesty’ movement will result in anything other than civil (and possibly criminal) penalties.

    That’s the simple truth.

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    …tell it like it is…