Arguing that the State is a legal fiction

[AgoristTeen1994]

Hey everyone I am in a debate on facebook about whether or not the State/the government is a legal fiction. I have already argued that just like a gov't registered corporation, that it didn't exist prior to the legal act that created it, and that it is not tangible, ergo it doesn't exist in the natural world/universe, thus it is a legal fiction....the people I am debating just blew that off....so any other arguments you can think of that support the logical idea that states are legal fictions?



P.S. I turned 18 yesterday! Yay me!

[NonEntity]

(04-08-2012 08:11 AM)AgoristTeen1994 Wrote:  Hey everyone I am in a debate on facebook about whether or not the State/the government is a legal fiction. I have already argued that just like a gov't registered corporation, that it didn't exist prior to the legal act that created it, and that it is not tangible, ergo it doesn't exist in the natural world/universe, thus it is a legal fiction....the people I am debating just blew that off....so any other arguments you can think of that support the logical idea that states are legal fictions?



P.S. I turned 18 yesterday! Yay me!

Happy birthday!

You might want to try this thought out on them... what makes something "legal?" Isn't that a definition created, or backed, by the power of the state? If so, aren't you involved in a circular argument? It's kinda like those who claim that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible. If the state is legal because the state claims it is legal...

- NonE

[AgoristTeen1994]

(04-08-2012 11:02 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  Happy birthday!

You might want to try this thought out on them... what makes something "legal?" Isn't that a definition created, or backed, by the power of the state? If so, aren't you involved in a circular argument? It's kinda like those who claim that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible. If the state is legal because the state claims it is legal...

- NonE

1. Thank you for the birthday wishes.

2. That sounds like a great idea!

3. You mention of the bible is admittedly, one problem, I as a Christian have with a lot of other Christians...they won't even consider that parts of the bible may not be correct on what the word of God is, or at the very least that they may be interpreting it the wrong way.

[Grey beard]

It should be fairly easy to show that the State is fiction, but people are so faithful to it even though it doesn't exist in fact.

I would ask if a story made up by man is considered fiction. The honest would agree that it is. I would ask if they understood the State to be the dirt or the government. If they say it is the dirt, ask them what the dirt was called 10,000 years ago. If they say it is the government ask them if government is a story made up by men.

[NonEntity]

Stacy Dittrich, a former Ohio police detective, crime expert and author Wrote:It's haunting because the people who get away are the ones deranged enough to believe their own lies...

(speaking of beliefs and how the brain (sorta) works and stuff like that.)


It may appear to some small meyends that this is a threadjack, but it ain't, so if this applies to you, well... just get over it!

- NonWhack-a-Mole

[AgoristTeen1994]

:rolleyes:

[Pete in Wisconsin]

Agorist Teen:

I wish I knew the best way to explain this to people, but I don't.

I've tried three approaches to get people to think about the state. Not sure if these worked or not, but here they are:

1) If everyone on earth woke tomorrow with amnesia, trees would still be trees, dirt would still be dirt, cats cats, etc. Men would still be attracted to women and vice-versa. Everyone would be hungry and seek food. But the state and corporations would no longer exist. In other words, anything that requires you to be convinced of its existence is probably not real.

2) If the state is real, are the people living in Italy still subject to the laws of the Ancient Roman Empire? If a state is real and permanent, how can it be replaced by another? Are the people living on the Mexican Yucatan peninsula still subject to the laws of pre-Columbian Mayan warlords? If not, Why? Perhaps the state was only imposed on the people by violent thugs?

3) If everyone on earth died except for you and a group of a hundred other survivors, and you all lived on an manhattan island, which ones would get to legally steal from, imprison, and lie to the others? What would you call these people? Criminals? Thieves? Parasites? What if they threatened you with violence unless you admitted that thy were chosen by God to be your government?

[Grey beard]

(04-17-2012 09:03 AM)Pete in Wisconsin Wrote:  Agorist Teen:

I wish I knew the best way to explain this to people, but I don't.

I've tried three approaches to get people to think about the state. Not sure if these worked or not, but here they are:

1) If everyone on earth woke tomorrow with amnesia, trees would still be trees, dirt would still be dirt, cats cats, etc. Men would still be attracted to women and vice-versa. Everyone would be hungry and seek food. But the state and corporations would no longer exist. In other words, anything that requires you to be convinced of its existence is probably not real.

2) If the state is real, are the people living in Italy still subject to the laws of the Ancient Roman Empire? If a state is real and permanent, how can it be replaced by another? Are the people living on the Mexican Yucatan peninsula still subject to the laws of pre-Columbian Mayan warlords? If not, Why? Perhaps the state was only imposed on the people by violent thugs?

3) If everyone on earth died except for you and a group of a hundred other survivors, and you all lived on an manhattan island, which ones would get to legally steal from, imprison, and lie to the others? What would you call these people? Criminals? Thieves? Parasites? What if they threatened you with violence unless you admitted that thy were chosen by God to be your government?

Those SHOULD make them think, but I wonder if it would be better to have them prove to you what the state is, and see the failure when they do.

[eye2i2hear]

I like the approach you're taking.

One for the US version of folks is one I've hard Marc use, something like this: where was the United States on July 3rd, 1776? (in other words, what changed other than opinion, expressed in words enforced with arms?). You can do this with each or any of the 13 "Colonies" vs "States" as well, of course.

It also never seems to be a negative to include pointing out to others the very words of those professing to be 'representing' The State, saying what the State 'is':

Blacks Law Dictionary 2nd Edition Wrote:
STATE, n
A body politic, or society of men, united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage, by the joint efforts of their combined strength. Cooley, Const. Lim. 1. ... The people of a state, in their collective capacity, considered as the party wronged by a criminal deed; the public; as in the title of a cause.

BODY POLITIC
A term applied to a corporation, which is usually designated as a “body corporate and politic.” The term is particularly appropriate to a public corporation invested with powers and duties of government. It is often used, in a rather loose way, to designate the state or nation or sovereign power, or the government of a county or municipality, without distinctly connoting any express and individual corporate character. Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 124, 24 L. Ed. 77; Coyle v. Mcln- tire, 7 Houst. (Del.) 44, 30 Atl. 728, 40 Am. St. Itep. 109; Warner v. Beers, 23 Wend. (N. Y.) 122; People v. Morris, 13 Wend. (N. Y.) 334.

http://thelawdictionary.org/state-n/

From the book, Adventures In Legal Land:

Marc Stevens Wrote:The more you examine what these people [Statists] say and do, the more it falls apart. The "state" is not a natural phenomenon. It is man-made and exists only in the mind. They are all artificial. Prior to July 4th, 1776, there were no American "states", there were allegedly American "colonies". Those colonies were magically transformed into "states" by nothing more than words being scribbled onto pieces of paper called "constitutions". ... A "state" is nothing more than a "state" of mind. A "nation" is nothing more than a halluci-nation.
... As I like to put: can I hit a "state" with a rock? To put it differently, can I put a "government" in a wheelbarrow?
...Many think the "state" is the ground, that the geographic landmass "Arizona" is identical in all respects to the "State of Arizona". ...If the "state were the ground and ONLY the ground (just as a table is just a table and not a book on the table), then the complaining party in a traffic case would be the ground. Now that's insane.
Obviously the "state" is not the ground. A "state" is not geographic or even tangible; if it's anything, then it's political. [pgs128-9]

Political derives from politic, and politic derives from policy [see Black's Law Dictionary]. One's policy then is either voluntary association --or not so much.

[WorBlux]

(04-08-2012 08:11 AM)AgoristTeen1994 Wrote:  Hey everyone I am in a debate on facebook about whether or not the State/the government is a legal fiction. I have already argued that just like a gov't registered corporation, that it didn't exist prior to the legal act that created it, and that it is not tangible, ergo it doesn't exist in the natural world/universe, thus it is a legal fiction....the people I am debating just blew that off....so any other arguments you can think of that support the logical idea that states are legal fictions?



P.S. I turned 18 yesterday! Yay me!

The government itself is a corporation.

All corporations are legal fictions.

The government is a legal fiction.

But what is even more damning there are no facts on what this fiction is based other than the threat or use of violence. Those facts which are claimed as foundational crumble under even a fairly casual scrutiny.

At least with most corporation you can track to the individual consent of each participant in some respect. The fiction is designed to paper over all these joints and parts to allow the simplification of outward facing contracts and legal claims. Yes a fiction, but at least in some ways we can say it is a useful one.

[LexScripta]

Quote:Happy birthday!

You might want to try this thought out on them... what makes something "legal?" Isn't that a definition created, or backed, by the power of the state? If so, aren't you involved in a circular argument? It's kinda like those who claim that the bible is the word of god because it says so in the bible. If the state is legal because the state claims it is legal...

- NonE

Yep, there are some who use the Bible as its own argument, however, there are better arguments for the truth of that. Of course its all circumstantial, but the evidence is, shall we say, overwhelming.