6 ms·

I've always been impressed by an odd contrast within theories of this sort. The theories posit that the government acted illegally in various ways. But at the s

I've always been impressed by an odd contrast within theories of this sort. The theories posit that the government acted illegally in various ways. But at the same time, the theories posit that despite this, there is some deeper framework of law that the government still has to obey. Yet what force would cause this deeper law to prevail if the state was committed to its conspiracy? Of course, this sort of thing could only appeal in the US, where a lot of the laws aren't product of a giant conspiracy but rather a complex patchwork of local, state and federal strictures, so a spew of incoherent legal nonsense takes a given court office a while to deal with.

tormeh 8y ago
I dunno. Germany has the same kind of thing. Search for "Reichsbürger". Essentially these people reject the modern German nation, and say they belong to one reich or another - either the Kaiserreich or the Nazi one. What these conspiracy people don't get is that a nation exists as a consequence of its subjects and warriors loyalty to it and obedience of it. It's just a power structure. All the legalities and voting and bureaucracy around it are just there because it's much easier for everyone to live with a power structure that behaves predictably, justly and generally nicely. But the legalities are not actually necessary. At the core the answer to "Why?" is "Because we can". Note that I'm generally pro-government. I'd rather have one nice power structure to deal with than a world operating after the rules of school, where I have to protect my lunch money myself. This is just reality.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- krapp 8y ago
  Or as attorney Leonard French said regarding one Sovereign Citizen case on his Lawful Masses podcast[0]: "We live in reality, where the four laws are not common law, statutory, code and... whatever. The real laws are the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, and gravity. Everything else is fair game." [0]https://youtu.be/nqPiQiinDTs?t=3143 https://youtu.be/nqPiQiinDTs?t=3143
  - AstralStorm 8y ago
    The list is not exhaustive, we're looking for loopholes all the time.
mindslight 8y ago
> the theories posit that despite this, there is some deeper framework of law that the government still has to obey Isn't this the spirit of hacking in general? Of course, they're trying to hack a system rooted in fundamentals that undermine hacking. So rather than a vulnerability leading to a "full compromise", the best that can be obtained is a minor advantage.
- crooked-v 8y ago
  When you apply "hacking" to the law, if you don't already know what you're doing very well, it usually ends up called "fraud". https://xkcd.com/1494/ https://xkcd.com/1494/
  - mindslight 8y ago
    "Fraud" is applicable to hacking contracts, not law in general. But yes, that's an example of what I meant by "fundamentals that undermine hacking". Similarly, relying on technicalities you will still get tripped up by mens rea. But other model-playing optimizations like tax avoidance are perfectly acceptable. As I said, "minor advantage" rather than "full compromise".
  - AstralStorm 8y ago
    Also embezzlement or violation of tax code. Sometimes even racketeering.

tormeh 8y ago

I dunno. Germany has the same kind of thing. Search for "Reichsbürger". Essentially these people reject the modern German nation, and say they belong to one reich or another - either the Kaiserreich or the Nazi one. What these conspiracy people don't get is that a nation exists as a consequence of its subjects and warriors loyalty to it and obedience of it. It's just a power structure. All the legalities and voting and bureaucracy around it are just there because it's much easier for everyone to live with a power structure that behaves predictably, justly and generally nicely. But the legalities are not actually necessary. At the core the answer to "Why?" is "Because we can". Note that I'm generally pro-government. I'd rather have one nice power structure to deal with than a world operating after the rules of school, where I have to protect my lunch money myself. This is just reality.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
krapp 8y ago
Or as attorney Leonard French said regarding one Sovereign Citizen case on his Lawful Masses podcast[0]: "We live in reality, where the four laws are not common law, statutory, code and... whatever. The real laws are the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, and gravity. Everything else is fair game." [0]https://youtu.be/nqPiQiinDTs?t=3143 https://youtu.be/nqPiQiinDTs?t=3143
- AstralStorm 8y ago
  The list is not exhaustive, we're looking for loopholes all the time.

mindslight 8y ago

> the theories posit that despite this, there is some deeper framework of law that the government still has to obey Isn't this the spirit of hacking in general? Of course, they're trying to hack a system rooted in fundamentals that undermine hacking. So rather than a vulnerability leading to a "full compromise", the best that can be obtained is a minor advantage.

crooked-v 8y ago
When you apply "hacking" to the law, if you don't already know what you're doing very well, it usually ends up called "fraud". https://xkcd.com/1494/ https://xkcd.com/1494/
- mindslight 8y ago
  "Fraud" is applicable to hacking contracts, not law in general. But yes, that's an example of what I meant by "fundamentals that undermine hacking". Similarly, relying on technicalities you will still get tripped up by mens rea. But other model-playing optimizations like tax avoidance are perfectly acceptable. As I said, "minor advantage" rather than "full compromise".
- AstralStorm 8y ago
  Also embezzlement or violation of tax code. Sometimes even racketeering.