Enlightened-Rogue | I love how these state operatives can never define “the state” when asked to. Not that they refuse to answer. They…..simply…….can’t……do…….it.
Why? Because the state doesn’t exist. It’s an abstraction that only exists in the minds of those who accept that abstraction as “real.”
The state only becomes tangible or manifests itself when believers commit an act of observable violence against those who don’t believe that abstraction and therefore, refuse to obey.
The exchange here between the bureaucrats and the accused is a microcosm of the relationship of the state to the sovereign individual. Try as they may, the state operatives cannot justify their institution’s authority with evidence but can only offer “points of law” which are, of course, merely words on paper. And words written by………them.
If I write rules on paper and claim they apply to everyone, is my authority legitimate? Of course not!
The only “evidence” that the state’s authority applies to a particular individual would be a signed contract by the accused, agreeing to be ruled by such an authority.
The state will, of course, falsely claim that the fact the accused stands or sleeps on a particular patch of dirt (“residence”) is such an “agreement.” Which is, of course, another offer of point of law, not evidence.
Enjoy the state’s bewilderment and agitation as it desperately tries to justify its existence. Imagine the wonderful chaos that would ensue if millions of sovereigns asked the same questions of their self-appointed rulers. And the higher up the this false, authoritarian hierarchy that those questions are asked, the better.