User Rating: 0 / 5

Star inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactive

The question is: are citizens or residents in a country allowed to disengage themselves from the existing government or country? Or, more precisely, have they ever been citizens or is this just a fable that politicians have spun? The truth? You are not a citizen… well… mostly.

In order to answer that question we need to look at all the possible scenarios in  which different citizens can be found.

However, even before that, we need to understand the current territorial principle governing countries. The main one is simple: if you enter into our territory, you voluntarily agree to abide by all our laws and regulations.


Case #1

Somebody is born in a country and solely because this person was born in a country, it must automatically abide by the country's laws and regulations. From an Absolute Austro-Libertarian perspective, this is of course nonsense.

A child cannot voluntarily agree to become bound by a contract since this child cannot understand the contract.  Hence, a child born into a country cannot be automatically bound by the laws and regulations of that country. This much it’s perfectly clear.

However the laws and regulations of most countries specify that a certain age this child becomes responsible by itself.  Therefore starting at this age, and by remaining in the country, the child has made a voluntary determination to accept all laws and regulations. is this assumption valid?

Clearly it is not. Because the child has not emancipated yet  the child has not declared him or herself capable of understanding the meaning of a contract.  Therefore this person cannot voluntarily agree to anything.  These would of course include the acceptance of being bound by territorial laws and regulations.

This case is similar to the case of a person being kidnapped and dragged into a given territory.  This person did not voluntarily agree to be bound by any laws and regulations and therefore it is not.

From an Absolute Austro-Libertarian  perspective, yes, native born people have no allegiance to a specific country or government simply because they did not choose or elect to abide by those rules and regulations.  And so they don't owe any allegiance to the country. Politicians will, of course, argue to the contrary using the very laws and regulations that the native born people have not agreed to.  Which is no argument at all because these people did not agree to anything  in the first place.

We are left then with the truth.  Because these people did not voluntarily agreed to any laws and regulations all these impositions are meaningless and so whatever its left is naked brute force. Therefore we are back to the notion that governments will do whatever governments want to do simply because they can.

Countries will simply enforce those laws and regulations through force. It is that simple. So it is irrelevant if you agree or disagree with them, they will simply pushed them on to you. However, in reality, you have no duty whatsoever to such a country or government.

Furthermore, the right to accept or not to accept any laws is reset every time somebody is born, and this person cannot inherit this decision from their parents much that countries may say so.  And so at the end of the day most countries have native born citizens and all those citizens, every one of them, don't owe any country or government anything!

This is the state in which the vast majority of the population throughout the world exists today.  Most countries have people that have been born in the country but are not citizens.


Case #2

What happens to immigrants? Immigrants, typically voluntarily agree to abide by laws and regulations. Usually there is some sort of legal swearing ceremony where immigrants swear and agree to abide but the laws of the land.

From an Absolute Austro-Libertarian perspective they have make a grave mistake. Those people have voluntarily agreed to be bound by those laws, rules and regulations. Therefore, those people have no right to reject their allegiance to the government or country. However, the right they still retain, within the boundaries of the law, is to get rid of the government or even dissolve the country.  

And that’s exactly what they should be doing. Not to change governments, but to demand for no government at all. To demand the dissolution of the country.  This is their right. Mind you, it is an acquired right.  Politicians can always change it. In some countries would even be considered high treason.  But in most countries this is actually an open discussion. Can an immigrant that has become a citizen, fight, within the boundaries of the law, to dissolve the country? In most cases, according to international law, the answer is yes. They can.

And so from an Absolute Austro-Libertarian point of view our position is that they should. They should become politically active and fight the government, any government  all the way.


Case #3

What happens to illegal immigrants that simply walk into a country?  We need remember the original premise the governments operate under, this is, the assumption that if you enter their territory you are voluntarily agreeing to be bound by their rules and regulations. Therefore any immigrant simply walking into a country is voluntarily accepting all their rules and regulations.

From this perspective these people are not better off than any legal immigrant.  They have no right to reject their allegiance to the country.  However they have the right to use whatever rights that are given by the country to fight against the government or to demand no government at all.



The lesson of the story is that the vast majority of the population in any given country, 90% maybe 95%,  have their rights simply stamped, stepped over, and tossed into the garbage bin by the political system.

They are being robbed, they are being oppressed, they are being manipulated by a system that represents itself and only itself. Best case scenario, maybe the government represents 10% of the population. But even that number is extremely dubious. It is not the tyranny of the majority; it is the tyranny of a very select minority. And there really is no reason for it to happen since they haven’t pledged any allegiance to this tyranny.

This people, are, in essence, free!. Why don’t they rise then? For that answer, you will need to review the Political Systems Lifecycle lesson which will explain that certain basic conditions need to exist for Political Systems to change. Conditions, enabling going from a Democracy to an Absolute Austro Libertarian system have not been reached yet.

In the end, you know now that as a person born in a country you have no allegiance to it. No duty to the government. No obligation to the country. You are free!

What you choose to do with that freedom is up to you. You can keep pretending you are bound to their laws or you can start building the future. Up to you.

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.



English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish
FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinMixxRSS FeedPinterest
Pin It