Dan S de Merengue

* Though the evidence at present points to their actions being more based on a disturbed paranoia*

I think the trains are the extreme example of Sovereign citizen ideology.

A conspiratorial mind set, starting out as an obsession, and often does, as you say, fall into blind paranoia, which classifies as psychosis; in the Trains case, group psychosis.

Then again, couldn’t wars between States fall under the same description of delusional, resorting to violent and extreme actions. Why then is the State so opposed to the same tactics of violent change in its own back yard

The Democratic system of change fails to deal with the multiple and diverse mindsets of its citizens. Democratic Governments need to get on board with the speed of change in its communities.

Democracy is intended as a hedge against the pitfalls of mass objection. It’s called voting.
When this mechanism for change is seen as inadequate to needs for change, objectors to the State Democratic system of change on offer, become disillusioned, and are faced with shrinking options.

Dear Diver Dan,

«In view of your dislike of State control over its citizens, inclusive of yourself, are you a law abiding citizen?»

Technically I am an Australian citizen who would be considered by others to be mostly law-abiding. This does not make me automatically committed to follow the state's laws.

Perhaps an example:
When I had COVID-19, the law required me to report my details and symptoms to the regime, which could subsequently use the information to impose on me horrific punishments like grabbing me from my home, forcibly if necessary, and incarcerating me in the hostile environment of a quarantine-hotel or hospital where I would not be able to observe my religious vows and where I would also be required by law to follow all the orders of the treating doctor, even if they conflicted with my religion and conscience, under threat of prison if I didn't.

Obviously I did not report my details as required by law, but since I understand the importance of the overall pandemic statistics (for reserving sufficient hospital and ICU beds, etc.), I instead asked a friend to call the health department from a public pay-phone and report my infection anonymously. I also isolated at home in accordance with the medical advice, because as much as I have no respect for the state's laws, I still do not want to infect others.

«Assuming the answer is yes, then how do you reconcile your obedience with a conscience opposed to many of its institutions and demands which clash with it?»

My personal policy is not to fight, argue and waste my resources over petty legal requirements and inconveniences: that's practical wisdom ("Render unto Caesar..."), not obedience, nor do I purposefully break laws like a juvenile for the sake of disobedience per se: I would only break laws when they significantly clash with my conscience and religious principles and when no other individuals are hurt.

«Would you classify their refusals as pacifist objections?»

I would have to look at them on a case-by-case basis.

Yuyutsu,
The COVID laws are not really a good example, as they were never really valid laws.

Very few people who were fined under COVID laws ever paid their fines. Mostly, they were withdrawn by the prosecutors, especially if anyone was willing to challenge them.

There a case of one guy went through the magistrates court and opted to have it heard in the county court. His defense was “I don’t care about the CHO directions”. THAT’S IT! And the case was withdrawn, as the court system doesn’t want to have to deal with the question of the COVID laws and their true validity.

Like every case I’ve ever heard about with regard to COVID laws, it’s the same, in Australia at least. The authorities eventually drop the charges whenever someone is willing to challenge them, as they have no real validity. Just as your actions describe, the state does not have any jurisdiction to micromanage our responses to a health concern.

Yuyutsu

This may be hurtful, but I’ll say it; People (Citizens) who deliberately break the laws of the State are anti-social. That’s you.

There are known ethnic and cultural groups in our communities, well known for importing obstinate attitudes precluding themselves from observing State laws.

A depressing book on this subject would arrive on your doorstep along with a users manual on Diazepam.

All tax dodgers qualify for the title of Sovereign citizen movement. Ex Prime Minister Turnbull qualified for the tag as a professional tax dodging expert, who made a living helping citizens (sic), dodge their legal obligations to the State.

Australia has a taxation department with its own branch of policing of the rules, but still that is not enough policing is it, when prominent members of society get off Scott free from law breaking.

So with prominent examples of disobedience and egregious behaviour from the top down , respecting the law, for the masses below them, easily falls into question, and from that point, the debacle of COVID lockdowns and the sway of draconian laws which followed, leads to a seating mass of discontent.

With the rise of terror groups, and the ever legitimising Sovereign state ideology becoming easier rather than harder to sympathise with, the crises in Australia appears to be disrespect for its laws.

I put this to you, if you disrespect the laws ( all laws) of the country in which you choose to live, then very quickly that Country turns into the rabble of the country many natural law breakers, ( now citizens) we’re happy to escape..

Resoect for the rule of law appears to need the help of a big boot, did that work, no.
Every citizen of this country has a self interest in maintains the integrity of the law by following its dictates, and not to feel there is a citizens right to cherry pick which laws to follow and which laws to ideologically not follow.

The situation in this country is looking bleak on this imperative front.

Dear Diver Dan,

I never dodged any tax because there is nothing immoral in paying taxes - only in benefiting from the taxes of others.

Also, unlike these "ethnic and cultural groups in our communities" which you mentioned (if indeed they exist), I do not demand any special privileges for myself (such as precluding myself from observing State laws) because as far as I am concerned, there is no need for you, nor do I expect you to follow them either.

If you are concerned about the success of your society, then you should first look at the sad fact that it forces people to be counted in it without even asking for their consent - thus it already started on the wrong foot. Since your society never respected individuals and their free choice, there is no need for anyone to respect your society and its laws. I nevertheless continue to respect you personally as one who was made in the image of God.

---

Dear Dan S de Meringue,

«The COVID laws are not really a good example, as they were never really valid laws.»

As if any other laws WERE valid?!

In retrospect, people can now doubt the validity of COVID laws even according to the State's own internal criteria, but at the time this doubt was not the common knowledge of ordinary Australians, thus people had no clue that these laws could be any different than all other laws - except that they came much closer to home.

Yusutsu, « As if any other laws WERE valid?! »

We do have some valid laws in Australia.

I’m glad we live in a country that’s not lawless. For example, we have the Crimes Act, and through this the authorities help provide peace and justice (though not perfectly, of course.)

An example of mixed justice was the famous case of Lindy Chamberlain, who was wrongly charged with murder of their own baby girl in 1980 through the NT Crimes Act. She was convicted on false evidence from so called scientific ‘experts’. But the chamberlains fought for justice, which they eventually received after 32 years, when the NT Coroner finally brought down the official finding in 2012 that it was a wild dingo that took Azaria.

Immediately outside the court following the ruling, Michael Chamberlain said, “I am here to tell you that you can get justice, even when you think that all is lost. But, truth must be on your side. I cannot emphasize strongly enough how sacred human life is and how important it is to pursue a just cause even it seems to be a mission impossible. If you know you are right, never give up on getting it right.”

Laws are never perfect. But the ‘freedom’ movement have demonstrated over recent times the importance of standing up against laws that are wrong. We know the COVID laws were invalid by the way most of the fines in Victoria and NSW have been dropped. In fact, all of them are being dismissed when people challenge them. Very few fines were ever paid.

To their credit, the freedom movement has shown the importance of the precept, “Good people break bad laws”. Truth was on their side.

We need a government that makes good laws, which helps make for a good society. But good people deliberately breaking bad laws was necessary over the last three years to help show the errors of what was a shameful era in the history of Australia, revealing the ineptness of our elected leaders, and their power-crazed authoritarian overreach.