https://tylerbloyer.com

Voluntary Slaves. Voluntaryism, the doctrine of master -servant.

In this video I continue to discuss the issues with Voluntaryism and other “Freedom Movements”.

https://tylerbloyer.com

The above video on the Voluntary Slaves is an introduction of sorts to the upcoming series, “Falling In to the Movement Traps”. I’ll be publishing part one of this series soon.

In order to understand why I would title this post, “Voluntary Slaves”, we need to understand what Voluntaryism (or Voluntarism, Volunteerism and so on) really is. Not the fake and misinformed definition of what the libertarian activists think that it means, but what it really means.

In the video and in this brief article I will be bringing forth some of my arguments which I know will ruffle feathers for anyone in the Voluntaryist/Libertarian cults. I have even been associated with these cults in the recent past. Hopefully, I now have a better understanding of what these groups are all about after spending time in and around these movements.

Admittedly, this discussion and commentary is very surface level. In the future I would like to go much further in depth on the voluntary nature of our slavery and the nature of evil in this contract. Evil and destruction act under a mask which we end up condoning and even begging for, “voluntarily”. Of course, there are many things that could be completely voluntary and also maniacally evil.

Voluntaryism provides no shield or resistance in defense of freedom for those who condone and desire their slavery and condone it for you as well. What of those who voluntarily subject themselves to all manner of immoral and degrading behaviors which ultimately end up enslaving the larger society to external control? What if the vast overwhelming majority of people in a society are voluntarily subjecting themselves to forms of external rulership and control? Even if that external control is composed largely of psychopathic, satanic, pedophiles… what if people still voluntarily agree to go along with this system, what then for the “freedom movements”?

As you can clearly see, Voluntaryism is nothing but words. Just air spoken to sooth the inauthentic souls who are lost on their own personal path to freedom.

The reality of Voluntaryism is that it is the doctrine of master-servant, or that of master-slave. Government is a voluntary agency and all citizens of government are voluntarily so. The entire “voluntary society” movement is a misinformed fallacy by definition. What I’ve found is that these groups are basically bunch of children that know nothing about law and how citizenship actually works.

What’s needed is far more than these false “freedom movements” in order construct the conditions of true freedom and prosperity. That being said, I still felt it was worth my time to break down aspects of these movements that I have found to be completely contradictory and thus need to be removed from the general consensus. A naive and foolish endeavor to be sure.

No man acting in a United States person (legal status) or other national citizenship is an involuntary slave, but necessarily and by law is a volunteer. To consent directly or indirectly is to volunteer to the doctrine of master and servant.

That beings said, it’s not required to contract with the government. It’s possible and quite simple to remove your citizenship status. Contracting with the government is completely and 100% voluntary. The argument that there was a gun to my parents head when they signed my birth certificate (a common argument from the Libertarian/Voluntaryist movements) is utterly false. There was also no gun present when I then applied for a drivers license, contracted under a w4, registered my vehicle, purchased propertly and all other actions which require the use of me acting under my legal name. This was all done voluntarily. The argument that we have been forced into the conditions we’ve created is a lie. We are creating these conditions through our own free will decisions.

If a parent voluntarily signs the ownership of a child over to the government they are not being mugged and forced to do so. They are voluntarily doing this. There is no gun being pointed at the parents and it’s not required to subject the child to being a citizen of the United States.

There is no amount of coercion, financially or otherwise, imposed upon parents which justifies the action to sign a child over to the state and claim that you have involuntarily done so. It is voluntary to consent to be governed and any other claim is a contradiction, misunderstanding, or possibly a lie meant to confuse and control it’s believers. There are plenty of ways to exist outside of this legal contract and it’s not required for life to be a citizen of any nation.

In order to remain a voluntary slave, the child must continue through life operating in the legal fiction which has been created for them. Their own ignorance of these conditions will validate and provide the consent necessary for the government to qualify the behavior as that of its voluntary citizen. Ignorance is not an excuse that nature is going to give us a break on. We will suffer the consequences of our actions regardless of how ignorant or even nescient we were when acted and created these conditions.

There is no guarantee of safety if one chooses to revoke their voluntary citizenship and serve no government. If one chooses to obey only the laws of Nature (Gods law) there is nothing in Nature which provides a guarantee that there won’t be threats or acts of violence conducted against you.

Giving up our freedoms is still a choice regardless of any excuse we want to make as for why we behaved a certain way. Even if there is a gun to your head, which there almost never is, it’s still voluntary how you choose to respond. There is no guarantee that your choice will lead to immediate safety. You know, the whole “liberty or death” sentiment. Even if we are being held in a state of duress we will have the ability to choose how we will respond.

Freedom does not guarantee safety. Putting a feather up your butt does not make you a duck and wearing the label, “Voluntaryist”, doesn’t give anyone the moral high ground. If we are being honest with ourselves, then the truth is that we are all Voluntary Slaves! That’s a hard pill to swallow, especially for those in the “Freedom movements” who would never dare to admit they are really just an ignorant coward. This would at least be honest. We can then provide for this truth by starting from what is real. The real conditions of our servitude is that the chains are loose and can be taken off at any time.

I see the average voluntaryist basically saying “I will say one thing, but act completely different”. It’s a contradiction in itself to claim you are a voluntaryist, but then voluntarily maintain relations that are “non-consensual” by the voluntaryist own definitions.

Voluntaryists will go along paying all manner of taxes and claiming that they pay their taxes under a state of duress. However, what this means is that by definition that are actually not a voluntaryist. It’s a contradiction and you are a slave who does what their master says to do. In other words, you are really a volunteer, but it appears you’ve only begun to understand what this really implies and now are throwing a fit on the floor like a two year old and demanding the relationship which you consented to end. Well, that’s not how it works folks. Reality doesn’t work that way.


https://tylerbloyer.com

Bitchute channel: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/tyler_bloyer/

Find me:

4 thoughts on “Voluntary Slaves. Voluntaryism, the doctrine of master -servant.

  1. I can see the point where the expressions in a movement (eg. “voluntaryism”) isn’t always consistent; typically that’s due to many voices with different perspectives. But to get at the heart of your argument: you say it’s hypocritical to voluntarily pay taxes and apply for licenses and still say that you’re under duress and want more freedom. To counter: imagine a world where The State or a capitalist owns all the land and water and therefore has the legal and police-enforced “right” to extract whatever rents they wish from anyone in that area; your argument seems to say that anyone staying there freely pays the price of their own choice. That is hypothetical, but the real world is close to this situation in many aspects of life: transactions made by residents and even just living in a space require payment of taxes and obeying legislated rules or else be threatened with shutdown or even arrest. This is forced upon the individuals or the organizations, on anyone who wants to accept fiat currency or anyone who wants to freely work in the food business (see “Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal” for the consequences), etc etc. Do we do it to avoid the punitive consequences? Sure. But that doesn’t mean that our “choice” to obey our guards is a true choice. It’s become extremely difficult to live without complying. We need a more just society, and “voluntaryism” might just be the rallying cry that brings us back to real balance with each other, the earth, etc.

    I’m trying to understand your recommended path of action… are you saying that to be truly dedicated to liberty that you must revoke your citizenship? Many would consider that if it were a live-and-let-live situation but unfortunately it results in forced deportation (because the US says they have the right to chase you out of this whole area). The insults won’t help. I’ve looked around on your site and found many valuable videos, but some focused writing on your suggested path toward liberty would help even more.

    Cheers!

    • Hello Trent,

      Thanks for the feedback and the points you brought up.

      Although I agree that there are many voices which bring a lot of different perspectives, that is not what I’m getting at. The point I’m bringing to light is that Voluntaryism as a movement and philosophy is flawed and contradicts itself. I am not seeking to “fix” voluntaryism, but rather cast it aside as flawed logic that doesn’t apply in any way whatsoever to freedom or liberty.

      I’d also like to confirm that I did not intend to insult anyone with this article and video. I don’t recall using any insults. I don’t feel that pointing out what I perceive to be contradictions in logic is an insult or attack, but a critique in order to have the discussion.

      Second, the goal of this post is not to lay out a “path of action” or show someone how to be dedicated to liberty. The point of this post is to point out the contradictions within freedom movements and specifically Voluntaryism. It it through finding contradictions and removing them that we can ultimately know what’s real and how to even navigate pursuing liberty.

      In the example you provided, which I’ve heard from others as well, there is no solution to that problem in “voluntaryism”. A philosophy that is fundamental contradictory and flawed can’t be applied to the example you gave to fix anything. Government is a voluntary agency and all citizens of government are voluntarily so. The confused “voluntaryist” is actually a slave because they don’t even understand the voluntary nature of their own servitude. Therefore, having not ever understood anything in regards to how law and citizenship actually work, this ignorant slave has the rallying call of “voluntaryism” only if to be mocked and ridiculed by his overlords who could care less about whatever flag or “movement” the slave claims to be a part of.

      Basically, what I’m hearing in your argument is that if it’s not easy, and it’s not just a door opened up for you to walk through, then people should just do what the oppressors say until a more safe time comes around. This is utter nonsense. This is not “voluntaryism” as even voluntaryists themselves would define it. What it really is; passivism, capitulation, contradicting, and has no ground to stand upon because it doesn’t mean anything.

      I myself don’t have this problem of contradiction because I don’t claim to be a “voluntaryist” or “libertarian”. I may have discussed these views before, and called myself these things before, but I’m definitely renouncing any form of calling myself a voluntaryist, libertarian, or anarchist.

      The path to freedom is the path of the individual. Not any group of collective. I will be spending time on solutions (and already have plenty in my work). However, it’s not my responsibility to provide a “path to liberty” for you or anyone else. The solutions are readily available and have been provided by people much smarter than you or I. If I take the time to point out major contradictions and flaws in a particular world-view or philosophy, it’s not suddenly up to me to have to provide a replacement solution. The burden of proof would be on the parties claiming that I should be a voluntaryist. They would need to provide answers to the major contradictions I’ve pointed out. Otherwise, there is no reason why I should be a voluntaryist if the fundamentals are flawed.

      Again, Thanks for the the points you brought up. I think it helps broaden the discussion so I appreciate it 🙂

      Tyler

    • You’re absolutely right about ultimate liberty being the “path of the individual”. That’s where we all need to end up!

      I still don’t see the contradictions in “voluntaryism”. I see how we always have choices whether to comply or not, but I don’t see how advocating against monopolistic mindsets is contradictory. There is a belief system that monopoly powers are good for society (commonly called “statism”); there is a belief system in the opposite, that such powers shouldn’t be assumed or supported by anyone… and “voluntaryism” is a good word for that.

      And getting others in a group to work toward that isn’t totally misplaced effort.

      I think we’ll have to do lunch sometime and see if we can understand one another. 🙂

      • Thanks again for this feedback, Trent.

        It’s fine to advocate against monopolistic mindsets, but we have to do it properly and without contradiction.

        It’s not good to have a contradiction in a movement such as voluntaryism. If the government is voluntary, which it is, then it doesn’t make since to demand that interaction with the government be voluntary if they already are. Therefore, it’s a contradiction that should be removed (remove voluntaryism) because there are no contradictions in nature.

        I’m up for lunch. I live in Midvale. Do you come around here often? Shoot me an email ( tyler@tylerbloyer.com ) next time you plan on being in SLC.

        Tyler

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *