The Sovereignty Series - Swimming with the Sharks - Being a Small Fish in a Big Pond

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Swimming with the Sharks

Being a Small Fish in a Big Pond

The Sovereignty Series


Cognitive Dissonance




To subscribe to 'Dispatches', a periodic newsletter from Cognitive Dissonance and TwoIceFloes Creations, please click here. 

TwoIceFloes is now on Facebook


Let’s suppose you’re charged with a crime, but you are innocent. Despite your innocence the court was able to ‘prove’ you were guilty and a jury of your ‘peers’ agreed with the evidence presented and unanimously returned a guilty verdict. Does the fact that the judicial system was able to win a conviction against you change the fact that you are innocent? Obviously the answer is ‘No’, though that does not alter the reality that you are now doing time.

Or let’s say you received an IRS notice that you owe $15,000 in back taxes. You and your accountant engage in a long running back and forth battle with the IRS where you repeatedly show the ‘agent’ that all your business and personal deductions are standard, reasonable and customary. In fact you refer to IRS publications, recent tax court decisions and tax ‘experts’ that all agree with your position, and yet the IRS agent does not back down.

After talking with an attorney you understand that to fight the IRS in court would cost more than the $15,000 they claim is owed, so you reluctantly ‘agree’ to settle the ‘overdue’ amount for $10,000. Does this change the fact that you are correct and what you just experienced was an IRS shakedown? Once again the obvious answer is ‘No’, though that doesn’t replenish your bank account now that you are lighter in the wallet by $10,000 plus substantial accountant and legal fees. 

Being a small fish in a big pond is nothing new to you and me. We all understand that there are limits to our ability to fight off those who are more powerful than us regardless of how ‘correct’ or ‘right’ we might be. While this knowledge may lead us to carefully consider which battles we engage in or under what circumstances we may consider legal action, it doesn’t materially change our view of who or what we are. Nor should it.

There are those who strenuously argue against the concept of personal sovereignty, saying among other things that since one cannot withstand the assaults of the much larger sharks, our sovereignty is never ‘perfected’ (my word, not theirs) and thus my supposition or premise of ‘personal sovereignty’ is invalid to begin with.

In other words, since I cannot hope to withstand even a relatively minor physical assault by a big dog ‘sovereign’ such as the USA, and are in fact surrounded by said ‘sovereign’, that I do not meet the defined conditions of sovereignty. Essentially I am being told that because I cannot ‘secure’ my borders, since I do not ‘control’ my sovereign territory, that I cannot claim myself sovereign.


Insecure Border


On the surface this appears to be a valid argument provided I agree that the common usage and definition of ‘sovereignty’ is the ‘standard’ I am trying to meet. However, such is not the case as I put forth in my prior three articles on this subject. Since my sovereignty springs from within myself, and is solely mine to keep or give away as I choose, I would argue that even though I reject the reigning powers’ definition of sovereignty, in fact I still meet the ‘control of borders’ requirement.

Can my ‘borders’ be physically overrun by a hostile individual, political entity or an individual acting as the agent of the political entity? Of course it can occur, and regularly does, based upon what I see and read in the daily news. When this happens to nations that are invaded, Iraq for example, there is no doubt that the nation who was successfully attacked has lost its ability to control its borders and rule the roost, let alone self govern other than to the extent allowed by the invader/occupier.

Does that mean that Iraq never was a sovereign entity because it could be, and was, invaded and overrun? Of course not. The real question is if the same applies to my personal sovereignty simply because I have been robbed, beaten, detained or jailed. While my physical ‘being’ has been constrained, my mind and spirit remain completely free unless I decide this is not the case. No one can ‘make me’ think or say anything unless I decide to think or do so.

Something conveniently ignored or forgotten is that just as we (mere peon) sovereign individuals are electronically spied upon in all manner of ways and forms, so are the so called ‘true’ sovereign nations of the world. Commercial, political and military espionage, both electronic and physical ‘inside-the-border’ spying, occurs constantly among ‘friends’ and enemies. Since the sovereign nation’s ‘borders’ are routinely violated, are they actually secure? Once again the obvious answer is ‘No’, yet this doesn’t seem to violate any nation’s sense of sovereignty.

Of course, great pain can be inflicted upon my person in order to coerce and compel me to do what ‘they’ want. While I can be compelled to relinquish my sovereignty temporarily or permanently, either physically or mentally, this does not mean they have my consent. Once again, the comparison to a sovereign ‘nation’ applies. Iraq was invaded and ‘occupied’ for years and it was generally accepted that Iraq was not sovereign until it was ‘allowed’ once again to self determine, secure its borders, and thus resume being sovereign. Did Iraq consent to the invasion and occupation?


Bombing of Iraq


This is where the concept of personal sovereignty as I define it is lost upon many individuals who, while they may claim otherwise, maintain some sort of dependency and/or belief upon outside ‘forces’ to define who and what they are. A significant part of the psychological warfare inflicted upon us is the ingrained from birth ‘belief’ that true power and sovereignty is created and applied externally. This is an enabling lie proffered by our masters to allow us to live easier with the disturbing truth that we are essentially slaves and possess the slave mentality.

I do not claim to have achieved total and absolute ‘personal sovereignty’ nor would I be so arrogant as to think I will soon. To reach that goal requires of us to follow as much a process of subtraction as of addition. Without being insulting to myself and any other person reading this piece, the slave mentality conditioned into us and our ancestors for centuries will not be scrubbed clean in a few weeks, months or even years. Great time and effort must be invested into rooting out all thought threads, ‘beliefs’ (common and individual) and dependencies while replacing them with more centered sovereign orientated thinking.

This is more a process of removal, revitalization and rebuilding than an instant-on flip of a switch. At some point in the lives of all of us our mindset becomes quite static, lethargic, and even catatonic. The result is we rely more and more upon group think and preconceived notions of what and how things should be. Why should we think critically when group think is so accepted and comfortable? Because of this, portions of our worldview must be removed, often slowly in order to minimize disorientation, before new concepts and understandings can be adopted and incorporated into our everyday thinking.

Everything changes once we begin to think and act as sovereign individuals. We have all experienced similar mindset changes, where a decision or realization is made and suddenly the world looks and feels very different. Often it is because we wish to be more proactive in our lives, even if only on an inner psychological level. The key to this process is not to expect perfection, particularly in the early stages, but rather a much more reasonable and sustainable progress. We move the mountain one wheelbarrow at a time.

I would like to point out that sovereignty on a country or nation basis is also a learning process and not an instant-on event. In fact, many so called ‘second and third world’ countries (and several ‘first’ world countries as well) are little more than ‘democratic’ dictatorships barely hidden under the cover of self rule by the ‘citizens’ held hostage within its borders.

The idea that countries such as these would be considered sovereign is amazing to me. Then again, in the ‘scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’ world of power and politics, and with the powerful supporting each other in order to support and ‘legitimize’ themselves, I really shouldn’t be surprised to witness hypocrisy at any and every level. While we Americans love to trumpet the belief that we were enlightened from the moment of the ‘birth’ of our nation, in fact this was hardly the case.




I suspect the reason the wealthy and powerful who currently control the financial mechanisms that essentially dominate the world will not admit that their sovereignty ultimately is derived from my/our sovereignty is because to do so is to admit they ‘need’ us to empower them. Interestingly they do so indirectly by creating laws that supposedly ‘empower’ us, but this is done solely in order to defraud us into shifting or sharing our sovereignty with them. This contradicts their claim to sovereign power by way of their superior intellect, business prowess, hereditary entitlement, military strength, political power, majority consensus or whatever cock and bull story they can pull out of their hat.  

My sovereignty is derived by right of birth as a human being which is the vessel of my consciousness. From this moment forward I choose to reclaim my sovereignty, however slow the process may be. It was fraudulently taken from me when I was too young and immature to understand the nature or implications of the implied consent ‘contract’ I supposedly agreed to.

Unlike so many others who ‘see’ (personal) sovereignty as the product or outcome of external force applied or repelled, and that this sovereignty is created or exchanged by way of the consent of the people, coerced or not, I am withdrawing my consent or agreement in order to reclaim my right to exercise my own sovereignty in the same manner that I am withdrawing my consent to the Ponzi and the financial control system. 



Cognitive Dissonance is unlike anything you will find on the web, a truly unique destination. There you will find distinctive Premium Members only articles as well as discussions on wellness and health, homesteading, spirituality & philosophy and most importantly ‘safe’ forums not found anywhere else. Come by for a peek and stay a while.


Born Free, then Enslaved

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
new game's picture

along time ago i put my own personnel constitution in writing. it was my set of rules to follow.

As guidance, I read  from the old testament (i am by no streatch religious whatsoever).

some of my rules are in violation of the set rules by other sovereigns. I supose this process was the basis for my soveriegn being with the natural laws being my guidance(discovered later)...

and yes, it has evolved over time.

and yes, i have had to compromise.


some call it antisocial behavior(thanks Dad), but some laws are just ment to broken as if they never existed:)

kchrisc's picture

My AR and AK maintain my sovereign borders.

I may lose, but you will pay a price.

“My guillotine maintains justice.”

pauhana's picture

I believe Cog is getting close to the top of Maslow's pyramid and nearing self-actualization.  Few people make it that far.   Distraction is the enemy and the deliberate ploy of our masters.  The trick for the rest of us will be to join him.  The challenge then will be to redesign the context of our society, however we wish to define it (nation, community or simply extended family), and figure out our place in it.  The process of stripping away the unnecessary is painful.  Sort of reminds me of Buddha's struggles. 

"The world is full of willing people; some willing to work, the rest willing to let them."  Robert Frost

chumbawamba's picture

Great stuff, Cog.  It's good to read this concept being parlayed without the use of legal gobbledygook, which might scare off the timid.  This is a subject in which everyone should find an interest.  Taking responsibility for ourselves is the key to personal sovereignty.

To that end, not to lend praise to Teddy Roosevelt (a scumbag), but this is a wonderfully relevant statement he made:

It behooves us to remember that men can never escape being governed. Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others. If from lawlessness or fickleness, from folly or self-indulgence, they refuse to govern themselves, then most assuredly in the end they will have to be governed from the outside. They can prevent the need of government from without only by showing that they possess the power of government from within. A sovereign cannot make excuses for his failures; a sovereign must accept the responsibility for the exercise of the power that inheres in him; and where, as is true in our Republic, the people are sovereign, then the people must show a sober understanding and a sane and steadfast purpose if they are to preserve that orderly liberty upon which as a foundation every republic must rest.


Cognitive Dissonance's picture

My head just exploded and I peed my pants. Chumbawamba just quoted Teddy Roosevelt and it all made sense.  :-)

acetinker's picture

Miffed was right.  You can't play the blues if you've never known the blues.  We are legion, Cog.  Thanks for being a voice.

When the time comes, and we must be close, I think we'll know what to do.

May the God we've never really known bless you and yours.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Miffed has been on a roll. Clearly she is connected to the universe. I suspect that is part of her personal troubles. How do you live a mere human life when you are so connected to the cosmos.

Not THAT is a Cognitive Dissonance if there ever was one. :)

acetinker's picture

Yeah, our 'troubles' are mostly created in our own heads.  Miffed strikes me as a caring individual, as do you and Mrs. Cog.  As for being connected to the cosmos, I suspect we all are.  You are able to articulate it better than me, and I appreciate that.

Duc888's picture

Cog, good blog you have there, I have not posted anything yet, just lurkin a bit.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

We welcome all lurkers, premium members or otherwise.

Mrs. Cog has worked, and continues to work, real hard to make the website layout distinct. Now she helps with finding images, editing my articles, creating her own original content and writing her own articles.

Before you know it she'll just push me off the 1,400 foot cliff and assume my identity. It will be seamless.  :)

<"It's mine....all mine." - Mrs. Cog>

grady8's picture

"It was fraudulently taken from me when I was too young and immature to understand the nature or implications of the implied consent ‘contract’ I supposedly agreed to". Pretty much explains the MO of religions.

Reaper's picture

Much is beyond our control, from others demands upon us, or the weather, or our health, or where we're located. I can no more stop the rain, than stop the government. I will not consent, so I must adapt. A common fallacy is to be believe you owe truth to power or anyone else to preserve your moral standing. You don't. Our government's laws are never argued in our courts, because attorneys argue with other attorneys over prior precedents. Precedents aren't laws, they're whimsical, venal or corrupt prior decisions. What respect or obedience do you owe to any judges' arbitrary prior decisions, that didn't even involve you? Are you to obey laws, which they redefine?

Solzhenitsyn, Russian dissident, described the American quandary of the truth. If the Secret Police ask you which way your friend or anyone went, is it your moral duty to tell the truth? What do people fear, a God, a system of laws, a financial system imposed upon them, or something indoctrinated into them at an early age? Most of us are as indoctrinated as Solzhenitsyn's fellow Gulag prisoners, who cried at Stalin's death,"if only Stalin knew?" Stalin knew; our government knows of its crimes and lies; and, our bankers know of their venality. We should know, also, we owe them nothing,since they only take from us. Their laws are the chains they confine us with and which they cast off themselves. Their financial controls over us are other chains. I say NO, directly. If NO is not a rational choice to be externally expressed, I lie because I am.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"If NO is not a rational choice to be externally expressed, I lie because I am."

But what will people say if you do not obey?


Reaper's picture

People are the herd. I chose to obey to survive and can thwart when safe. The traitor or enemy within is a great danger. I am not another's tool.

VWAndy's picture

Honesty and integrity are not weakness. Fear is the weakness they derive thier power from. At some point people of real character will come to terms with this. Then we will be ready. Keep up the great work Cog.

Reaper's picture

Honesty and integrity is something to offer in exchange for value. Honesty and integrity offered to a predator is foolishness. Who do you expect to reward you for your honesty and integrity offered to your oppressor? Would you tell the Secret Police which way your friend or brother went? In the jungle, must a predator announce his presence to his prey? When hunting deer, must I reveal my presence to the deer?

VWAndy's picture

Thats why honesty and integrity are two different things. To thine own self be true. Im not talking about blind trust its about good judgement. I only need be honest with me and those I choose to be straight with. Even then chain yanking is to be expected. Why take any persons word for any thing even if you know they can be trusted. Its a crazy world. When I was 13 I asked my mom if she thought I was smart. She said Sure, did you take out the trash this morning?

  A person could tell me one thing and my friend another turning us on each other. Try that with my wife and I, phooff yer toast. Even so we dont trust each other blindly. If you are doing it right there should be people around that you can be honest with. Honestly yank your kids chain so they wont be fooled so easily.

Then we have the golden rule. If some choose to deal in a fashion return the same. Now I will try to treat others as I would like to be treated to a point.


Cognitive Dissonance's picture

“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”

Frank Herbert, Dune

maddog2020's picture

Mr. Cog you are a amazing enlightened individual!

Keep it up!

Those of us in the trenchs in the fight against all the foes of the Western Enlightenment that began with Martin Luther and then to Martin Luther King and on.....

sometimes all is dark but in the long term all is positive!


blindman's picture

Terry Allen - Amarillo Highway
Bap Kennedy (& Steve Earle) - Angel is the Devil
here i have this list of entertaining links ....
Keynesian Economic Theory As Applied To Private Sector Independent Contracting
R.L. Burnside-"It's Bad You Know" from "Come on In"
fracking fracking
The Rolling Stones - Memory Motel (with Lyrics)
.."got the MInd of a fool and ... use it well...
just a memory, and it used to mean so much to me..." k.r/m.j.
Is San Francisco New York?
"...Whatever the Silicon Valley gold rush has done or will do, it’s already given us an entirely new species of yuppie mogul: the one who stockpiles bitcoin and speaks in hacker pidgin, the one who wears Uniqlo on a Gulfstream and obsesses over single-origin coffees. The kind, in other words, who plays the underdog even while sitting on top of the world."

sink critically's picture

That was beautiful, man. I agree with nmewn that it cannot be taken. It's also ok to assert, but an announcement is an individual choice. Counting oneself as a whole person can happen with or without a formal declaration. Some of us have never looked at ourselves any other way.

Gaurden's picture

Only one law is really necessary.

Dont intentionally hurt other people.

maybe we need to get the basics right before we create other laws.

Kayman's picture

The problem with laws is they are produced by lawyers and adjudicated by judges (lawyers).

There are so many laws that they can cherry-pick nearly anything to subjugate you. And as Cog so aptly outlines in the beginning, it becomes an economic question only.  Being right has a price.

For me, I have now chosen, via concepts evolved from ZH, to simply do less, produce less value, thereby starving these slimy parasites of tax revenue.

Ifigenia's picture

since the invasion of Iraq i stop buying anything relate to the multi-nationals cias. v.g., no more coca-cola, not because i dont like the real thing, but i know part of their tax money go directly to the war/killing machine. More i drink, more i contribute to the killings of more people.

no more banksters's picture

"Some politicians like Bill Clinton and George W. Bush adopted this perception later and tried to establish Western-type democracies based on this concept of Negative Liberty, maintaining also the "fundamentalism" of the big, mostly American, corporations and banks. They applied a massive violence in other countries (Iraq, Yugoslavia, Somalia, etc.), bringing another bloodbath through a different way. At the same time, they imposed progressively, new measures of repression and restrictions of civil liberties in Western democracies in the name of protection against terrorism, thus verifying Berlin's warning."

RockyRacoon's picture

Thanks.   I needed that.

nmewn's picture

"My sovereignty is derived by right of birth as a human being which is the vessel of my consciousness. From this moment forward I choose to reclaim my sovereignty, however slow the process may be. It was fraudulently taken from me when I was too young and immature to understand the nature or implications of the implied consent ‘contract’ I supposedly agreed to."

The way I have always looked at it is this, it hasn't been taken, its an impossible thing to take...its just being suppressed.

The contract between sovereigns, you and I and them (the vehicle of accepting consent and of granting it) was always based on "authorities" being subject to every law passed. This was deemed fair to all parties (sovereigns), how could it not be?

This is no longer the case, the contract is now broken and it wasn't by us.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I get your point. I was using artistic license to be dramatic.

But a 'contract' is only valid when either or both parties are not being duplicitous. Otherwise it is fraud. In that case the goods or services exchanged, in this case my will, my consent, my participation, were 'taken' as in theft under false pretenses.

If I as a child/young adult was indoctrinated into a fraudulent system by force (see what happens if your children don't go to school) and brain washed and conditioned into believing the system is fair and honest, which is is not and may never have been, which then induces me to 'consent' to sign a 'contract', then exactly how is that child/young adult able to enter into a viable and valid 'legal' contract? 

A contract 'signed' as part of a confidence game is not binding.

rubiconsolutions's picture

I could not agree more. As a Christian anarchist (yes, there are a few of us) I have long wondered about how to withdraw my consent. Absent our ability to withdraw said consent aren't we all slaves? I mean, if there is no practical way to withdraw consent, to be sovereign then we are slaves. And really are deluding ourselves that we are free.

Kayman's picture

A contract requires Capacity, Consideration, Consensus, Intention and Legality; the absence of which means you do not have a contract.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Which is why ultimately it is with the implied threat of violence that compliance and cooperation is gained.

nmewn's picture

I think what Kayman is saying is, a child can't enter into a valid contract due to mental maturity...their capacity for understanding.

Fortunately, at least one set of parents stood behind one precocious little child when he refused to stand & swear allegiance to something he didn't understand...or he understood it all to well perhaps...not everythiing is taught in school.

Of course the teacher & administrators thought him a child of communists & was the sixties afterall. Actually no, we are sovereigns, its how I was brought up and how I'm bringing up mine.

In this world ;-)

falak pema's picture
Swimming with the Sharks - Being a Small Fish in a Big Pond

That's what Gen. Giap told the Viet Cong in their fight with the soldiers in the photo series of your previous article.

"Swim like small fish amongst the people to avoid those US sharks".

Giap was Spartacus...of the 20 th century; he won the war and then lost the peace 'cos he was not a man of his age to understand the pace of change. 


DavidPierre's picture

The fight for our planet, physical and spiritual, a fight of cosmic proportions, is not a vague matter of the future; it has already started. The forces of Evil have begun their decisive offensive, you can feel their pressure, and yet your screens and publications are full of prescribed smiles and raised glasses.

At no time has the world been without war. Not in seven or ten or twenty thousand years.

Neither the wisest of leaders, nor the noblest of kings, nor yet the Church — none of them has been able to stop it.

And don't succumb to the facile belief that wars will be stopped by hotheaded socialists. Or that rational and just wars can be sorted out from the rest. There will always be thousands of thousands to whom even such a war will be senseless and unjustified.

Quite simply, no state can live without war, that is one of the state's essential functions. ... War is the price we pay for living in a state. Before you can abolish war you will have to abolish all states. But that is unthinkable until the propensity to violence and evil is rooted out of human beings.

The state was created to protect us from evil. In ordinary life thousands of bad impulses, from a thousand foci of evil, move chaotically, randomly, against the vulnerable. The state is called upon to check these impulses — but it generates others of its own, still more powerful, and this time one-directional. At times it throws them all in a single direction — and that is war.

Even if we are spared destruction by war, our lives will have to change if we want to save life from self-destruction.

You only have power over people so long as you don’t take everything away from them. But when you’ve robbed a man of everything he’s no longer in your power — he’s free again.


falak pema's picture

True, but how do you stop anarchy from running havoc and subsequently the whole process to rebegin in name of "law and order"-- and justice?

Solzy had not read his history backwards before 1917, he was more emotional than rational and refused to understand the fundamental conundrum that man is weak alone and strong when united and thus OBLIGED to define rules of nationhood; all time dated and requiring permanent reappraisal, thus an ongoing process. Its voluntary abandonment of personal power that allows nationhood to be born.

Whence the circle that recommences time and again. 

Your fundamental analysis is VALID at the level of the individual : "give unto Caesar...but cherish your soul.." 

But its a difficult propostion to defend as a  CITIZEN of a political construct which REQUIRES we not separate ourselves from body politic, as the nation is US; or its THEM, the despots.

DavidPierre's picture

How we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?

Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?.

The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!

If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.


Ifigenia's picture

"What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest" sound like the Gestapo in operation,

SafelyGraze's picture

do you have any more photos of those "puppets"


Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Mrs. Cog found that one. I don't do puppets. :)

DavidPierre's picture

BUT...But...but !!!

WTF...Facebook !!!

VWAndy's picture

Realy one year 0 likes. Wow. I picked up a pile in just a few weeks. Give up dude i cant even spell.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Seinfeld reference. "No soup for you, come back one year."