This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
A Brief Rumination on the Coming Cashless Society
Today, I hired an independent researcher to do some legal consulting for me. We agreed on a $100 "detainer". Since I began checking out of the system in 2009, and mainly to avoid any more contact with the IRS, I stopped doing business with all banks. I don't have any bank accounts of any kind, no credit cards, and I don't even have a debit card through services like PayPal because they're all tied in to the same corrupt banking system, and the IRS can (and most likely will) find you or at least your money by data mining your banking records. So to eliminate this attack vector I primarily operate with United States Notes (better known to the sheep as Federal Reserve Notes), i.e. cash. So to pay the detainer should have been a simple matter of running over and depositing a $100 note into my researcher's account at my local Chase Bank branch. Nope.
When I got there, the teller informed me that Chase does not accept cash deposits. The funds had to be in the form of a check or they could do a debit or an advance on a debit/credit card. I told her I thought that was a very silly policy and she gave me one of those, "Oh well, fuck you" smiles. This was actually in the news last year, and Chase's official policy is here. The reason they give for this is: "We’re trying to do more to combat money laundering and other criminal activities", which is banker euphemism for "We're slowly phasing out cash from society to make it easier to control and manipulate all of you serfs MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!" I inquired if Chase would accept a post office money order, and she replied in the affirmative. Haha, bitch, the day is mine!
In the years since I went all cash, I've learned a few tricks and "backdoors" to still get paid for the particular expertise I dispense for money and to also pay for services where a check is required. Of course there are gift cards issued by Visa, MasterCard, American Express, etc., which act in most cases like normal credit cards. But in fact once you register the card you have opened a bank account with the issuing bank. The fact that you had to provide a Social Security Number to register the card should have clued you in (read the fine print on the bottom of the page here; note "Green Dot Bank ... Member FDIC"). You can use these cards for up to 2 weeks as a straight debit card without registering (at least that was the case when I experimented with a WalMart MoneyCard using the Green Dot Bank network). After that, you won't be able to use it until you register it (with a SSN) or else you can return it and have the balance refunded. If you are going to use a gift card, I suggest getting one of the above mentioned and using it up within the registration grace period, or get a speficially non-reloadable gift card (edit: which do not require registration with SSN) that expires once it's depleted (i.e. it's more like actual cash, and if you lose it, you lost it). However, unless I want to order something online or make a reservation that requires some sort of credit card, I prefer to stay away from the banks altogether and use US Postal Service Money Orders.
First of all, the post office has an interesting history in the United States, and although the modern United States Postal Service is officially "an independent establishment of the executive branch" (see 39 U.S.C. § 201) it actually rests in its own jurisdiction. I can't get into the intricacies of what this all means (primarily because I haven't researched it all out myself), but I do know that USPS Money Orders are not governed by the same laws that govern, say, national banks, or even money orders issued by independent operators. For example, I can walk into a post office and purchase a money order up to a denomination of $2,000.00 for a fee of $1.60 (or up to $500.00 for $1.25). I don't have to present anything other than the order and the cash. No ID is required. The clerk takes the money and your fee, makes up the money order, and hands it back to you, blank except for the imprinted amount. Whereas, if you were to purchase a money order from e.g. a grocery store, as of a few years ago you are now required to present ID, which is recorded in some fashion (to prevent fraud and thwart terrorism, of course). In other words, it's still tied in with the banking system, and subject to banking laws.
As mentioned, the USPS money order is blank and it's up to you to fill it out. If you want you can just leave it blank and hold it indefinitely as cash; when you want to spend it you fill it out to yourself and cash it. Or you can spend it as cash with anyone who will accept it (think precious metals dealers, people). You can fill it out, or just hand it to them and let them fill it out, and get any change coming back in cash. The best part is you don't need a bank account to cash them; you can simply go to any post office, present it for payment (with ID), and you get handed back a pile of notes and coins. Now, this isn't always fullproof: sometimes the teller doesn't have the cash at hand to cash out your entire money order if it's particularly large, so you will either have to go at the end of the day when their coffers are filled or find a post office that does more volume and therefore will have more cash on hand. It's a pain when they don't have enough money to cover the instrument; to me that's fraud, or more specifically check-kiting (try using the "Oh well, sorry!" excuse yourself when you bounce a check and see what happens). I've tried yelling at the staff and complaining to the Postmaster General, but there's really not much you can do other than sue in court...an interesting proposition, and one I would like to research some other time when I don't have so many fires already raging. At any rate, it's a reasonable trade-off for being free from the banksters and their shitty, almost arbitrary and capricious anonimity-assaulting rules. Also, there's never a fee to cash the money order, whereas most banks charge a $5-$10 fee for cashing a check drawn on the bank for non-account holders.
So continuing my saga, off I went to the post office to exchange the piece of paper I had in my pocket for another piece of paper that Chase bank would be happy to accept (after having to wait in line for half an hour; ironically I had a $900 money order waiting for me at my mail pick-up but I wasn't able to cash it on the spot because it was still too early in the day :\). I then went back over to Chase and handed them the money order, my anonimity and freedom preserved, and my researcher paid. My time wasted.
I wanted to write about this in the same way I wrote about the shantytowns popping up in Stockton, California. It's one thing to talk about it, and in the case of the looming cashless society, to piss and moan over it, but when it actually arrives in the form of a small incremental move like the above, and it confronts you, it is prudent to take heed. This is a harbinger of the cashless society that is slowly creeping over us. The clock is ticking. Take advantage of it while you can, because once it's gone, so is another aspect of our freedom. And unless an alternative currency not controlled by any particular government comes to the fore, or precious metals make a big comeback as currency, or barter returns to local communities as a big aspect of our local economies again, or perhaps some new currency spontaneously pops up in some part of the country or world that takes off organically, unless something replaces the relatively free currency we have presently, we will have lost forever a fundamental aspect of our freedom. If even our petit spending money on things like a quick snack at the gas station on the way home or an eighth of weed from your local dealer is controlled by international banksters, how free can you really be? If you don't have the credits to even pay for a drink because the government cut you off for not being patriotic enough--if you don't have the mark--what will you do?
I am Chumbawamba.
- advertisements -


I understand your reasons for trying to unwind yourself (as a corporation) from the State, chumbawamba. Good for you. But you may also want to consider the practical value of a corporation, especially a foreign coroporation, for dealing with the banks. That would be a corporation you create, not you personally. Using that and the idea of a W-8 (can't be used directly), you can separate 'banking' business quite effectively from you as a person.
This isn't a suggestion for tax avoidance or any illegal schemes - it's precisely for the purpose you describe: banks are set up to deal with corporations, tax ids, checks and credit cards. If you don't want to give your SSN, then they treat you like a kook. If you're incorporated with a proper tax id, then they're happy to do business with you as a corporation. It's beyond most of us as a 'do it yourself' project, but incorporating and getting the basic legal and tax advice is worth it if you're spend much time on avoiding the system as an individual. It's much harder to disappear than it is to replace yourself as a corporate entity.
I prefer private international trusts formed without the United States. You can then apply for a TIN from the IRS and do business under it, but it is not beholden to the US government as its sponsor.
See http://passingbucks.com
-Chumblez.
Fascinating.
Chumba, always good to see you back. I hope to see many more of your articles along these lines on the Hedge. They are sorely needed here.
Thought this might add to your point about "the United States - what is that?"
With regard to a "State", or "state", that is defined as follows in the Congressional Record of 1864:
<<SEC. 182: And be it further enacted, That wherever the word state is used in this act, it shall be construed to include the territories and the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out the provisions of this act.
APPROVED, June 30, 1864.>>
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=013/llsl013.db...
As far as I know (but I am not American), this is the definition of "State" (as opposed to "state") that the Federal United States of America uses: the "state" is CONSTRUED by statute to mean the territories and district of Columbia, under the Federal Corporation of the United States of America, which has usurped the power of the sleeping government of the united States, which is government of the people and by the people. Yet this what, AFAIK, supports the State's claim of taxes due, and its enforcement thereof. There is also no limitation, AFAIK, on what the State may repossess, since everything the citizen-caretaker 'owns', including its body and labour, by these statutes may be claimed at any time by the State. This legalises slavery, since the slavery may be counted as 'voluntary' due to the citizen's 'voluntary' citizenship within the district of DC.
The key here, AFAIK, is to clarify that one is NOT a denizen of Washington, DC, and is therefore NOT covered by its noxious statutes. Fail to do this, and the State may legally (if not lawfully) repossess any of its assets that are currently under care of its own (DC-owned) citizens.
Of course, they can still come and steal your stuff with guns and enforcement freaks, emprison you as a slave and continue to benefit from your labour in prison. But that would not be under colour of law, and maybe could be appealed to an international tribunal. I have limited faith in law when State guns (and propaganda, and sheeple support) can ignore all due process whatsoever. But FWIW, I believe that the reason the State in all our countries is doing whatever it wants, regardless of 'votes', referenda, or any form of public voice, is because from these centuries-old statutes, under colour of law, they CAN, being corporations whose allegiance is to their owners and not their (citizen) assets. Votes mean nothing - they are merely statements of public preference, which may or may not be acknowledged as it suits.
Please correct where I am wrong. I am still learning about all this. It is more difficult because I am not an American, so my countries of citizenship, lacking any meaningful stated constitution that I am aware of, have even less awareness of the corporate fraud that has taken over their governments, and so less work has been done on our plight. At least the united States has an express constitution, that defines governmentally-acknowledged rights. The Aus 'constitution' is little more than an outlining of government relationships and Canada does not even have that - just a series of disparate documents that together make up a 'constitution' which is, nonetheless, the 'supreme law of the land'. I am still trying to work out whether the Federal Corporation of Canada Inc. (the country of Canada is where I'm currently living) is construed as part of DC, or some other tentacle of the BIS central bank system via the fucking English "queen" -- and whether there is any document that explicitly states how I do not have to be subject to its control. (Possibly the Magna Carta, still not sure.)
What sucks hardest is that, being born 'free' (for the 5 minutes it took until my parents 'registered' me via the birth certificate), I have to become a goddamn lawyer, historian, and civil rights advocate all rolled into one in order to try to earn back any degree of tenuous freedom from the interference of these vermin-infested slave-supported federal corporations -- all while trying to create & save enough wealth to keep body and soul together to provide for myself & family. It's enough to make you want to put a bullet thru your brain.
I feel your pain, Renfield. I am trying to put 3 kids through college while researching this. You seem to have figured most of it out, at least the American side of it. Not sure how it works in Canada. However, I know that it all boils down to whether a particular government, LEO or court has jurisdiction over you. Chumba showed that if you follow the rabbit hole far enough you find that you end up back where you started but with a different Res (look this up in Black's Law Dictionary - it is the key to Resident) or status.
The Vatican started this whole corporate ponzi hundreds of years ago. However, despite all of the shell corporations, misleading treaties, twisted words and fascist enforcers they still need us to VOLUNTEER our compliance. If you declare yourself a Sovereign, then they have no jurisdiction. If any one of us has a res or is a resident then it is within the universe as a spark of consciousness. In the U.S. I can state that I am a natural non-person (Sovereign) of 1 of the 50 states but I am NOT a citizen of the United States which is a corporation within the 10 square miles of the District of Columbia including the Territories. A Christian could claim that they are a resident of Heaven and therefore a temporary non-resident alien visiting Canada and therefore not subject to taxation by the Canadian government which has no jurisdiction over a Heavenly being.
Thanks, Chumba for digging deeper.
Thanks, cro-maat, it helps to talk over this stuff even if it is at 2:00 in the morning and only online. "Jurisdiction" appears to be just about everything, now that the corporate government has pretty much discarded even a pretense of being about 'the people'. We are down to the last days of this kind of governance, and so their grip is tightening because their time getting short. If they knew they had time, they would not be as open and sweeping as they are. It's now or never for them, and so they are going for it all.
All we can do is make it clear and explicit that there is no 'volunteering' our compliance, that therefore they are guilty of identity theft, fraud, negligence, theft, murder, genocide. Enforcing this is another matter. If we strip them of colour of law, which is what they are trying for with these fraudulent strawman identities, then they must resort to illegal violence. They will not hesitate to do this -- they are already occupying countries illegally -- ours under colour of law, and others (the Middle East) entirely without it. Which is why it was important that Putin stated to the UN that the United States' invasion of Iraq is illegal. At some point, international justice will catch up to them. But we have no means to call international guns. If the State comes to steal our property and emprison and further enslave us, there is not a lot we can do about it at this point in time. All we can do is try to wake up sleeping sheep, which will gradually weaken the State and give us (the people) more power; so in an ironic way it helps that they are becoming so blatant (asset forfeiture, which is in reality asset seizure, for instance). Sheep sometimes won't wake up until the guns are pointed directly at them and theirs.
I am not a Christian -- mostly Taoist -- but Holy Scripture of all kinds comforts me. I think sometimes of this scripture: "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." I take that literally to mean that many of those in the know are satanists. Government agents are mostly just more sleeping sheep. They did not write these statutes and probably don't even know them. They have no real authority, but the guns of darkness back them up and that's what keeps me up at night.
I can't claim to be a resident of Heaven being the wrong religion for that but I can explicitly state that my compliance is NOT voluntary, and even if it were it is not informed. Lack of disclosure means there is no real contract. This could even release the sheep, in the end. A fraudulent contract, whose terms are not disclosed and therefore not consented to, is not a contract. It is fraud. And no-one is bound by contract to a criminal, in furtherance of their crime. I can declare my existence as a human being, on the same plane as they are, and therefore by definition NOT their chattel or their asset. I can repudiate any 'strawman' that the state has drawn up to fraudulently represent me, so this I intend to do -- when it is necessary. Until then I stay quiet and hidden as much as possible.
Most of all, their biggest fear is exposure. So this we can do: expose them, talk about ways around them as this posted article does, and share others. Refuse to be shamed into silence, refuse to listen to their 'media', resist all their efforts in any way possible and most of all, refuse to let them win with stupid sheep issues of race, gender, or religion which that elite wants us to talk about. Let's talk about them instead, their rogue 'states', their corporations pretending to be governments, and enumerate every law they are breaking.
I am still reading through (slowly, to understand) this affidavit I found, by Anna Reitz:
http://www.annavonreitz.com/commerciallien.pdf
I think it is quite clear, so far, and I am looking eventually to reproduce something like this where I live. She also emphasizes the importance of un-incorporation:
http://www.paulstramer.net/2015/11/what-is-plan-show-me-step-by-step-is....
We can revoke our 'implicit consent', and we can un-incorporate (which maybe an American would understand as 'secede'). I am moving into an unincorporated locality. So far, so good. Next I need to unincorporate myself, but my family is another matter. There is also the recent victory in Lufkin County, Texas:
http://www.youarelaw.org/judge-and-doj-attorneys-abandon-case-midstream-wow
and this in Tyler County, Texas, where a petitioner's demand for dismissal with prejudice of an alleged case, for lack of jurisdiction, seems to have sent them away (for now):
http://www.youarelaw.org/massive-fraud-in-the-court-case-reveals-breakth...
and I think Joe Banister had a victory as well, but that was long ago and I do not know of any follow up from that:
http://www.bernhoftlaw.com/_documents/nyt_protestors.pdf
But as long as the criminals are running the governments and courts, as long as they are still active, all victories are temporary and nothing important will be widely publicised. So the key is to protect ourselves with information for when and if the time comes, and support those who are working for the resistance no matter how they may seem to us personally. The State still has its guns and at its heart, it cares nothing for the law. So until there is international assistance or things become so bad that enough sheep wake up, we have to support each other knowing that they may just invade us anyway. The Resistance is growing, but it is still young and vulnerable. Sorry to go on so long. There is no-one I can talk to where I am so it is hard not to drone on here. Promise I won't do it again, not on this thread anyway.
Renfield, I will be keeping an eye out for your posts in the future - you do your homework, and write well. Don't worry about 'droning on', when you have something intelligent to say. God, Buddha, and maybe even Allah know there are plenty of ZH posts without a shred of intelligence in them.
Thank you, NFP. Brevity is the soul of wit - and the patience of our cranky commenters has helped me out many times.
I'd be careful with the use of the term "sovereign". I avoid it altogether. It only causes problems, especially now that enough knuckleheads who knew only enough to get themselves in trouble made the "sovereign citizen" an enemy of government and subject to appropriate treatment as such.
Also, consider the meaning: one might be "sovereign" with respect to other men but man is still subject to god/nature, and one cannot be sovereign and subject at the same time...it's an oxymoron (unless we are discussing distinct jurisdictions, which can coexist).
Anyway, I prefer to define myself as an immortal living soul made in the image of my creator, which is not the United States, so they can never have jurisdiction over me that I don't voluntarily give up. I have been working on rescinding all my contracts with the various state and federal agencies I invoked over the years but it's a tricky process. Sometimes these judges just truly don't know about jurisdiction because they've never been properly challenged and had their ass handed to them on the matter with an order from a federal judge.
-Chumblez.
it makes sense to avoid that term in any American discussion, particularly since the rise of the "sovereign citizen" meme
nevertheless, in the Rest Of The World that term is still easily defined: whoever has an army, a flag and a leadership that is recognized by other such entities
the "Islamic State", for example, has even a territory, but is a bit lacking in recognition by others, though
back to the article: "And unless an alternative currency not controlled by any particular government comes to the fore..."
hmmm... a currency not controlled by only one government. a currency that would make it more difficult for one government to expropriate or devalue it...
a currency that would make it more difficult for one government to wage war against cash...
perhaps I should find a project that has the goal of setting such a currency? a regional project, spanning one continent, perhaps? hmmm...
Ghordius, honest question: would you not consider the EU that one government, controlling many nations through a single currency? How is it not that? It looks to me like it is a mini-USD, acting within Europe as the USD acts globally, and quite out of control, but I am no expert.
Qaddafi is that you?
SDR?
Bitcoin will fall to Quantum Super Computers! Be aware of tech well in advance of that crypto. And then, you will again be part of a banking SYSTEM.
Thanks for the update Chum!
Give it all away, why don't you!
The Old Man
If that happens every currency on the planet will fail. Quantum Computers will provide the recipe for gold from lead just as easy as cracking SHA_256.
they can already make gold. they just can't make inexpensive gold.