Demystifying the language of a statist Noahide

As I said in my last post, the vast majority of Noahides that I interact with and their rabbis are statist. That means the logical conclusion of their thinking and teaching must be that governments, especially modern ones, have legitimacy and ownership rights over the population. In simple terms, every pleb is owned by government and its edicts.

Yes, this blog is called Seven Laws Blog UK, but that does not mean I label myself as “noahide.” That has a “religious clique” connotation to it that I want nothing to do with.

Anyway, a proud Noahide, a guy who repeatedly introduces himself as a Noahide when he comments, commented on my last post and confirmed so much of what I said, but I want to use his comment to show the distinction between what he believes and actual reality. As a statist, he pumps a lot of faith into fiction, and it’s my hope I can use his words to make it plain how much unreality he preaches.

Here is his comment.

As Italian Noahide, I disagree with your interpretation.

Limiting the discussion to democratic nations, I remind you that the obligation to pay taxes does NOT derive from the government, but from the laws approved by Parliament, whose members are directly elected by the people. Therefore, the government has nothing to do with this duty, which arises from an act, the legislative one, which is issued by the representatives of the people. Taxes are used to finance the functioning of the nation, not just the government (think of the judiciary, the police force, the construction of schools, hospitals, etc. etc.). To function, a civil society needs taxation. Even assuming that tax evasion does not constitute a violation of the Noahide prohibition against theft, as far as I am concerned it is a violation of the Noahide obligation to establish a jurisdictional and judicial system that ensures the balanced development of human society. Tax evasion is a crime in all democratic nations; incitement to commit a crime or condoning a crime are not compatible with the Noahide Law, except in the case in which the crime contemplated by the Penal Code of a democratic nation is clearly in conflict with the Noahide Law, a hypothesis which, in a jurisdictional system of a democratic nation, is almost impossible: there is no democratic nation whose law imposes conduct such as, for example,idolatry, blasphemy, or adultery

I’m sure plenty will read that and won’t see anything wrong with it. It reminds me of a series I did in the past about a Noahide in the UK that held that a godless societal system and government was better than one that upheld the seven laws. Yes, I said it: a self-proclaimed noahide glad that there was a godless system rather than a divine law system. These people shoot themselves in the foot.

Anyway, let me start the analysis of the Italian’s speech.

He starts of by talking about “democratic nations.” What does this refer to? Democracy refers to the notion that the people (demos) rule (kratos). Just look at that and think. This Noahide thinks there are nations where it is the people that rule.

Is that practically true?

I’ve written long articles expressing my disdain for democracy (like this one). I need to be brief here.

When I think of political democracy, all I see is deceit, delusion and deception. Evil, essentially. To cut to the chase, in reality, the people, the individuals who make up the population of a territory neither rule nor do they have any rulership to delegate to others. This is a crucial fact that highlights the lie of democracy.

When an idiot ticks the ballot and selects a candidate – that’s the blunt way of saying “when a voter votes” – he is declaring that he wants to impose his will on his neighbour by means of someone else. And since, as even the Italian admitted, governments do not uphold the seven laws, making them necessarily evil, the idiot wants wicked people to dominate his neighbour. The idiot has no real or actual power over his neighbour. Thus, he cannot give any real power or authority to the person he’s voting for. But the wicked political party or candidate he votes for will have what matters most in a godless and wicked political system: the gun, the means of violence to hurt others, and the baseless faith of the pleb class that he’s allowed to use it where others can’t.

But be very clear: it is not the people who rule. It’s a percentage of them who vote for someone else to rule. And then that politician or the head politician of a political party is the one that actually rules, not the people. That is proven by the fact that the politician or his party can break promises and do what the people don’t want. That easily shows the people don’t rule.

But it is questionable if the politicians who rule. In recent years, the influence of NGO’s (find out what that means), investors, lobbies, medical, financial and scientific advisors have become more obvious. The COVID lie made it even clearer that governments seem to follow a certain centralised agenda which seem to point to other organisations pointing the finger for where politicians should drive their cattle-populations. The World Health Organisation. The World Economic Forum. The United Nations. NATO. The European Union. The Central Banks. The International Monetary Fund. So even when the gormless cattle vote and get their oppressor in place, it’s doubtful whether that person is really in charge.

The idiot says, “but we can vote for someone else.” The delusion is real.

That is “the democratic nation.” Where people beg for someone else to dominate everyone else, but the people have no such rulership to give. That is delusion! And it’s a greedy means to oppress others.

May God curse the democratic nation!

The Italian then looks down from his superior seat at me and chooses to remind me, as if I had forgotten, that tax obligation comes from approved law of Parliament, not the government.

Does anyone other than me see the contradiction in that? What is Parliament? That’s a bunch of people said to be part of what? The government. So the laws of Parliament are the laws of government.

And what factually are human laws? Just human opinions, nothing more. They are not divine or special writ. Just opinion. There is nothing in the physical nature of the people who make up Parliament that makes them different to another human. But there is an added quality. It’s not authority. It’s not obligation as if a person is morally bound to do something. No, it’s a threat. “You must give me what I demand or else I’ll hurt you.” That’s it.

So the Italian creates some obligation when, in reality, there is only a demand and a threat.

Sad, really, how people make more of something than what it really is. That is the seed of idolatry. I’m not calling the noahide an idolator. But I am saying that idolatry comes from elevating an aspect of creation beyond its nature.

But I guess romanticising rape may help the victim ease the painful idea that they are being violated.

What is “tax?” It’s a compulsory contribution to government. That’s the nice way of putting it. I’ve already said what it is: someone who feels they own you demands the fruit of your labour or else they will hurt you. It’s the way to decorate robbery. A robber is at least honest and doesn’t feel you morally owe him something.

For those noahides who support wicked governments (those who don’t uphold the seven laws), this is a wicked robber who violates you regardless of your consent and then uses the money to support a system that doesn’t uphold the seven laws or divine morality. If a good person would just think about what that means, what deeds they are supporting … I believe it may scar them emotionally. In a world where injustice and corruption is systemic, where idolatry is legally protected as a human right, where “tax-funded” medical services are used, not only to murder the unborn, but to create drug dependency and snake oil and sustain a despicable pharmaceutical industry, to pay for cops who do more harm than good, … to list it all would take too long.

But along comes another lie: “the representatives of the people.” Which people? Realistically, can a politician represent the person who didn’t vote for him? Can he represent masses of people with contradictory desires and wishes? Can he represent the individual who doesn’t accept the legitimacy of government? Of course not! So he doesn’t represent “the people.”

What does the word “represent” mean? Does it mean to speak for someone else? A politician cannot speak for those who disagree with him. When all is said and done, a person can only speak for themselves. An individual can hire someone to speak for him, but contractually, that true representative only has equal say of the individual and is under the control of the individual. That representative, that delegate, doesn’t have more power than the individual. And the contract can be ended when the individual wants it over. But if that representative is hired by two people with conflicting wishes, he cannot represent both. That’s impossible.

Yet the noahide thinks a politician can represent masses of people. That’s impossible. Additionally, the government has more power than the individual and can force its will on the individual. That’s not representation. And there is no real contract between the individual and government. And the government can change the rules when it wants and the individual is still bound to its decrees. In no real way is this representation, only more romanticising the fact that the individual is dominated, controlled. “Do what they say, or they will hurt you.”

So when the noahide opines that representatives of the people exist and can bind the people under “acts,” he has again contradicted himself. A real representative cannot bind the person he represents, only an owner can.

Another meaning of represent can mean to exemplify certain characteristics or beliefs. If a noahide who claims to uphold God’s law feels that politicians who don’t uphold God’s law represents them, that’s a sorry state of affairs. Evil represents you? The abolition and undermining of God’s law stands in your place? What a sorry state of affairs!

He adds that these wrongly-named “representatives” are “directly elected.” Sadly for such a believer in the lie of “people-rule,” the vast majority of government is unelected. Government isn’t limited to the people the vote-counters put into place, but it has many departments that the citizen cannot touch. There are financial and advisory influences over government that the voter cannot touch. Essentially, in even the best picture of “democracy” were it is honest (hahahahahahahahaha!), when the percentage of voters get someone they erroneously think is their “representative” (but cannot be), that has the effect of a person blowing their breath on a lion and moving a few hairs.

Me knowing what taxation (robbery, the removal of consent), the noahide says “a civil society needs taxation.” My god! What a sorry world we live in. It may be true that a society needs to rob one another to keep going. Just don’t add “civil” to its description. What did Frederic Bastiat say about this “legal plunder?”

The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else …

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.

Frederic Bastiat, The Law

And that’s the state of Jews and Noahides. Plunder is a praised and morally obligatory way of life for these people. The state must rob you to function. Robbery is the lifeblood of “civil society.” I’ll be the rare person who would be happy to see such a society die, especially when its other sins that such robbery funded comes to light.

Did you see the examples that the noahide brought up for what robbery helps fund? “Judiciary, the police force, the construction of schools, hospitals, …” The judiciary which ignores the seven laws and with a demented system (I wonder if this noahide is another one who loves the jury system with lawyers). The army of the government, the police, the head of the spear that is usually ignorant force and violence that swallows innocent and guilty alike. Schools, the state indoctrination camps that separate children from their parents and real life to program kids to be controllable workers, learning useless information but conditioning them to obey certain “authorities.” And hospitals, the dens of drug pushers and butchers, and bureaucrats. This noahide has been programmed well by the system. Being a noahide didn’t stop him looking like a twin of Agent Smith. (Those who don’t know the movie called “The Matrix” needn’t worry about that comparison.)

Knowing what taxation is, and how it benefits the officials of government who get their pay from it, is it any wonder that the ones robbing you would say “it’s wrong not to let us plunder you?” I chuckle when the noahide says, “tax evasion is a crime in democratic nations.” It’s like all the bullshit is condensed into one singular phrase.

For me, what is truly disheartening, since I am passionate for the seven laws, is the final statements of the noahide. He openly admits that the politicians of the governments don’t uphold the seven laws. They don’t uphold the seven laws. Just ponder that. If anyone out there actually loves God and his law, just let that settle in. Earlier on, the noahide says that he thinks my opposition to taxes is incompatible with some law he thinks is one of the seven, to establish a justice system that ensures the balanced development of human society. I’m sure he has rabbis teaching him this. Yet, he knows he’s talking about governments that don’t uphold the divine laws. That means idolatry runs rife. That means that murder can and is legal. That means that injustice flourishes. That destroys the balanced development of society. Since we can get the death penalty for breaking the seven laws, ignoring the laws may mean our very existence is pointless.

As Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes) says, Fear God and keep his commandments, because that’s all a human is. Yet a noahide speaks for supporting systems that actively work at negating God’s commandments, that take away the basis of our humanity, relegating us to beasts, to animals. When the law of God is undermined, what are we?

Maimonides taught, and Nachmanides did not contradict, that the law of Dinim (Laws, Courts, Judgments) was that Gentiles to establish courts that upheld the seven laws. The Talmud teaches that the law of Dinim had a prohibition, not to do acts that pervert justice, don’t do injustice. The current governmental system is impacted by both aspects of this law. It does NOT and the people do not establish courts that uphold the seven. And the judiciary it does have perverts justice, I believe, frequently. The cops are ignorant of their own law, much less God’s. The juries are ignorant judges who do not know actual laws of righteousness. The lawyers end up just being salesman aiming to twist the ignorant jury. And many judges are just tyrants. And God’s law is left on the scrapheap. And the noahides and rabbis have the absolute gall to tell me that I would break God’s law by not supporting that pile of immoral scum, by not aiding the breaking and undermining of God’s law.

I humbly say “NO!” to that! I angrily say “NO!” to that. I vociferously and with rage shout “NO!” to that!

Anyway, I hope I’ve gone some way to demystifying the belief-filled utterances of the noahide. Modern governments are just gangs with no ownership rights over people, have no real basis for their claims of “authority.” So they are just bullies, liars, murderers and robbers who continue to pull the wool over the eyes of the irresponsible plebs who want to dominate their fellow man. Taxation is just robbery. All government-gangs today, that I know of, are wicked not upholding God’s law. And to willingly fund wickedness is either foolish or wicked or both. If a civil society needs to rob each other to keep functioning, it is not a civil society but a degenerate one. And all the institutions that state-robbery funds, like the police, hospitals and schools, are rooted in corruption that damages people.

My aim is not to convince anyone. I don’t know who would be convinced by my words. I can change no one. But at least I get to say my piece, and I can only hope it conforms with God’s truth.