Tuesday, May 6, 2014

No Foraging in the King's Forest Because It Hurts The Peasants

Let's Talk About 'Public' Land

Eric Blair
Activist Post

Conveniently hidden in the noise of the Bundy Ranch standoff is the heart of the issue: property rights and use of government-owned land. With the federal government going on a land-grab spree of late, it's time we have a frank discussion about "public" land.

What is it? Who owns it? What's it used for? What rights do citizens have to use it?

Back in feudal times peasants weren't allowed to forage in the king's forest. Those caught poaching to feed their families were put to death. It was considered stealing private property from the king himself, not the kingdom as a whole, no matter how big his forest grew. No one claimed it hurt other peasants to take from the king. Yet, today, we are to believe that foraging on government land somehow hurts the kingdom.

Some citizens call rancher Bundy a tax cheat, saying he's stealing from taxpayers because he hasn't paid grazing fees on public land. Does this group view public property as profit centers? Do they know they're advocating for the same thing as big oil companies, frackers, Harry Reid's Chinese solar power plant and a host of other cronies who don't give a damn about land preservation? Because these entities dutifully pay their fees for their "right" to use public lands.

I'm not here to stick up for Cliven Bundy. His family claims they've had foraging rights to government land in Utah since 1877.  Ironically, that's right around the time that the government violently stole the land from native Americans. So, ancestor Bundy used the government cavalry to do to them exactly what the BLM is doing to him at the behest of Harry Reid's corporate endeavors. I'm just keeping it real.

Does this mean that land rights only exist for people who can defend property with weapons? It certainly seems that way. To be fair, native Americans never understood "private" property until they were forced to, but they did respect tribal boundaries which they too defended with force.

Historically, property rights were recognized when someone put their labor to the land by building a house from the trees or managing a herd on the fields. The right to use the land became "ownership" and could only be claimed by an individual or a family who worked the land. In the example of feudal times the king displayed ownership of the forest because he protected it with force. Significantly, the kingdom did not own the forest because no one could even begin to understand that concept.

Today property ownership comes with very few rights without permission from, or paying fees to, the government. For example, I used to pay around $7000 a year in property taxes for a modest home and three average cars that I supposedly "owned".  I also had to buy permits to paint my house, to finish a room in my basement, to cut down trees or burn brush in my yard.  I paid this money to the kingdom because they claimed a right to my property.

Increasingly people are being prevented from foraging (keeping a garden or chickens) on their own land as if it belonged to the king. It's apparent that when property rights become privileges, the grantor of those privileges becomes the real owner of the land. But what happens when the grantor is a vague collective called the public? A king can be removed, while the "public" cannot.

Is all government land "public"? Of course not. Try hiking around the NSA data center in Utah and see what happens. Try entering Yellowstone National Park without paying the $25 entry fee and see what happens. As a taxpayer (peasant), you have absolutely no rights to that land, therefore you and other citizens are not the owner of that property - but you did pay for it.

The simple truth is if you don't have a right to use the land, you don't own it. Claiming that not paying our fair share for using the king's land (including our own homes) is akin to treason against the kingdom is a colossal mind-control victory for our rulers. People who believe this truly cannot see the chains that bind them.

Well, on a positive note, at least we have all this "public" land to sell real cheap to our creditors when the US economy goes the way of Greece, right?

This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Anonymous said...

Went to Yellowstone not too long ago and wondered the same thing. Why should we pay to get in, if tax dollars pay to run it? I don't think the Federal government has a right to have parks anyhow. That should be the States' job.

Anonymous said...

The indigenous people who we molested (like everything else0, had a noteworthy regard for the land.
From what I gather; they considered it sacred and rejected the notion that anyone could 'own' it.
These competent but generous people told the white man that they could live in their midst IF.
If, they lived with them for a time and learned how to live WITH the land, and honored their respect for it and it's bounties.
What's happened next is typical of the Royal family / Rothchild ways.
Not much has changed in hundreds of years.
Except their advance.
Thank you for the accurate perspective Eric. - James Bennett


An administration has no money,can own no property since it exists at the will of the people,it has no existence in its own right.It is time for all the peoples of the world to read again the timeless words of Thomas paine.

Anonymous said...

great article. note on native irony of 1877 perfect. Had not considered that. well done.

Anonymous said...

1) george washington was the kings cousin. 2) the "president" is and has always been a blood relative of the opium and slave trading cartel called the royal family. 3) you are and always have been english peasants 4) which means you are and always have been ruled by isreal yes even before you called it that. the shrub and his pedophile daddy are direct descendants of godfried de boullion. 5) everything you think you own including your self is and always has been property of the king/queen its why you have a birth certificate or wharehouse reciept. 6) what are you going to do about it? 7) not a damn thing because you are dumbed down and pacified with your many material desires. 8) keep throwing babies at that slavery machine and everything will be fine . . . usa! usa! usa!

Anonymous said...

I smile when I see these things. We are not living in a police state. We are living in a pressure cooker with finite PSI rating for a pressure valve. When the govt increases the heat, all they are doing is increasing the rate at which we move towards the time when the pressure will need to escape. It would be nice if they decided to turn the heat off and open the lid. The problem then is that the pressure cooker would still be intact. In the battle between steam and metal, who do you think always wins?

Anonymous said...

Interesting that no one mentions "Land Patent"......I have one and no county, state or the federal government can tell what to do or own in it (as long as it doesn't hurt anyone outside of it)... from the four corners of my "Private Property" all the way up to heaven and all the way down to hell it is ALL MINE. I don't need a permit to do anything and no one can come into it without my permission or a document signed by a FEDERAL JUDGE...... Remember "If you don't hold it, you don't own it"... Ponce

Anonymous said...

Anon, how did you go about getting the land patent? Is it possible for any landowner to get a patent, or just on some property and not others? Info please.

William Burke said...

Permission to PAINT YOUR HOUSE? Where the hell do YOU live? If that's a requirement, I'd just paint it without permission.

And how can one be said to truly "own" something, when it can be taken from you for not paying an extortion fee?

That's not government. That's organized crime.

Tesla921 said...

If you have to pay taxes on it you don't own it. You rent it from the government whether you like it or not.

Anonymous said...

Nevada wasnt taken from the Indians by the US cavalry. It was ceded by Spain in the Treaty of Guadalupe. It was ceded to the people not to USA Inc. USA Inc (as an agent) was supposed to (and promised to) dispose of the land to the new state of Nevada, to be sold to individuals. Well USA Inc didnt keep their promiset. They kept the land like a king.

And yet so many know-nothings judge Bundy as a thief, and a scofflaw.

Anonymous said...

People must stop using the word CITIZEN. CITIZENS have NO rights. Why? Because a CITIZEN is a Government created fictious object in the form of a BIRTH CERTIFICATE with a name the same as yours. Look at your B CERT. It says you cannot use it as a means of identification. Govts dont want you to know that HUMANS DO HAVE RIGHTS, Lawfully & under their fictional Colour of law/law of force/ `LAW OF THE SEA -Commerce law, they stealthfully created & used to deprive us of our REAL Law, `Law of the land.' When asked are you a citizen? ALWAYS say NO....but check it out first & dont be beligerant. Just KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

Anonymous said...

It's all about words.
What you have in actual reality is a group of schoolchildren milling about in a playground, all with equal rights before God, and one group using the vehicle of words to try to control another group. "We are the government!" To which the obvious response is, "Are you?" "We own the shirt on your back!" "Do you?"
What it really comes down to is who will eventually fight harder to impose their vision onto the other group.
It's all just words, really, until the fight starts.
And then it's "Who's still standing?"

Anonymous said...

Just keep on asking and promoting The Three Magic Questions. What is the EXACT AMOUNT of fraud that ANYBODY has the right to commit? What is the EXACT AMOUNT of fraud that ANYBODY has an actual obligation to endure? What is the BASIC PREMISE that is being operated off of, in the instant case?
Get ALL of the above words fully defined and understood, since words are representations of concepts, which are then used to convey OTHER concepts with. Until you fully understand all of the words, you will not fully understand the message that they are trying to tell you!


Anonymous said...

No Respect, No Rights....Continuing down this road will lead to social extinction. The matrix of continuity is not a right, but a corporate and organizational plan to prevent their extinction at the expense of the land upon which we stand.

Anonymous said...

why dont we own our own homes once we have paid mortgage ?

Post a Comment