The phenomenon of sovereign citizens persistently trying to win court cases with their principles, despite a lack of success, is indeed puzzling. On YouTube alone, there are around 5,000 videos showing sovereign citizens facing defeat in the courtroom. These individuals often make claims that have yet to prove successful and frequently end up incarcerated.
Why do people continue to adopt this seemingly futile approach? It’s akin to watching 5,000 parachutists attempt a failed jump from the Eiffel Tower, only for newcomers to keep trying despite knowing, or perhaps ignoring, the inevitable outcome. Despite the growing pile of mangled bodies at the base of the tower, every day people decide to climb up and try for themselves.
The dedication of these individuals is noteworthy; they invest a great deal of time mastering the intricacies of their “sovereign” defense. Yet, it seems that they dedicate little time to researching previous legal outcomes or understanding why their arguments haven’t held up in court historically.
What drives this persistence? Is it a deep-seated belief system that overrides rational analysis, or is there another factor at play that encourages them to keep going despite overwhelming evidence of failure?
The dedication of these individuals is noteworthy… What drives this persistence? Is it a deep-seated belief system that overrides rational analysis
It’s a lovely little combo of desperation and digging themselves into a hole. Most of the elements of sovereign citizens come from people who are not in good situations, as outlined by the canadian court’s very thorough opinion (which has already been linked twice in this thread, so I won’t bother it again). Once you’re in it, the same situation occurs that you can see with people in cults, mlm companies, or ponzi schemes. Maybe if you keep going, and pushing through the pain right now, you’ll get that mythical payoff. The alternative is to face the fact that you’ve likely ruined your life, rendering impossible whatever you hoped to achieve in the legal system in the first place.
Identities with more rigorous behavior requirements often persist longer. It seems counter-intuitive but the greater the buy-in required, the more appealing the identity seems to be.
In some weird and deeply human way, displaying your devotion to these doomed and unreasonable defenses probably increases the individual’s status among their sovereign peers. That’s the payoff that we don’t see when we only look at the financial and legal costs.
The prerequisite for joining such hyperindividualistic ideologies is the belief that you’re better/more important than others, that the work of others can’t be depended on (“if you want it done right, you’ve got to to it yourself” fallacy mindset).
So:
Why do people continue to adopt this seemingly futile approach? It’s akin to watching 5,000 parachutists attempt a failed jump from the Eiffel Tower, only for newcomers to keep trying despite knowing, or perhaps ignoring, the inevitable outcome. Despite the growing pile of mangled bodies at the base of the tower, every day people decide to climb up and try for themselves.
“Well duh, those people failed because they weren’t me!”
While what you said is true, you’re neglecting that it’s not entirely based on selfish ideations.
There are people selling courses and profiting heavily from tricking those people into thinking that these strategies work. They pretend they’ve won cases like this, that the loopholes are real, that many people are singing them praises. The failed attempts are just “the loud minority that screwed up the process”.
I’m pretty sure at this point that most of them think that Legal jargon is the equivalent to a druidic incantation and they just need to find the right incantation for it all to work in their favor.
Just as “magic spells” use special rhymes and archaic terms to signal their power, the convoluted language of legalese acts to convey a sense of authority, they conclude.
In a study appearing in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers found that even non-lawyers use this type of language when asked to write laws.
“People seem to understand that there’s an implicit rule that this is how laws should sound, and they write them that way,” says Edward Gibson, an MIT professor of brain and cognitive sciences and the senior author of the study.
https://news.mit.edu/2024/mit-study-explains-laws-incomprehensible-writing-style-0819
To be clear, there really is no such thing as a “Sovereign Citizen” except in their own brain.
They believe that there is some hidden loophole that only “smart” people understand that allows them to reap the benefits of being a part of a society without having to be subject to any of its rules; and that that cheat code is accessed via some combination of paperwork that the government keeps hidden from the public.
Essentially, to them, the social contract (ie. citizens voluntary give up certain rights like the right to speed through red lights, the right to murder, etc… and subject themselves to laws of the state in exchange for that state providing them with roads, infrastructure, stability, prosperity and the right certain inalienable freedoms) is just for suckers who don’t know the correct forms to fill out.
It’s absolute mind-numbing stupidity of the highest order.
Because stupidity is immortal.
It’s funny because the EXACT SAME ARGUMENTS work for cops.
Speeding? You mean traveling in a conveyance.
Assault and battery? You mean protecting and serving.
Deprivation of rights, kidnapping, and false imprisonment? You see, your honor, I didn’t know about any of that stuff so it shouldn’t apply to me.
In conclusion, the only “sovereign citizens” in this country are the bitches in blue.
Are you right in the fucking head??
In conclusion, the only sovcits in this country are the bitches in blue
So, you are saying there are no sovereign citizens in the world? Oh I wish, as someone in a country full of them. Google the Wiembilla shootings, read about the people who commited them.
Man you must have tried hard not to understand his point that you missed it this badly.
Police have special powers according to the law, so no, the same arguments don’t work.
They REALLY don’t. They have very situational allowances that have become defacto “special powers” thanks to a combination of decades of copaganda and huckster “warrior programs” that teach wannabe bullies that they are the most important of gods special snowflakes whose only responsibility is saving their own ass.
Check out the guy that got stabbed in the face repeatedly on an NY subway while cops watched from 10 feet away, behind a safety door meant to protect the train conductor. Took them to court because their motto was literally “protect and serve” and got a real live judge to say out loud that it wasn’t literal and cops have no duty to actually protect or serve anyone, legally.
They REALLY do. What you call “situational allowances” are what we’re talking about. You can’t turn on some flashing lights and speed through red lights to get to a crime legally. They can.
Police have special powers that the rest of us don’t have. If they didn’t then police wouldn’t even exist.
The problem I’m talking about is when they speed through red lights because they think they have these “special powers” when they law is EXCRUCIATINGLY explicit on exactly when and why cops can sometimes disregard certain legal requirements. That does not mean they can do what they want when they want. That’s exactly the kind of people OP is talking about, and that’s cops. To a fuckin T. Nobody else goes to court, cries ignorance as an excuse, and expects to get away with it.
My real problem is that it works for them. Qualified immunity is a disgrace to law, as is the absolute immunity enjoyed by judges and magistrates. You want to fix law, fix that first.
Ok so your issue is that police abuse their powers, powers that regular citizens do not have. I agree that’s a huge problem and it should be addressed regularly.
That has nothing to do with the discussion at hand though. Sovereign citizens live in la-la-land. There are no special hidden laws about “travelling vs driving” where you don’t need a drivers license to drive on public roads. There are laws that allow police to speed and go through red lights.
They do it for the same reason people buy lottery tickets, despite the horrible odds: blind hope.
Plus, you never have to admit you were wrong.
They believe that the right amount of good spells recited in the correct order will grant them victory. Unfortunately they’ve studied a different magic book than most people, so their magic does not work on others.
Because they see other people gaming the system or somehow otherwise being protected from the consequences of their actions. Ethan Couch, who drove drunk underage and killed four people and fled the scene, and who got probation. Brock Turner who raped an unconscious woman, and who got stuff months in county jail and was released after three months. Matthew Broderick, who drove into the wrong lane, hit a car head-on, killed two people, and was fined a hundred pounds. Hundreds of cases, some high-profile, some only known to the local community, where people get off - sometimes on technicalities, sometimes on connections, sometimes on good lawyering, sometimes on bribes.
Then people wonder why they can’t get away with things. Millionaires and billionaires get their debts written off, so they should be able to do so as well. They should be able to claim that they’re not subject to laws just like those other people. So they start looking for things that might exempt them, patterns of how to get away with things. Every time something goes wrong, it’s not because they’re poor or unconnected, it must be because that other guy’s lawyer wrapped his case in a red ribbon, or capitalized the defendant’s name, or something else esoteric that they didn’t notice or didn’t think of.
And they talk to each other, sharing their theories of his to get away with things. And there’s also a rich ecosystem of fraudsters and conmen who are absolutely willing to take advantage of them, selling them false license plates and fake “passports”, selling handbooks and online courses on how to get away with stuff. If they’re caught (and haven’t just changed over to some other URL), it’s because the law changed or there was some nuance in their situation, and you just need this other thing that’ll fix it, it’s only $129.99, payable in four easy installments …
Because our president shows that once in 248 years, someone who continuously flouts the law somehow makes it into power, then changes everything to be in their favor, permanently.
If they were reasonable or intelligent they wouldn’t be what they are in the first place.
They are not smart people.
That’s it.
I think it’s low level mental illness or some yet to be diagnosed mental condition. I don’t think it manifests itself strictly in Sov Cit folks. Think of those people who go full Don Quixote over some perceived wrong wrought onto them. They dig themselves in to fight something ridiculous and impossible to win -for they have no case- and spend their lives dedicated to it, never giving up or letting it go. The Sov Cit dudes at least have each other to commiserate.
Yeah this is some kind of specific oppositional defiance disorder
This was my dad but thankfully he had ADHD, so he’d forget to hold a grudge after a day or two.
Still, it was annoying that every single minor inconvenience was this great injustice made to torture specifically him. He definitely was a narcissist with a healthy dose of main character syndrome thrown in for good measure.
Because they’re too dumb to realize how dumb they are.
I was gonna say “Dunning-Krugers gonna Dunning-Kruger.”
