It's All About Trust ... (Law)
It's All About Trust ... (Law)
How Trust Structures Underpin Everything
Badlands Media will always put out our content for free, but you can support us by becoming a paid subscriber to this newsletter. Help our collective of citizen journalists take back the narrative from the MSM. We are the news now.
Today we’re going to talk about something so fundamental to society that most never notice it. We’re going to talk about trust, both in the legal sense and the “everyday” sense.
This knowledge is indispensable for Digital Soldiers fighting the present 5G battle; if you ask me, increasing our literacy in matters of law will help us greatly to develop the situational awareness necessary to not only bring about the Great Awakening, but live in harmony after the fireworks and the dust settle.
Put bluntly, there are things about trust law that I think every Digital Soldier should know.
Believe it or not, the first legal arrangement in history was a “trust”—it wasn’t called a trust per se, but all of the elements that comprise a trust were present. If the entirety of civilization were to disappear tomorrow, then it could be “rebooted” using knowledge of trust law alone (such rebooting would take a long time, but it could be done).
These are bold claims, no doubt, but logical necessity forces these conclusions upon us. Trust is the archetypal “official/legal arrangement” (in a manner of speaking) that makes all other legal arrangements possible. Every government, every business, and every contract could be effectively described as variations on the concept of trusts.
One of the most powerful advantages that the “elites” have over the rest of us is the fact that they use trust law to protect their fortunes, families, and enterprises.
My goal in writing this article is to demonstrate how knowledge of trust law can be of great assistance to Patriots and Anons everywhere (DISCLAIMER: nothing herein shall be taken as legal advice). This will not be a tutorial on how to form or operate trusts (I will link to a guide on how to do that at the end of this article). Instead, we’re going to talk about what they are, and from there we will see how they are embedded in everything that makes society run.
The rule of law itself depends on the presence of trust amongst a people—without trust, you can’t engage in any enterprises that require more than one person to undertake. Wealth creation can’t happen in a trust-less environment; trust is wealth itself in its primordial form. Even gold loses its value in a trust-less environment, for its value is dependent on the prior existence of a functioning marketplace, and markets require trust (in every sense of the word) to function.
To attack the trust between people is to attack them on the most fundamental of levels; weaponized propaganda intentionally designed to sow distrust between people is a form of psycho-spiritual assault. Make no mistake that only tyrants want to destroy trust. When people can’t trust each other, then they can’t form trusts, and it’s no coincidence that the same exact word is used for both concepts.
When we restore our capacity to act as trustees, then we restore the trust of society. There’s a tremendous amount to get into with this concept, so let’s start with the basics.
Trust Basics
Are trusts always called trusts? No, but that doesn’t matter for our purposes today. What matters is that a trust is an arrangement consisting of certain elements and requires at least 2 people to operate.
You can have unofficial “trusts”, and these can be recognized occasionally at law'; for example, in 1932 senator Louis McFadden called the Federal Reserve “the world’s biggest trust”, despite the fact that the Federal Reserve Act does not describe it as such.
In the simplest terms possible, a trust exists any time that one party in possession of valuable property (trustor) asks another party (trustee) to take care of said property in order to realize some kind of benefit. It sounds simple because it is simple. Whomever is designated as the recipient of said benefit is called a beneficiary—this could be a specific person, or it could even be an “unnamed beneficiary”.
That’s basically it—the archetypal trust is nothing more than:
Some kind of property
A person/entity who owns said property (trustor)
A person/entity entrusted to take care of or use said property (usually under a vow or oath before an authority figure, God, etc) in order to realize a beneficial purpose (trustee)
A person/entity who is entitled to said benefit(s) that arise from the trust (beneficiary)
The trust agreement itself, including but not limited to the terms, instructions, protocols, etc.
A trustor, trustee, and beneficiary all have various rights and obligations within a trust structure (which can vary depending on the trust in question), and this is indeed the source of their power.
In a trust, legal title to certain property is vested with the trustee, whereas right of use (beneficial title) is vested with the beneficiary. This is why you can sue a beneficiary, but you will never be able to get the property out of his or her trust via a lawsuit precisely because he is NOT the trustee.
Trusts can be massive, or they can be small and simple.
On the simple level, if I gave you a glass of water to you to give to a mutual friend, and you agree to take my water and give to said friend, then that basically fits the definition of a trust (though I wouldn’t expect a judge to rule on a glass of water any time soon). In this case, I am the trustor, my water is the property, you are the trustee, and our mutual friend is the beneficiary. If I gave you someone else’s water without their permission, then that would be a “false trust” arrangement. This is because you cannot start a trust using someone else’s property, full stop.
In regards to massive trusts, when the signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their fortunes and lives to their posterity and countrymen to create a government for America (for the beneficial purposes of securing the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), this too was basically a trust by another name.
In the Federal Reserve’s case, the trustor would be congress (representing the U.S federal government), the trustee would be the federal reserve, and the beneficiary would be… hmmm, who benefits, exactly? Probably someone, somewhere… but you get the idea!
Can you see how this simple arrangement lies at the heart of civilized society?
Indeed, civilization is only made possible by the fact that people can entrust other people with valuable property for beneficial purposes. Where this is not possible, you cannot have enterprise, stable societal structures, infrastructure, etc…
It's almost too simple to directly observe, and that’s why many people don’t see it—even legal professionals won’t necessarily see the connection (through no fault of their own, but because the kind of philosophical dot-connecting necessary to see it is generally ignored, or even discouraged.) But whether even the professionals can see it or not, the objective truth remains what it is—the trust structure is the primordial “legal” arrangement that begat all others.
A trustee wields great power BECAUSE he does what he does for someone else’s benefit—this is how the role of trustee stabilizes civilization itself.
On Trusts and World Power
John D. Rockefeller supposedly once said that the key to power is to “own nothing, but control everything”—and this is exactly how trusts (and their predecessors by other names) work.
Indeed, he could have simply said that the key to power is to form trusts, and it would have meant essentially the same thing. Again, trusts allow property to be available for use by one party, while remaining under the ownership of another party.
On a philosophical level, the concept of “trust” has an interesting relation to the concept of “security”, for the more trust you have, the less security you require, and vice versa.
There’s a reason why they call society these days a “security-surveillance” state, and not a “trust-based” state! The level of trust that exists in a given society is a direct measure of the health of that society; and a society that has lost its trust can neither legislate nor print its way back to health, nor can it reliably produce wealth or protect its citizens.
In terms of law, when you form a trust, you essentially prevent the “system” or other third parties from being able to lay claim to your stuff, because having valid trust structures in place to manage things is more or less the equivalent of declaring yourself to be both competent and at peace.
(Stay with me, because the consequences of this are going to become mind-blowing very soon…)
On Peace vs. War, and Trust vs. Security
Legal systems exist to deal with conflicts (broadly speaking), and therefore, where there is no conflict, there is no need for police, courts, etc., to do anything. (At least, this is true in theory/principle.)
Having a functional trust relationship (in every sense that that phrase can be taken) with others is the equivalent of being at peace with others. This is because you can’t have trusts without trustees, and trustees must be trust-worthy (aka capable of discharging their fiduciary duties, which is a fancy word that essentially means “duties in trust;”) otherwise, they are disqualified from such a position; the very existence of a trust implies that a trust-worthy person is being trusted with something valuable.
One could even go so far as to equate a “trust certificate”—a legal document that certifies that a trust exists—to a declaration of peace (again, don’t say that to a judge… we’re just talking about concepts here). This is because the existence of a trust implies the absence of conflict; and the absence of conflict means that no system designed to handle conflict resolution (such as police forces, courts, etc.) has any real justification to get involved.
Of course, in practice, the “authorities” overstep themselves constantly—we’re discussing things in principle, here.
Trusts in Law and in “Everyday” Life
We can see how this plays out both in legal contexts, but also in everyday contexts that occur between people: we instinctively withhold valuable belongings and information from those we don’t trust (as we should!). Most of us have had the extremely unfortunate experience of entrusting something valuable to the wrong person (present author is no exception)—someone who pledges to manage your property pursuant to an agreement of some sort, who then breaks their promise is the equivalent to the concept of a false trustee in trust law.
If, for example, someone promises to keep a secret of yours, and then breaks their promise, then that’s the equivalent of misusing your valuable property, for your private information indeed DOES belong only to you and those you entrust with them. Trusts, regardless of their size, are inoperable unless they are managed by a competent trustee.
Trust is based on voluntary arrangements, whereas security comes down to the use of physical force to make things happen. There’s a place for both in this world—not everyone is trust-worthy, and that’s one reason why security systems exist. Some people have to be physically prevented from stealing, murdering, and so on. People of good faith and good character, however, ought to be permitted the greatest degree of freedom possible.
Where there is conflict, security is needed; but where trust prevails, there is no such need.
Practical Implications of All of the Above
It’s impossible to explain trusts fully in one article, but the above is a good starting point.
When you learn to see the roles of “trustor”, “trustee”, and “beneficiary” being played out all around you by friends, family, governments, corporations—any entity capable of owning or using property could potentially fill any trust role—then you will see clearly the way that property and power is managed in our world. Every authority structure on Earth could be described as a “trustee”… (whether they act like it or not is another story…)
In addition to the above, you can use trust structures to manage and protect your property with an extraordinary degree of independence from the “system.”
Recall how we discussed earlier that the existence of a trust is evidence of peace, and how being in a state of peace circumvents the ability for the courts to get involved in your business? The trustee of an Express trust under the Common Law can’t have their records subpoenaed, nor are such trusts obligated to pay taxes to the IRS.
Yes, you did indeed just read that.
But don’t take my word for it—I would not make such statements if I didn’t have legal texts and handbooks to back up what I’m saying.
A Handy Legal Resource
In Weiss’s Concise Trustee Handbook: A Guide to the Administration of an Express Trust Under the Common Law, Functioning Under the Law Merchant, we read the following on pages 41 and 42:
“[A]ttention must be paid to the Internal Revenue Service, for they are the lawful, legal entity, duly authorized to collect association dues (income taxes) from 14th Amendment citizens and other persons volunteering and availing themselves of the “privileges and immunities” regarding non-payment of debts in the system implemented under former H.J. Res. 192, 12 USC § 95a, and 15 USC, ch. 41 § 1602(c)(d)(e)… Persons under this system have only relative rights to life, liberty, and property… But that has no bearing on a property created and administered in Express Trust… Nor is an Express Trust subject to federal excise taxes imposed on corporations… It has nothing to do with the IRS.” (Emphasis mine)
Amazing, isn’t it?
Trusts, when formed and operated a certain way, have nothing to do with the IRS. Is it not fascinating that the IRS cannot trespass where a trust of sufficient strength exists?
To finish where we began: knowledge of trust law is one of the major keys that the elites rely upon to stay in power.
I have linked Weiss’s Handbook for anyone who wants to go deeper into this topic—even to the point of forming and managing your own trusts, and, in the process, reclaiming and protecting your time, property, energy, etc.
Conclusion
The purpose of sharing this knowledge isn’t to help anyone get rich or try to duck out of reasonable responsibilities that come with being a member of society.
No, the purpose is simply to spread awareness that this knowledge even exists in the first place.
I have some personal experience operating trusts, but am learning more about it all the time—I recommend readers consult with others in the comment section to learn more, as it’s almost always the case that there’s at least a couple people in the comment section well informed enough to go further than I have gone (and in some cases correct me where my thinking has been less than precise).
I hope as many people as possible benefit from learning the information above, and, if nothing else, let it be known that there are few roles in society as important as that of trustee.
When we repair the bonds of trust—in every sense—an increase in wealth and prosperity is the inevitable result.
Badlands Media articles and features represent the opinions of the contributing authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Badlands Media itself.
If you enjoyed this contribution to Badlands Media, please consider checking out more of my work for free at American Hypnotist.
That’s a very interesting topic Hypnotist! Thank you for that education my friend!
Perhaps we should all - or those that chose to, leave this system and start a trust. Starve the fed gov of funds and control.