Groups within the Patriot Movement
Like all large-scale movements, the Patriot Movement is a compilation of different groups who see different issues as their primary concern. While exploring the positions of these different groups, one should keep in mind that while their primary focus may be different, virtually every group supports the fundamental goal of revitalizing American liberty through Constitutional and law-abiding government. It should also be noted that many Patriots fall into more than one group within the Movement.
- Tax Honesty Movement - The Citizens within this category are primarily focused upon exposing the American people to the truth about tax law in this country. Having read the law and the federal court cases interpreting tax law, these people know what the law really says and really means, as opposed to the inaccurate "socialized" view that is spoon-fed to the ill-informed public. [See Taxation, within this site.]
- Social Security Opponents - Although we have used the word "opponent", we are not sure that it is the correct word. The Citizens in this group do not so much "oppose" Social Security, as they want the truth of the matter to be known by the public. People in this group have performed the legal research and know that SS is a completely voluntary program for Citizens of the states of the Union. And of course as such, so is FICA withholding. [See Social Security Tax within this site.]
- Social Security/Non-enumeration - This group believes that enumeration of the population, whether made mandatory by law (such as a national ID) or, as a mere "consequence" of Social Security, is unacceptable. Some hold this view for practical and political reasons, while other object to enumeration on religious grounds. [See Employment Tax within this site.]
- Judicial Reformers - These Citizens feel that the courts in America no longer dispense much justice, but consistently rule in favor of those who hold the political and/or financial power, essentially disenfranchising the average American from his own court systems. This group feels that the best way to resolve the problem is to hold judges accountable for the decisions they make that are plainly incorrect and unlawful. No effective system of accountability exists today. [See http://www.jail4judges.org/ ]
- State's Rights Advocates - These Citizens feel that through various mechanisms, the federal government (sometimes with the cooperation of State officials) has conspired to defeat the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution and undermine the Republican character of our nation by unconstitutionally expanding federal jurisdiction into broad areas of subject matter that the Founding Fathers clearly reserved to the states.
- Federal Reserve Opponents - These Citizens feel that the creation of the Federal Reserve, and the delegation of our national monetary policy to a group of private bankers is fundamentally unconstitutional as well as injurious to The People of this nation. They also feel that since Federal Reserve Notes (which is what most Americans call "money") were "de-monetized" (i.e. removed from the gold standard) they are worthless and our currency has been debauched. [See Federal Reserve within this site.]
- Right to Keep and Bear Arms Advocates - These Citizens believe that our unalienable right to keep and bear arms is slowly, and intentionally, being eroded by the government. Given the proliferation of gun control laws in the last 30 years, it would difficult to argue against their perspective. These Citizens agree with Thomas Jefferson when he said, "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government", and with George Washington who said, "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence". Given that this site is dedicated to revitalizing this nation's sense of liberty by educating The People about the egregious, immoral, and at times unlawful conduct of our government, it is easy to see why many Citizens still see Mr. Jefferson's and Mr. Washington's remarks as compelling truths that cannot be ignored. [See http://www.gunowners.org/ ]
- Federal Expansion Opponents - These Citizens are concerned about the continual encroachment of federal authority into areas not intended under our system of Republican government. Various mechanisms, such as the Interstate Commerce clause, and Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, of the US Constitution have been misused to justify ever-increasing federal jurisdiction into the lives of average Americans. This group holds views very similar to that of the State's Rights advocates. [See US Territorial Authority and Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction within this site.]
- United Nations Opponents - These Citizens believe that our participation in the United Nations is antithetical to the proper administration of the United States government. This group sees the stated goals of the United Nations as incompatible with American liberty, as expressed and secured by the Founding Fathers. Additionally, this group sees solid evidence that the ultimate goal of the United Nations is to undermine the sovereignty of individual member nations until these member nations accept the United Nations as their ultimate governmental leader. This phenomenon is frequently referred to as "one world government" or "The New World Order".
- Church and State Advocates - These Citizens believe that it is the right of every American to freely exercise his conscience in the administration of his duties as a public officer. This group knows that there is no "separation of church and state", nor was such a doctrine ever intended by the Founding Fathers. This group knows that the "separation of church and state" doctrine imposed by the US Supreme Court conflicts with 178 prior US Supreme Court decisions in which God was acknowledged as the ultimate sovereign of this nation. The "separation of church and state" doctrine was the only instance in the Court's history in which the Court rendered a decision without making reference to any prior Supreme Court decisions.