Can we (practically) withdraw consent to be governed?

I have started the process of removing myself from the electoral register

We did not elect you, you don't own us

It has been a painful realisation: we have a belligerent government, controlled via foreign interests, that comprises endless traitors, who have abandoned any pretence to adherence to constitutional rule of law. The powers that be have engaged in genocide, war for profit, destruction of our basic rights, debt enslavement, identity fraud, human trafficking, and rape of the mind of the masses. If that isn’t enough reason to reject their attempts to govern us, I don’t know what is! The challenge is to do it peacefully and lawfully.

I have decided that I no longer consent to be governed by criminals, and am willing to face the consequences. Specifically, I have initiated the process to have my name removed from the electoral register. It is not that I wish to relinquish my right to vote, but rather than I no longer wish to confer legitimacy on the corrupt system of power that past votes have enabled. I can cope with ordinary unholy, but downright evil is not something that I am willing to be associated with in any form or fashion. Of course, the administrative system is not keen on anyone withdrawing their consent.

Here is the email I wrote to the electoral officer of Durham County Council:

Dear Sir/Madam,

I request that I am removed from the electoral register (in entirety, not just the public register) immediately.

Please confirm that the removal has been actioned.

Martin Geddes

…to which I got the response…

Hello Martin

Could you please confirm the reason why you wish to be removed from the register.

Kind regards, Tom

…bringing forth my reply…

Hi Tom,

My reason is “I no longer consent or contract, with immediate effect”.

If further explanation is lawfully required, please refer me to the appropriate statute or instrument, and I will respond accordingly.



…provoking this blocking move…

Hello Martin

Thank you for the confirmation. In this case you would not be able to be removed from the register as the law (Section 23, Representation of the People (England and Wales) Regulations 2001) requires that you register to vote. Electors would need a reason to be removed from the register which are set out in Section 10ZE of the Representation of the People Act 1983.

Regards, Tom

Those who know me will attest that I am one very stubborn Taurean, and not prone to giving up quests easily, especially when they align to my new hobby of “combat correspondence” with officialdom. So I have penned the following reply:

Hi Tom,

I have looked at that section, and it says nothing about the council needing a reason for de-registration from your side of the fence, only about an entitlement to registration from my side of the fence. By definition, an entitlement is something over which I have discretion, and can choose not to exercise at will. Any such barrier is therefore a matter of council policy, and not law.

The Bill of Rights 1688 is clear that Parliament can do nothing to prejudice the interests of the people. This includes compelling the people to act in ways that go against our interest. I have solid (but private) grounds for wishing to remove my consent to being governed in this way at this time. No crime is committed in common law as there is no victim and no injury. It may be compulsory to register via statute law, with penalties for not doing so, but an offence is only committed if there is no reasonable defence, and I believe that present circumstances give me one. A jury of men and women is entitled to exercise its conscience and judge both the facts and the law; it is not for officials to decide, however honest their intentions.

Is de-registering a crime? If so, which specific clause in statute law is being broken? (If there is none, what is stopping you?)

Is there a specific named item of law you can point to that prevents you (operating in your role) from acting according to my instruction? (I freely acknowledge that you may be nervous of aiding and abetting an offence! But if there is none, you are not at risk.)

Is there a law that denies me (a living man of flesh) a right to operate the legal fiction “Martin Royce Geddes” and control how it is used and stored in this case? (My understanding is that the register only keeps details of the legal concept of me, which is a distinct thing in law from the man with blood in his veins — as when someone is lost at sea and their estate needs to be managed, despite no body being present.)

I appreciate that this matter may be outside your normal role parameters, and that you personally wish to act lawfully, as well as to adhere to the policies of your workplace. That said, an important matter of principle is at stake. Are we sovereign over our own identity, or not?

Kind regards,
Sui Juris

I fully accept that there are serious consequences to this. The obvious one is potential prosecution. That’s a hazard of being a dissident, and I accept it readily. I must also accept that I have obligations in the world, like participation in jury duty. That the state has chosen the electoral register as the means of assembling juries is not my problem, however. I also must recognise, in order to avoid hypocrisy, than I am relinquishing any right to redress via agents of the electoral system, including via my member of parliament. Given that most of them are complicit in treason and crimes against humanity, that’s not much of a loss.

As a final thought… this isn’t really about me, the council, or the government. It is about Tom the functionary, who has just been provoked into asking questions about his role, and will “red pill” his boss (by accident) when discussing these questions. Whether I get off the electoral role is immaterial — it might even turn out to be an unwise move, and that’s something I can deal with. The important thing is that we all push back, and as a society reject any and all tyrannical impositions.

It doesn’t take a lot of us. There might have been zero such letters in the past; a dozen of them is enough to be noticeable to Tom and his colleagues. Corrupt officialdom is nothing without compliant officials.

Justice is won “one Tom at a time”.