From time to time you will see someone mention on comments on the net that there is an actual difference between “United States of America” and “United States” in terms of law.
Haha, I followed your link, quickly skimmed that “article” and a few others, and have concluded…
That guy doesn’t have the slightest idea what he’s talking about. Name the subject, he’s in over his head. You and I will never reclaim the seconds of our lives we wasted reading what’s on that blog.
US vs USA? No significance in the difference, one is a shortened version of the other. The country to our south is also “United States”, although officially it’s Estados Unidos Mexicanos, United Mexican States. There have been others too.
So I’m supposed to take some loonbat seriously because he put together a rambling screed on a Wordpress blog? No thanks. I bet he considers himself a “sovereign citizen” too.
The “United States” and “United States of America” are one and the same.
Ye that’s what I thought but on like every now and then it comes up. Doesn’t make any sense to me.
But it’s a bit interesting like people using the term Holland for example for the Netherlands so I thought there might be something I didn’t know about here.
The post was TL DR I read only a lil part of the blog.
Using “Holland” that way is like using “England” to refer to the United Kingdom, or back in the past “Russia” to refer to the Soviet Union. It’s common enough, but it’s confusing and a mistake.
Well, Holland isn’t the same thing as The Netherlands, Holland is just a part of the Netherlands (actually two provinces now, North Holland and South Holland.) But from context one can usually tell when someone is talking about The Netherlands as a whole even when they’re saying Holland. Sort of like how people refer to the Queen of England when they really mean the Queen of the United Kingdom.
As for the linked blog post, it’s what’s commonly referred to around here as the “magic words theory” of law. People who don’t actually understand how stuff works are convinced that if they can somehow find the right magic legal words, they can make the legal system do whatever they want. They don’t realize that the stuff they come up with is completely incoherent and illogical.
It’s generally speaking the Holland parts of the country that fought for dutch independence.
The national redoubt is within Holland too, the so called waterline.
There was also once a Kingdom called the Kingdom of Holland:
The Netherlands has through history been slightly smaller than it is today, for example the Dutch republic. It’s generally thought of as the most important part of the country too so I guess it stems from a combination of these factors.
Holland and England are the dominant (by far) polities in their respective unions. Same with Russia and the USSR. And all of these places existed as independent kingdoms/states with a significant presence in international affairs before they joined in a union. But no one state of the US is dominant to the exclusion of the others. And only a few spent a short time as independent states before joining the US.
Well, that’s more complex. There are 2 spaces and an ‘&’ symbol, making it critically different than ‘US’ and ‘USA’. These types of questions are generally best left to experts…
Let me go get my tinfoil for hat making, and put on some popcorn.
I heard one caller in to a radio talk show get started on this. What’s the dope on the fringe?
Holland was a vassal state of the Holy Roman Empire for a long time before the Dutch Republic and later Kingdom of the Netherlands as we know it existed.
Let’s stop beating around the bush and address the underlying lunacy here.
There are people who call themselves various names, “Sovereign Citizen” and “Freeman On The Land” being the most common, who believe that they can live in society without actually following any of society’s rules that they think are inconvenient. They invent, or have bought into, various schemes which all purport to show the same thing: They can opt out of parts of the law by using various magic phrases and ritualistic practices involving forms and letters which will force the courts to acknowledge that they are in a special class which doesn’t have to follow the law.
This is idiocy. It is trying to accomplish the impossible, so the details don’t matter. Law isn’t based on magic formulae or rituals or secret codes, it is based on rules applied to achieve a purpose, so if the purpose is invalid (and opting out of a society while continuing to live in it is certainly invalid) no application of those rules will achieve it.
There are multiple iterations of this idiocy, differing in the details but with the same goal, all being sold by different hucksters to the gullible and the desperate. None of them have ever worked. None of them could ever possibly work.
All that said, I certainly find investigating this stuff interesting. It’s the same urge that makes me seek out B-movies and schlock TV and so on: It’s so bad it’s good in an entirely unintended fashion. It’s unintentional comedy.
I was watching the semi-finals of the World Cup with someone who doesn’t follow soccer … the TV clearly said Netherlands, I called them Holland and the broadcasters kept saying the Dutch … it was the 60th minute before she figured it out.