freeman2009 wrote:Yes I am using 'strawman' as a reference to the state created corporate entity. I use the term only for brevity and clarity so the reader can fully distiguish between the Natural human and the entity which it has fiduciary duty to.
As a basis, there is...1
. The human being (one of the people - a sovereign) and his natural person with which he/she stands and interacts at common law.
...and there is...2
. The created corporate Trust
(a.k.a. Artificial Person - an artificial juristic entity
) that has public and private accounts for operating in commerce (using the fiat currency / legal tender / internal accounting system of a society) and that Winston Shrout calls the "Strawman", and that a real natural person must stand in assuming the duty of a Trustee to give it consciousness.
(Neither of these to be confused with some other delusional perceptions of a "Strawman" that are clearly wrong.)
freeman2009 wrote:As you state, the secondary entity (created by you) would still give you fiduciary duty to it, however my assertion is that this duty would only be there when you are in uniform as laid out by the laws of the entity. In the same way that when you are buying your groceries, you are not acting as fiduciary for any company which you may be the CEO.
Are you buying those groceries with their fiat currency / legal tender? Then you are using their commercial instruments which they created and that they hold all IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) to. You are therefore not doing business directly with the grocer, but are employing the use of a third party's services - the fiat currency / legal tender - and the use of such an offered service comes with terms and conditions attached. Those terms and conditions are that all private accounts generated on-demand (such as buying something from a grocer with the fiat currency) must be settled according to their respective Codes, Rules and Regulations, and that you surrender any dispute that arises to be settled in their commercial courts.
freeman2009 wrote:You are only acting and responsible for your actions of CEO, when clearly acting in that capacity. You are not responsible for or accountable to the company for your actions when not acting as CEO unless there is a comercial law which covers these actions. Such as a clause in the comapany handbook covering such activities outside your company role. An example of this would be drug usage outside work, where you can be tested inside work and duly fired.
Yup. Their jurisdiction extends to as far as you agree and contract to let it extend to.
( George Mercier's "Invisible Contracts"
But also see above to realise when you are acting with fiduciary duty to your corporate Trust / artificial juristic person
. You are acting with duty more times than your think, even though it is invisible (we have gotten used to it).
freeman2009 wrote:My idea is simply to put a third party (the second corporate entity) between you the natural human and the state created coporate entity.
I've been studying all possibilities and I don't think this will work. Thanks for the good challenge
If you create multiple corporate-entities
, then when you give it consciousness (when you are operating it) you are directly
taking on the role as a Trustee.
Note. The fiduciary duty as Trustee is separate from its creation by a Trustor.
If you create corporate-entity AAA
, then standing as Trustee to AAA
you get AAA
to make BBB
, then standing as Trustee to BBB
you make CCC
, then still even though AAA
, you still stand as the Trustee directly when operating in the capacity of each.
You cannot act
as a Trustee to AAA
and then AAA
acts as a Trustee to BBB
, then BBB
acts as Trustee to CCC
. As far as I can see, the Trustee is always the through the real human being's natural person, and so cannot be a cascade of corporate-entities
It is always a real human being that must give consciousness to a corporate-entity
You stand as Trustee directly to AAA
when operating it, you stand as Trustee directly to BBB
when operating it on behalf of the beneficiary of BBB
, and you stand as Trustee directly to CCC
when operating it on behalf of the beneficiary of CCC
The beneficiary of each could very well be its creator or some other entitity if so defined by its Trust document / Charter / Founding document.
However, by doing such a thing, you can avoid being held as surety more easily.
Don't forget though, if a Trust is created, its accounts must be registered in order to use the fiat currency / legal tender / internal accounting system and so will also have to be operated according to the respective commercial Codes, Rules and Regulations, lest that created entity
be trespassing upon the IPR associated with that currency / accounting system.