After the Hammer: Six Years of Meads v. Meads, 2019 CanLIIDocs 2094- Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments” (OPCA)
Six years after Meads Vs Meads, this survey remains a highly useful description of the OPCA phenomenon and has not been the subject of any substantive criticism. That said, Meads’ profile of the OPCA phenomenon has some factual issues and limitations. One error in Meads is that the Freemen-on-the-Land were described as being “strongly anti-government” with “libertarian and right-wing overtones. Christian rhetoric is common.” Subsequent investigation, including a recent sociological profile of this population, has instead concluded that while this community is indeed extremely hostile to state and institutional actors, politically this population is predominately “left-leaning”
What happened in the Meads case……….. The aim of the so-called OPCA arguments is to “ to disrupt court operations and to attempt to frustrate the legal rights of governments, corporations, and individuals” The Redemption theory is related to the “strawman” theory, stating that each individual has two personalities: One of them is the tangible human person whereas the other one is a legal fiction, created by the State through certain documents (issuing of birth-certificate, ID or social security number). Tax-resistance partisans often argue that State documents are issued to the “wrong” or “false” person in order to escape tax liabilities or other forms of the State’s authority (ID or driving license inspection, etc.): This strawman theory is embodied in what is known as the “capital letter argument”, stating that “JOHN DOE” and “John Doe” are not the same person(!). From views expressed by Jacques Bellezit.