I just find this stuff to be very difficult to believe. I think Russell-Jay Gould is a LARPer. If you really think about it, it just doesn't make a lot of sense. Quantum grammar is the most ridiculous phrase I've ever heard.
I understand the seeming senselessness of it. The presentation in the video is not the best. Without intended insult, part of the problem is the presenter. That said, could it be that the seeming lack of sense is because we are not part of the groups of people who originated the 'deal', who understood the laws, or who comprehend the value in such things.
Here is a comparison which may be of use. I know a person who worked on rights of way, contracts, easements for use of long distance communication. Going back as far as the 1800s, companies associated with railroads secured line permits/licenses/easements, etc. for running telegraph lines to all sorts of places. Some of those contracts involved property which is now-aday in major metropolitan areas. You may find licenses with an annual fee of $1/mile length to maintain communication lines. The 130 year old physical document still exists, though it may have been imaged somewhere along the way. Originally for telegraph; later converted for use of copper telephone lines then fiber optic cable. This is 2021. These 130 plus year old contracts are still in force today based upon wording of the original contract and the laws and legal governments under which they were executed. The contract applies to successors of the original company. So, over those 130 years, the ownership of the original company, and all assets, was bought/sold/merged many times. The laws upon which that contract was issued still stand, and the contract stays in force. Today, that $1/year contract could cost millions to originate. The value of the contract itself is worth millions if it were to be sold.
Another common point of reference would be the contracts to buy a house. This is not about the financing part, but the transfer of ownership. These days, the default wording is that mineral rights do not transfer with the sale of the property. So, a plot of land developed sixty years ago was purchased by a land speculator, sold to developers (without mineral rights), lots were made, houses were built, and starting with the original occupant the house and property may have been sold multiple times. Yet, the mineral rights are the property of the land speculator and the successors (whoever or whatever they may be).
Without insult, most people are focused on their monthly payment amount and how much they have to bring to closing (today). They understand what they are signing in a property purchase (tomorrow) about as well as they understand the contract to purchase an iphone.
Now, look at the concept being applied in the video. What is alleged is that a contract/deal/agreement of a sort was made (today to those people at the time of execution). Most people at the time did not know/understand the contract (tomorrow for the people who lived then), they just needed to deal with looming debt (today for those people who lived at that time). They dealt with it like an iphone contract or the purchase of a house. They focused on their present need and left the long term consequences for other people to deal with.
This last point is of immense importance. The practice of incompetent/corrupt/compromised/lazy people in government making decisions which caused massive long term problems to fix a short term looming issue, at the expense of other people, has been going on .... probably since governments started to exist after the fall of man when Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden and cursed.
Evil people/being understand this. They are prey on the ignorance/fear of whoever is on the other side of the table. The fact that it may not be comprehensible to us at the moment does not mean the deal was not legitimate. It does mean it sucks for us who have to pay for the sloppy selfish behavior of people in the past.
To understand the applicability of a contract/deal/treaty/agreement it is necessary to understand the conditions/rules/laws under which the contract was executed.
Replying to my own post. Let's say a person who had full knowledge of rights of way, went to one of the companies who owned some of those million dollar leases. They go and talk to someone in the current owning companies rights or way dept and is able to convince them to sell the right of way license for much less then it is actually worth because the people who were in charge of making decisions to sell the right of way contracts AT THAT POINT IN TIME did not understand the value of the contracts in the way the buyer did. Once a lawful contract is executed, the ownership has changed. The new owner got a multi million dollar contract for a song because of knowledge vs. ignorance.
Take the previous paragraph and apply it to ownership of the title four flag which appears to signify ownership of the contract on the United States as it is alleged in the video presented by OP. Russell Jay Gould is alleging that he did the equivalent of getting the right of way contract for next to nothing. But in his case, it is a contract on the United States. It was achievable because he operated according to the laws under which the 'deal' was originated. And having taken possession of the 'contract instrument' (the flag), he declares his uncontestable claim.
I want to thank you first for the extremely high-effort reply and second for giving me a new perspective. I still believe the video has some truth and some things that aren't true, and I still think the idea of quantum grammar is pure baloney, but there could well be something more than I originally thought that is true.
He's not a larp, he's crazy. I went down the rabbit hole on this last year when it was posted and watched three of Goulds videos and had to shut them off. He's looney tunes.
I just find this stuff to be very difficult to believe. I think Russell-Jay Gould is a LARPer. If you really think about it, it just doesn't make a lot of sense. Quantum grammar is the most ridiculous phrase I've ever heard.
Kind of agree with you here. Right up there with reptilians
I understand the seeming senselessness of it. The presentation in the video is not the best. Without intended insult, part of the problem is the presenter. That said, could it be that the seeming lack of sense is because we are not part of the groups of people who originated the 'deal', who understood the laws, or who comprehend the value in such things.
Here is a comparison which may be of use. I know a person who worked on rights of way, contracts, easements for use of long distance communication. Going back as far as the 1800s, companies associated with railroads secured line permits/licenses/easements, etc. for running telegraph lines to all sorts of places. Some of those contracts involved property which is now-aday in major metropolitan areas. You may find licenses with an annual fee of $1/mile length to maintain communication lines. The 130 year old physical document still exists, though it may have been imaged somewhere along the way. Originally for telegraph; later converted for use of copper telephone lines then fiber optic cable. This is 2021. These 130 plus year old contracts are still in force today based upon wording of the original contract and the laws and legal governments under which they were executed. The contract applies to successors of the original company. So, over those 130 years, the ownership of the original company, and all assets, was bought/sold/merged many times. The laws upon which that contract was issued still stand, and the contract stays in force. Today, that $1/year contract could cost millions to originate. The value of the contract itself is worth millions if it were to be sold.
Another common point of reference would be the contracts to buy a house. This is not about the financing part, but the transfer of ownership. These days, the default wording is that mineral rights do not transfer with the sale of the property. So, a plot of land developed sixty years ago was purchased by a land speculator, sold to developers (without mineral rights), lots were made, houses were built, and starting with the original occupant the house and property may have been sold multiple times. Yet, the mineral rights are the property of the land speculator and the successors (whoever or whatever they may be).
Without insult, most people are focused on their monthly payment amount and how much they have to bring to closing (today). They understand what they are signing in a property purchase (tomorrow) about as well as they understand the contract to purchase an iphone.
Now, look at the concept being applied in the video. What is alleged is that a contract/deal/agreement of a sort was made (today to those people at the time of execution). Most people at the time did not know/understand the contract (tomorrow for the people who lived then), they just needed to deal with looming debt (today for those people who lived at that time). They dealt with it like an iphone contract or the purchase of a house. They focused on their present need and left the long term consequences for other people to deal with.
This last point is of immense importance. The practice of incompetent/corrupt/compromised/lazy people in government making decisions which caused massive long term problems to fix a short term looming issue, at the expense of other people, has been going on .... probably since governments started to exist after the fall of man when Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden and cursed.
Evil people/being understand this. They are prey on the ignorance/fear of whoever is on the other side of the table. The fact that it may not be comprehensible to us at the moment does not mean the deal was not legitimate. It does mean it sucks for us who have to pay for the sloppy selfish behavior of people in the past.
To understand the applicability of a contract/deal/treaty/agreement it is necessary to understand the conditions/rules/laws under which the contract was executed.
Replying to my own post. Let's say a person who had full knowledge of rights of way, went to one of the companies who owned some of those million dollar leases. They go and talk to someone in the current owning companies rights or way dept and is able to convince them to sell the right of way license for much less then it is actually worth because the people who were in charge of making decisions to sell the right of way contracts AT THAT POINT IN TIME did not understand the value of the contracts in the way the buyer did. Once a lawful contract is executed, the ownership has changed. The new owner got a multi million dollar contract for a song because of knowledge vs. ignorance.
Take the previous paragraph and apply it to ownership of the title four flag which appears to signify ownership of the contract on the United States as it is alleged in the video presented by OP. Russell Jay Gould is alleging that he did the equivalent of getting the right of way contract for next to nothing. But in his case, it is a contract on the United States. It was achievable because he operated according to the laws under which the 'deal' was originated. And having taken possession of the 'contract instrument' (the flag), he declares his uncontestable claim.
Someone not in the military talking Jurisdictions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7xJ_aSKGuk
And, an American State National telling the cops he doesn't need a license plate or driver's license at a traffic stop:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfUJLHKKzjg
I want to thank you first for the extremely high-effort reply and second for giving me a new perspective. I still believe the video has some truth and some things that aren't true, and I still think the idea of quantum grammar is pure baloney, but there could well be something more than I originally thought that is true.
Someone not in the military talking Jurisdictions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7xJ_aSKGuk&t=509s
And, an American State National telling the cops he doesn't need a license plate or driver's license at a traffic stop:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfUJLHKKzjg
He's not a larp, he's crazy. I went down the rabbit hole on this last year when it was posted and watched three of Goulds videos and had to shut them off. He's looney tunes.