The Baby Holm case seems to have taken a hold on Hovindologists. I have followed it pretty lightly. It is not a tax case which at however a removed level is the proper subject of this blog. A recent post by Danielle Holm that she asks to be circulated really intrigues me, though. It strikes me that the Holms are coming from a space that is quite different from the likes of Hovind and his merry band.
Danielle's piece is rather long and I feel the necessity of a bit of background for readers who may be entirely new to all these matters, so there may be some things you can skip.
Kent Hovind is an independent Baptist minister. He holds the Young Earth Creationist view - a hyper literal reading of the Book of Genesis which when you are done summing up all those begats and tacking on seven days implies the world is about 6,000 years ago.
Hovind argues that there is scientific support for the YEC view and ran a theme park of sorts that focused on the implication in YEC that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. After a long prison sentence on tax related charges he is opening Dinosaur Adventure Land in Lenox, AL.
Doctor Dino, as he calls himself, seems to have never encountered a conspiracy theory he didn't like at least a little. YEC requires the existence of a pretty vast conspiracy, since it flies in the face of "establishment science" in many areas most notably in denying evolution, but the cosmologists, physicists, geologists and astronomers will also have issues with it.
Hovind's tax troubles are rooted in another conspiracy theory which traces back to Irwin Schiff and others who argue that the income tax is actually very narrow in its application. Hovind weaves in a lot more than that. If you have three hours to spare you can check out The Dangers of Evolution, which is as close as you will get to tying it all together.
Hovindologist is a term I have coined to describe the odd group of people who find Hovind both fascinating and appalling. This distinguishes them from Hovind's fairly rabid supporters whom I dubbed Hovindicators.
In 2014-2015, Hovind faced a new set of charges as he was nearing release on his 2006 conviction. He became a figure in the right wing conspiracy bubble, making it all the way to Alex Jones, but never making the leap to Fox, much to my chagrin, as I might have made some money if that had happened.
At any rate, first among Hovondoligists is retired IRS appeals officer, Robert Baty, who runs a Hovind dedicated Facebook site. His focus tends to be on Hovind's "false legal narrative". Hovind continue to maintain his innocence on the original charges that he served time for and people believe him.
The Baby Holm Case
The bare bones version of the Baby Holm case is that Christian and Danielle Holm were living off-the-grid. Danielle was pregnant and when it came time to give birth in October 2016, they decided to go a hospital The Alabama Department of Human Resources took the child on the basis that the Holm's could not care for him properly. This US District Court decision in December 2016 is a handy summary.
The Hovind Holm Connection
Christian and Danielle found themselves receiving encouragement from some Hovind supporters, most notably Brady Byrum. Brady Byrum is an autodidact legal researcher. in the tradition of Irwin Schiff who is responsible for the latest Hovindication effort.
It is a little murky, but based on Robert Baty's research it appears that Brady Byrum also offered his legal assistance to the Holms.
So now Christian and Danielle besides being blessed or cursed with the support of some Hovindicators find themselves under the scrutiny of Hovindoligist in chief Robert Baty, who has another facebook site that he dedicates to them.
The Sovereign Citizen Connection
Connecting Kent Hovind to the Sovereign Citizen movement is a reasonable step. In the United States anyway, the sovereign citizens tend to accept some sort of historical legitimacy of the United States and have some point where it went wrong. Hovind, who is not really that systematic a thinker, will apparently support numerous versions.
A classic sovereign narrative though is that it was all good until - the fourteenth amendment, the federal reserve, going off the gold standard, the sixteenth amendment, whatever. From there they can create a parallel legal system that runs the way they think it should - Paul John Hansen's "court of record" is an example. Ed Brown styles himself a "constitutional ranger".
The Holms Are Different
The reason I am reproducing Danielle's statement is that it convinces me that Christian and Danielle are coming from an entirely different space. To the extent that you can legitimately place people with fringe views on a left/right continuum, they strike me as much more left than right. Their Hovind connection appears to be one of those random things that crop up from time to time. With that said here is Danielle's statement. Any emphasis have been added by me.
Danielle Holm Statement
I still truly do not know what self-proclaimed "sovereign citizens" believe in. We have been called that by those trying to oppose us, but we have never considered ourselves that, nor did we even know what that was until after our baby was kidnapped and people started flocking to us, telling us they could help us, etc...Being in a vulnerable position after having our baby kidnapped, and never being involved with law or courtrooms EVER, we were at first accepting of what we thought was "love" of others wanting to help us. Some of them had the tactics of sovereign citizens. We did not know this at the time. We were simply learning all while having the pressure of our baby being held, hostage. Some of these people may truly have been trying to help, while others may have been trying to hurt. We may never know. We do not judge anyone, and we love all. However, if anyone has told anyone, that we are "sovereign citizens", and think we are better than anyone, you are being lied to. Again, we have nothing against ANYONE, no matter what they want to call themselves, and we do not even 100% know what this term means all the way, however we do know they stand for the artificial system, still with possessions, technology and devices, while we simply just want to live in Creation free of all of that. There is a major difference. We realized throughout this entire process, that NONE of that matters, and that the only thing that matters is SERVING LIFE within CREATION and NEVER breaking the ULTIMATE law which is LOVE/DO NO HARM. This is why we are NOT "sovereign citizens". They are fighting laws within the system. We do not wish to fight at all. About laws or anything. We simply just stand for creation and not destroying life.
- Industrial civilization is killing all life on our planet, driving to extinction 200 species per day, and it won't stop voluntarily.
- Global warming is happening now, at an astounding speed. The only honest solution is to stop industrial civilization from burning fossil fuels.
- Most consumption is based on violence against people (human and non-human) and on degrading landbases across the planet.
- Life on Earth is more important than this insane, temporary culture based on hyper-exploitation of finite resources. This culture needs to be destroyed before it consumes all life on this planet.
- Humanity is not the same as civilization. Humans have developed many sane and sustainable cultures, themselves at risk from civilization.
- Most people know this culture is insane and needs radical change, but don't see any way to bring the change about.
- Unlike most environmental and social justice organizations, Deep Green Resistance questions the existence and necessity of civilization itself. DGR asks "What if we do away with civilization altogether?"
- Unlike most environmental and social justice organizations, DGR asks "What must we do to be effective?", not "What will those in power allow us to do?"
- DGR offers organized, reliable ways to promote sane ways of living and surviving the ongoing crisis.