International Journal of Coercion, Abuse, and Manipulation Volume 6 2023 88
F. CERI and Belanger in the Broader Pseudolaw
Content
As previously noted, at this point our understanding
of the internal dynamics and social operation of
pseudolaw populations, and their leaders and
adherents, is very underdeveloped. Social sciences
data on these populations is limited (Fiebig &Koehler,
2022). What information is available up to this point
suggests at least four population types:
1. “steady state” pseudolaw populations that
operate for decades, that retain a common
and consistent ideological/political goal, but
that may exhibit some “churning,” where
particular leaders and variations become more
or less dominant or influential over time
2. “slow burner” pseudolaw movements that
gradually accumulate around a key central
personality or personalities, but then implode
when the promised pseudolaw-based benefits
do not materialize
3. “fast burner” pseudolaw movements that also
feature a central figure, but that rapidly expand
and collapse in a matter of months or a few
years and
4. marginal but persistent pseudolaw promoter
gurus.
Using this four-part scheme, movements such as the
US Sovereign Citizens and Moorish Law populations,
and the German and Austrian Reichsbürgers, fall into
the “steady state” type. For example, the emerging
American State Nationals are a “churned” aspect of the
much older Sovereign Citizen community.
The characteristics that lead to different evolutions
for “slow burner” (e.g., the Canadian Freemen-on-
the-Land (Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 818-820), versus
“fast burner” (e.g., the Republic of Ireland Freeman
(Netolitzky, 2018b, pp. 10-12) and Magna Carta
Lawful Rebels (Netolitzky, 2023b)) required further
investigation.
All three of these preceding examples have or had
thousands of participants. An important unknown is
whether smaller pseudolaw populations may be very
different.
Belanger is a potential type example of the fourth
category, a person who persistently applies and
promotes pseudolaw for an extended period of time, but
who operates outside any larger grouping or affiliation.
These actors engage in more of “a monologue,” than
social interaction and group-building. What factors
lead to that pattern will require more investigation,
but several other potentially similar Canadian guru
comparators have been documented:
1. Marc Riley Zurawell, a.k.a. Marcus Riley
Bessette, who has for a decade operated
the “Peace Maker Society,” a one-man pseudolaw
enterprise, while Zurawell makes dramatic
claims, such as he is the “Emperor of Canada”
(Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 821-822) and
2. Kevin Annett, a disbarred church minister
who since 2012 has claimed to operate
a “common law” nation-state, “Kanata,” and an
international criminal tribunal that has
purportedly “dissolved” countries and
convicted numerous religious and political
figures of genocide (Netolitzky, 2023c, III(C)).
All three examples are long-duration “one man
shows,” where the leader/promoter has never met
with “consumer” success, despite extraordinary
claims. What possibly distinguishes Belanger from
Zurawell and Annett is Belanger specifically targets
existing pseudolaw and pseudolaw-friendly groups for
recruitment.
These are all very early observations. What is fair to
say is that populations and individuals who deploy
pseudolaw exhibit significant diversity (Netolitzky,
2021), another characteristic shared between
pseudolaw groups and cults.
VI. Conclusion
Pseudolaw gurus have been called “parasites”: they
exploit gullible others for their personal benefit
(Meads v Meads, 2012 ABQB 571, para. 72). If so, then
Belanger and CERI are a kind of second order parasite:
a mite that sucks upon a flea. The preceding review
F. CERI and Belanger in the Broader Pseudolaw
Content
As previously noted, at this point our understanding
of the internal dynamics and social operation of
pseudolaw populations, and their leaders and
adherents, is very underdeveloped. Social sciences
data on these populations is limited (Fiebig &Koehler,
2022). What information is available up to this point
suggests at least four population types:
1. “steady state” pseudolaw populations that
operate for decades, that retain a common
and consistent ideological/political goal, but
that may exhibit some “churning,” where
particular leaders and variations become more
or less dominant or influential over time
2. “slow burner” pseudolaw movements that
gradually accumulate around a key central
personality or personalities, but then implode
when the promised pseudolaw-based benefits
do not materialize
3. “fast burner” pseudolaw movements that also
feature a central figure, but that rapidly expand
and collapse in a matter of months or a few
years and
4. marginal but persistent pseudolaw promoter
gurus.
Using this four-part scheme, movements such as the
US Sovereign Citizens and Moorish Law populations,
and the German and Austrian Reichsbürgers, fall into
the “steady state” type. For example, the emerging
American State Nationals are a “churned” aspect of the
much older Sovereign Citizen community.
The characteristics that lead to different evolutions
for “slow burner” (e.g., the Canadian Freemen-on-
the-Land (Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 818-820), versus
“fast burner” (e.g., the Republic of Ireland Freeman
(Netolitzky, 2018b, pp. 10-12) and Magna Carta
Lawful Rebels (Netolitzky, 2023b)) required further
investigation.
All three of these preceding examples have or had
thousands of participants. An important unknown is
whether smaller pseudolaw populations may be very
different.
Belanger is a potential type example of the fourth
category, a person who persistently applies and
promotes pseudolaw for an extended period of time, but
who operates outside any larger grouping or affiliation.
These actors engage in more of “a monologue,” than
social interaction and group-building. What factors
lead to that pattern will require more investigation,
but several other potentially similar Canadian guru
comparators have been documented:
1. Marc Riley Zurawell, a.k.a. Marcus Riley
Bessette, who has for a decade operated
the “Peace Maker Society,” a one-man pseudolaw
enterprise, while Zurawell makes dramatic
claims, such as he is the “Emperor of Canada”
(Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 821-822) and
2. Kevin Annett, a disbarred church minister
who since 2012 has claimed to operate
a “common law” nation-state, “Kanata,” and an
international criminal tribunal that has
purportedly “dissolved” countries and
convicted numerous religious and political
figures of genocide (Netolitzky, 2023c, III(C)).
All three examples are long-duration “one man
shows,” where the leader/promoter has never met
with “consumer” success, despite extraordinary
claims. What possibly distinguishes Belanger from
Zurawell and Annett is Belanger specifically targets
existing pseudolaw and pseudolaw-friendly groups for
recruitment.
These are all very early observations. What is fair to
say is that populations and individuals who deploy
pseudolaw exhibit significant diversity (Netolitzky,
2021), another characteristic shared between
pseudolaw groups and cults.
VI. Conclusion
Pseudolaw gurus have been called “parasites”: they
exploit gullible others for their personal benefit
(Meads v Meads, 2012 ABQB 571, para. 72). If so, then
Belanger and CERI are a kind of second order parasite:
a mite that sucks upon a flea. The preceding review
