In fact, it is reversed. The printed word, for example. Would you claim that individuals are more or less free of institutional power when able to read and write? I think it's pretty obvious that the balance of power between individuals and institutions is tilted very much towards individuals with individual literacy, compared to illiteracy.
That's a good example. When the Christian Bible was only available in Latin, everyone had to ask a priest what was right and what was wrong.
When the Christian Bible was first translated into the common tongue, the leaders of the Catholic Church thought there would be chaos in the streets, but it wasn't really that bad. Even today 50% of Christians world-wide are Catholic.
Sure some of the Protestants caused a mild ruckus. Sure the Brits wanted to make up their own rules, but these spin-offs were basically carbon-copies of the Catholic blue-print. Even those who ostensibly opposed Catholicism imitated its methods and mind-set.
The original fear was that individuals would feel empowered to interpret the Christian Bible PERSONALLY. Basically, the early Church leaders feared some sort of GNOSTIC revolution where people stopped going to Church altogether and simply read their own copy of the Christian Bible and interpreted it for THEMSELVES.
They were afraid that people would figure out that Jesus wasn't born on December 25th. They were afraid that people would figure out that Jesus didn't tell anyone they had to go to Church once a week. They were afraid that people might start spotting logical errors and story inconsistencies.
But their fears were apparently unfounded and 2000 years later, the Catholic Church is still one of the most influential organizations on the planet.
I'M TALKING ABOUT LITERACY.
George Orwell identified a critical quirk of the human mind.
If you can limit the words people use and the standard definitions of those words and the publication of those words, you can control large numbers of people.
I agree with you that we should have the right to defend ourselves.
However, I have a feeling you're already familiar with Ruby-Ridge and Waco.
What I believe we need to do is join the Personal-Sovereignty movement.
The first demand would be that your real-estate should be able to be privately owned and Sovereign.
Currently, real-estate taxes make it easy for the State to steal your land.
You are essentially forced to pay them rent for something you should own.
A developer can swoop into your neighborhood and put up expensive units, which raise your property value, which RAISES YOUR TAXES (rent) to force you out.
Your land should be like your castle. Nobody should be able to enter your land without your permission, including the police.
Your land should be your jurisdiction.
+proHUMAN +proFAMILY
Your scathing critique is requested.