Hi all, sorry if this is the wrong subreddit for this. If so please just let me know and I will take my inquiries to a different forum.
-
How is it that the United States has a merchant marine academy as a government service institution, but the merchant fleet isn’t a national or government entity? It is to my understanding that upon completion of the MM academy one is obligated to service aboard a merchant vessel. However, if these are private companies rather than government agencies, wouldn’t the graduates have to apply and be hired? Do these merchant shipping companies function something like a joint stock company whereby they are somewhere between a government agency and private corporation? Sorry if I am missing something.
-
Would the United States benefit from having a nationalized merchant fleet to secure its most important imports and exports (such as U.S. LNG coming online in a major way) and to prevent issues with the supply chain like we have seen recently. This would treat the fleet like a uniformed military service.
-
Is the U.S. merchant fleet/maritime shipping employment growing and a smart choice for future employment?
Thank you very much!
Creating fictional etymologies and definitions seems to be a trend prevalent among conspiracy theorists and fundamentalist religious apologists. Apologists often focus on the choice of English words in the Bible to support an argument while ignoring the fact that the Bible wasn't written in English. For the sovereign citizen argument saying citizenship implies a maritime connection, I have also seen this type of argument used elsewhere by these conspiracy theorists. For the record the suffix ship comes from the Old English roots borrowed from German, in this case schaft which means to craft or make or do, such as craftsmanship, leadership, etc.
In the case of sovereign citizens a large part of their arguments focus on applying meaning to typography and absurdly restrictive definitions of words. The same person who made the citizenship = maritime law argument also said US law is Roman Law because the names of the months come from the Roman calendar. In general their arguments are exaggerated cherry picking and quote mining.
I think at it's core this style of reasoning is a combination of ignorance, narcissism, and confirmation bias. When sovereign citizens argue with police and in court some claim they are only subject to god's law while simultaneously threatening to sue officers and bureaucrats in the very system they claim is invalid. To me this is analogous to a child who doesn't want anyone else to play with their toys even if they aren't using them. "I am above the law, but want to be able to use it against others."
