POSITIVE LAW ISN’T LEGITIMATE AND THEREFORE “LAW” BUT NATURAL LAW IS LEGITIMATE

POSITIVE LAW ISN’T LEGITIMATE AND THEREFORE “LAW” BUT NATURAL LAW IS LEGITIMATE AND THEREFORE “LAW”

Explanation: Laws of Nature (physical, behavioral, evolutionary, and logical) then the Natural Law of Cooperation within the limits of the laws of nature (natural duties, rights, inalienations) that prohibit negative behaviors and construct ‘the order’ of cooperation, then legislative contracts within the limits of the natural law of cooperation (contractual duties, rightts and inalienations) that produce positive behaviors, then private contracts within the limits of the legislative laws, the natural laws, and the laws of nature, that produce private commons, and then informal signals, manners, norms, traditions, values that facilitate cooperation – and so we have laws of nature, natural law, legislative contracts of the commons, private contracts of the private sector, and normative contracts independent of assets (demonstrated intersts), and findings of the hierarchy of courts of the empircal, common law.

While Natural Law prohibits all authority thereby requiring Concurrency in positive legislation, and Commonality in negative dispute resolution across regions, classes (and now sexes), limiting us to *decidability* and therefore to *science*, Positive Law is an attempt to create a ruling class (Russia France, Judaism) that violates the self determination of individuals, families and groups, by violating the inaliebiity right and obligation for reciprocal insurance of self determination by self determined means, by test of sovereignty in demonstrated interest, and reciprocity in display word and deed, limiting us to voluntary competitive markets for cooperation in association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war, and aversarial markets for dispute resolution before a jury of our peers (or voluntary duel, or fight, or argument).

Under this formulation of the natural scientific, law of cooperation, there is no difference between what is moral and what is legitmate (legal). In fact the entire structure of it, beginning with self determination by soverignty and reciprocity, prohibiting authority, requiring a means of decidability, consists of the criteria for deciding what actions are moral and legitimate, and therefor enforcible laws, within the limits of the natural law of cooperation and laws of nature, without violating morality, which we discovred scientifically through the long term empirical tests of commonality and concurrency: the natural law itself.

Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute