1) Show me any evidence in history that law must be justified?
2) If P is false then falsify reciprocity as providing decidability in matters of conflict.
3) If P is false then falsify the P-Truth checklist.
4) P explains lang, psych. soc. law, as extensions of physical laws.
Reply addressees: @victorkfranco @Ozpin_88 @Nationalist7346 @TruthQuest11
Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence
-
1) Show me any evidence in history that law must be justified? 2) If P is false
-
1) Show me any evidence in history that law must be justified? 2) If P is false
1) Show me any evidence in history that law must be justified?
2) If P is false then falsify reciprocity as providing decidability in matters of conflict.
3) If P is false then falsify the P-Truth checklist.
4) P explains lang, psych. soc. law, as extensions of physical laws.
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-24 11:54:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1286630947966853121
Reply addressees: @victorkfranco @Ozpin_88 @Nationalist7346 @TruthQuest11
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1286514642785677312
-
The Militia Is First Before Arms
The Militia Is First Before Arms https://t.co/NsTx4yNXnV
-
The Militia Is First Before Arms
The Militia Is First Before Arms https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/07/23/the-militia-is-first-before-arms/
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-23 20:31:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1286398631592026112
-
The Militia Is First Before Arms
—“I admire Poland for many things they are doing now.”—Stewart Colley —“Let’s hope they repeal their gun laws”—Josh Burda
Ooh.. gotta answer that one. Lesson from Russia: you don’t convert to consumer capitalism without first establishing rule of law. Lesson for the world: you don’t convert to an armed populace without first establishing military service and a militial tradition. If anything, the past month has made me understand that the cognitive class-tribes of men can only be united by military training where words do not matter, only empirical evidence, truthful testimony, and duty to one another before all else. Men > Military Service (at last boot camp and two years of continuous operations – even just training – ‘in the field’, three years is optimum because that’s the length of the human forgetting curve necessary to truly transform. > Quarterly militia practice for military, disaster, medical, or riot control. This is our most profound secret to success. Military > Empiricism+Testimony > duty > invsetment in the commons > Status regardless of rank > ‘insurance’ regardless of rank.
-
The Militia Is First Before Arms
—“I admire Poland for many things they are doing now.”—Stewart Colley —“Let’s hope they repeal their gun laws”—Josh Burda
Ooh.. gotta answer that one. Lesson from Russia: you don’t convert to consumer capitalism without first establishing rule of law. Lesson for the world: you don’t convert to an armed populace without first establishing military service and a militial tradition. If anything, the past month has made me understand that the cognitive class-tribes of men can only be united by military training where words do not matter, only empirical evidence, truthful testimony, and duty to one another before all else. Men > Military Service (at last boot camp and two years of continuous operations – even just training – ‘in the field’, three years is optimum because that’s the length of the human forgetting curve necessary to truly transform. > Quarterly militia practice for military, disaster, medical, or riot control. This is our most profound secret to success. Military > Empiricism+Testimony > duty > invsetment in the commons > Status regardless of rank > ‘insurance’ regardless of rank.
-
No the Constitution and Anglo Law are Not Philosophical but Empirical
NO THE CONSTITUTION AND ANGLO LAW RE NOT PHILOSOPHICAL BUT EMPIRICAL
—“What is the significance of a philosophical approach to the constitution?”—
1 – Contrary to popular belief, the constitution is not a philosophical document. 2 – Contrary to popular belief, the common law is not a philosophical discipline. 3 – The natural law of tort (demonstrated interests) is purely empirical (scientific). It’s not philosophical. Philosophers only sought to explain it. We discovered it by adjudicating differences in order to end conflicts and to ‘keep the peace’ meaning ‘cooperation between members of the community’ – in particular to prevent retaliation cycles (feuds). This is why the first laws do not state the law, they only standardize punishments – because the law existed, everyone knew the laws – they’re common sense. But the variation in punishments created retaliation cycles (feuds). A standard punishment demands the community enforce the punishment as ‘settlement of differences’ and ensure both parties against further feuds. 4 – This law is predicated on self-determination, individual sovereignty to achieve it, reciprocity to maintain it, jury and court to decide it, and markets in all aspects of life as a consequence of it. (This is what other civs can’t do – get past familism or tribalism) 5 – The constitution presumes the common law (not positive law), and articulates a market for the production of commons. It’s just another marketplace. 6 – The constitution contains processes for transactional modification of that marketplace. The bill of rights shouldn’t be necessary (and many of the founders didn’t think so) but their failure was to define the common law sufficiently that rights weren’t necessary. 7 – A constitution is a contract that produces a ledger for transactions under the rule of law of natural law of tort. it’s a recipe for running a legal accounting system, for the production of contracts under the natural law of tort. The ‘philosophical’ claims about the constitution are relatively recent attempts to undermine it and end rule of law. It’s the most boring empirical system known by man – which is why no other people in the world have constitutions – only ‘documents of nice words’.
-
No the Constitution and Anglo Law are Not Philosophical but Empirical
NO THE CONSTITUTION AND ANGLO LAW RE NOT PHILOSOPHICAL BUT EMPIRICAL
—“What is the significance of a philosophical approach to the constitution?”—
1 – Contrary to popular belief, the constitution is not a philosophical document. 2 – Contrary to popular belief, the common law is not a philosophical discipline. 3 – The natural law of tort (demonstrated interests) is purely empirical (scientific). It’s not philosophical. Philosophers only sought to explain it. We discovered it by adjudicating differences in order to end conflicts and to ‘keep the peace’ meaning ‘cooperation between members of the community’ – in particular to prevent retaliation cycles (feuds). This is why the first laws do not state the law, they only standardize punishments – because the law existed, everyone knew the laws – they’re common sense. But the variation in punishments created retaliation cycles (feuds). A standard punishment demands the community enforce the punishment as ‘settlement of differences’ and ensure both parties against further feuds. 4 – This law is predicated on self-determination, individual sovereignty to achieve it, reciprocity to maintain it, jury and court to decide it, and markets in all aspects of life as a consequence of it. (This is what other civs can’t do – get past familism or tribalism) 5 – The constitution presumes the common law (not positive law), and articulates a market for the production of commons. It’s just another marketplace. 6 – The constitution contains processes for transactional modification of that marketplace. The bill of rights shouldn’t be necessary (and many of the founders didn’t think so) but their failure was to define the common law sufficiently that rights weren’t necessary. 7 – A constitution is a contract that produces a ledger for transactions under the rule of law of natural law of tort. it’s a recipe for running a legal accounting system, for the production of contracts under the natural law of tort. The ‘philosophical’ claims about the constitution are relatively recent attempts to undermine it and end rule of law. It’s the most boring empirical system known by man – which is why no other people in the world have constitutions – only ‘documents of nice words’.
-
NO THE CONSTITUTION AND ANGLO LAW RE NOT PHILOSOPHICAL BUT EMPIRICAL —“What is
NO THE CONSTITUTION AND ANGLO LAW RE NOT PHILOSOPHICAL BUT EMPIRICAL
—“What is the significance of a philosophical approach to the constitution?”—
1 – Contrary to popular belief, the constitution is not a philosophical document.
2 – Contrary to popular belief, the common law is not a philosophical discipline.
3 – The natural law of tort (demonstrated interests) is purely empirical (scientific). It’s not philosophical. Philosophers only sought to explain it. We discovered it by adjudicating differences in order to end conflicts and to ‘keep the peace’ meaning ‘cooperation between members of the community’ – in particular to prevent retaliation cycles (feuds). This is why the first laws do not state the law, they only standardize punishments – because the law existed, everyone knew the laws – they’re common sense. But the variation in punishments created retaliation cycles (feuds). A standard punishment demands the community enforce the punishment as ‘settlement of differences’ and ensure both parties against further feuds.
4 – This law is predicated on self-determination, individual sovereignty to achieve it, reciprocity to maintain it, jury and court to decide it, and markets in all aspects of life as a consequence of it. (This is what other civs can’t do – get past familism or tribalism)
5 – The constitution presumes the common law (not positive law), and articulates a market for the production of commons. It’s just another marketplace.
6 – The constitution contains processes for transactional modification of that marketplace. The bill of rights shouldn’t be necessary (and many of the founders didn’t think so) but their failure was to define the common law sufficiently that rights weren’t necessary.
7 – A constitution is a contract that produces a ledger for transactions under the rule of law of natural law of tort. it’s a recipe for running a legal accounting system, for the production of contracts under the natural law of tort. The ‘philosophical’ claims about the constitution are relatively recent attempts to undermine it and end rule of law.
It’s the most boring empirical system known by man – which is why no other people in the world have constitutions – only ‘documents of nice words’.
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-23 12:51:00 UTC
-
ONLY A PEOPLE OF SUFFICIENT BREEDING CAN UPHOLD THE RULE OF LAW —“Just having
ONLY A PEOPLE OF SUFFICIENT BREEDING CAN UPHOLD THE RULE OF LAW
—“Just having rule of law that’s justly or even strictly applied is often sufficient for economic velocity. … Most nations fail simply because of the corruption undermining laws – only a people of sufficient breeding can uphold the rule of law.”—Gary Knight
Source date (UTC): 2020-07-23 08:49:00 UTC