Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence

  • That’s patently false. The foundation of contract law is reciprocity, and irreci

    That’s patently false. The foundation of contract law is reciprocity, and irreciprocal contracts will not be enforced by the court. The problem is the court’s definition of irreciprocity favors personal choice and consequence rather than legal defense from baiting into hazard.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-07 11:58:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258365508732289027

    Reply addressees: @YvesBurri @EricLiford @Nationalist7346

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1258219149777498112

  • QUESTION What would need to differ from the P-Constitution for the states and fo

    QUESTION

    What would need to differ from the P-Constitution for the states and for

    … 1. Canada

    … 2. Australia

    … 3. UK

    … n. Any other european country of your choosing?

    How do our countries differ?


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-03 17:42:00 UTC

  • OUR NEED: REDUCING THE CANON OF THE WEST TO A BIBLE: THE LAW BEYOND WHICH NONE M

    OUR NEED: REDUCING THE CANON OF THE WEST TO A BIBLE: THE LAW BEYOND WHICH NONE MAY TREAD

    (From OCT 2019) (updated)

    The west never had a single bible, but a canon, and that canon was written in multiple frames although the spectrum of scientific, legal, philosophical, normative, literary, and theological.

    Philosophy, theology, tradition, are just narratives that explain a group strategy in a grammar of wishes.

    Law is the evidence of what actually occurs, not what is wished for.

    While we traditionally had rule of law beyond which no leader may tread, we allowed liberalism (even classical liberalism) to violate that traditional law under the presumption that while the monarchy needed be constrained by law, we the people were somehow so special and virtuous we need not be.

    Our British Ancestors, Our Founding Fathers, through generations of the English civil wars, sought to reduce that canon to constitution.

    But they lacked the skill we developed in the 20th because under programming, the sciences, and the collapse of the philosophical program (yes).

    They were successful despite those weaknesses as long as the heroic narrative of the revolution persisted, or what the founders said was dependent upon the moral teachings of the church.

    The failure of the church to reform in the face of Darwin and the sciences, the replacement of the church with the academy, the capture of the academy by the immoral left, combined with Anti-whiteness, under guise of privilege, colonialism, and slavery (not unique to whites at all) provided the means of undermining that narrative, by taking advantage of our our christian virtue, our market tolerance, our false claim that man was oppressed rather than domesticated by the aristocracy and markets, and our false presumption that we could create an aristocracy of everyone if they were but given the chance.

    We dragged them out of their failed cultures, failed religions, failed institutions, failed governments, and failed civilizations. We dragged them kicking and screaming out of superstition, ignorance, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the chaos of a hostile nature. And They hate us for it. They work daily to destroy us. They seek to bring their failures to us, not our successes to them. We gave them that chance. And they failed. They failed because are unfit, unwilling, or unable, and undeserving. And they are destroying the monument to mankind that we have made.

    So we must complete the Greco-roman-germanic-anglo-American research program and produce that bible in the form of a constitution such that no narrative can undermine it, without causing our retaliation.

    We need to create the white law – a rational, scientific, western competitor to Jewish law and Muslim sharia. A strict construction from our founding differences: sovereignty and reciprocity, truth and duty, judge and jury, heroism and excellence, family and commons, and the market for voluntary cooperation in all walks of life – that together produce the social political and economic order most rapidly open to adaptation and innovation.

    We need a constitution and a law closed to interpretation open to innovation, but beyond which no man, private, public, or foreign may tread.

    And we need to enforce it intolerantly, unforgivingly, and mercilessly, as our ancestors defended themselves by the same means.

    Heroism and excellence, The universal militia, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, and Duty, Judge and Jury, and markets in all aspects of life: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war.

    That is the secret to western civilization.

    Sovereignty.

    And it is our law beyond which none may tread.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-03 15:20:00 UTC

  • YOU WON”T BE ABLE TO CRITICIZE OR FALSIFY P-LOGIC AND LAW Every professional dis

    YOU WON”T BE ABLE TO CRITICIZE OR FALSIFY P-LOGIC AND LAW

    Every professional discipline uses a methodology. P creates a single professional discipline of the metaphysical, psychological, social, political, and group strategy. It is to sentient sciences what physics is to non-sentient physical sciences. P is a methodology that produces a formal grammar (or logic). As such it is what we refer to as a formal science (formal logic of metaphysics, psychology, and sociology).

    We use that science to explain western civlization. We use the explanation of western civilization to explain why it’s the optimum civilization. We explain and advocate our preference for that optimum civilization. We use that understanding and preference of optimum civilization to correct past and present errors in that civilization, and to restore, reform, and, innovate on that optimum civilization.

    It is impossible to criticize the methodology (science). It is very difficult to criticize what we do with it. At best one can argue for preference of different organizations of our or other civilizations given the tactical advantage of circumstances, within that strategic optimum.

    You must be able to criticize P on it’s foundations and it’s propositions. (You won’t be able to). The difference between counting, accounting, mathematics, programming, and P is simply the increasing number of causal dimensions in the domains they describe). You certainly can criticize the choice of continuing the strategy of western civlization or the policy implementations we suggest to do so. But you aren’t going to be able to criticize the logic or science whatsoever. It won’t happen. You don’t know that yet. But I do.

    Hostility to criticism of any of the sciences (logical facility, logic, mathematics, accounting, mathematics, programming, P (P-logic, P-Law) is simply hostility to laziness and ignorance rather than informed debate.

    P is not a theology, philosophy, ideology, or analogy. It’s a (the) formal grammar (logic, vocabulary, paradigm) of sentient life if not all life.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-03 09:40:00 UTC

  • Law exists. Contracts can be constructed within the law are choices). Legislatio

    Law exists. Contracts can be constructed within the law are choices). Legislation and regulation (policy) are choices. Commands are arbitrary and involuntary. The present judiciary conflates law, legislation, regulation, and command. We disambiguate them.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-01 10:33:00 UTC

  • THE SUPREME COURT’S 2A RULING. 1. There are ten 2A cases before the supreme cour

    THE SUPREME COURT’S 2A RULING.

    1. There are ten 2A cases before the supreme court (SCOTUS)

    2. The NY case was effectively dropped by the SCOTUS because the law was withdrawn, because they were afraid the court would rule against it.

    3. The court dropped it because they didn’t want to cloud the controversial subject with an unnecessary ruling when there are more cases before it.

    4. In the court’s notes they stated that it was clear that NY did not pay sufficient attention to the courts recent rulings on 2A

    5. The court will follow with the upcoming cases, which cover the gamut of attempts to undermine the 2A.

    6. Unless something changes there is about zero chance the court will change course – and it is extremely likely that they will strike down most threats to 2A.

    7. It is irrational for us to wait until the court decides these cases.

    8. It’s necessary to state our demands, and unify 2A groups around a specific set of demands, that fully express our rights.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-30 19:54:00 UTC

  • DISAMBIGUATION: ILLEGAL, LEGAL, COMMERCIAL, COMMONS Regarding: Alcohol, Pot, Oth

    DISAMBIGUATION: ILLEGAL, LEGAL, COMMERCIAL, COMMONS

    Regarding: Alcohol, Pot, Other Drugs, Sex, Promiscuity, Prostitution, any unregulated behavior, attention-causing, or Hedonism (unregulated behavior) in general – there is a difference between illegality (prohibition), legalization (private and out of the commons) and commercializing (in the commons).

    Many if not all unregulated behavior can and should be removed from the commons. What people do in private is their own business.

    We share the commons.

    We don’t share private spaces.

    Prohibited(illegal) >

    … Private(outside of commons) >

    … … Craft Production (for home and friend consumption)

    … … … Commercial (sourced in and marketed in markets) >

    … … … … Commons (demonstrated in commons) >

    … … … … … Monument-Memorial (heralded in commons)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-30 11:42:00 UTC

  • (A great deal of my work is devoted to prohibiting false irreciprocal, and false

    (A great deal of my work is devoted to prohibiting false irreciprocal, and false-promissory speech, so that politicians public intellectual and media are liable for their words.)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-28 13:06:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1255121088150941697

    Reply addressees: @mutedilettante

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1255118876976676865

  • The law isn’t inspirational or funny. On the other hand we have a lot of fun

    The law isn’t inspirational or funny.
    On the other hand we have a lot of fun.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-26 23:50:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1254558418163109890

    Reply addressees: @dormant511 @SepteusT

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1254556478431690753

  • DEFINITION: TOTAL WAR Total war includes any and all civilian-associated resourc

    DEFINITION: TOTAL WAR

    Total war includes any and all civilian-associated resources and infrastructure as legitimate military targets, mobilizes all of the resources of society to fight the war, and gives priority to warfare over non-combatant needs.

    (stage one – mobilized total war)

    Total war is unrestricted in terms of the weapons used, the territory or combatants involved, or the objectives pursued, especially one in which the laws of war are disregarded, the differentiation between combatants and non-combatants diminishes, sometimes even vanishing entirely, due to the capacity of opposing sides to consider nearly every human resource, even that of non-combatants, to be a part of the war effort.

    (stage two – unrestricted total war)

    In the mid-19th century, scholars identified total war as a separate class of warfare.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-26 22:03:00 UTC