Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence

  • We are not equal. The meaning of equality is only “equality before the law, in m

    We are not equal. The meaning of equality is only “equality before the law, in matters of dispute, when standing before the court.” Everything else is a fictionalism (deceit). We are not equal by any other means. In fact, at thirty points, we are arguably different species.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-18 21:01:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163194113417719810

    Reply addressees: @MartinRobo123 @NoahRevoy

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163191809792729088


    IN REPLY TO:

    @MartinRobo123

    @NoahRevoy You sir are an idiot. We are human beings and therefore equal. Men are better at some things and visa versa. You can treat a woman exactly the same without losing face or does that deep down just hurt your pride and masculinity?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163191809792729088

  • Theft isn’t disagreement it’s fact. Theft is theft. Parasitism is parasitism. De

    Theft isn’t disagreement it’s fact. Theft is theft. Parasitism is parasitism. Destruction of rule of law and markets is destruction of rule of law and markets. Women have displaced men in the center of the workforce, competing successfully, but still using the vote to extract.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-18 17:48:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163145581646221312

    Reply addressees: @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163043174182457345


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163043174182457345

  • BTW: Law is simple. Procedure is complicated. 90% of lawyering is procedure. 100

    BTW: Law is simple. Procedure is complicated. 90% of lawyering is procedure. 100% of winning is research and argument. I’ve killed three companies in the past by this means, and I’m happy to advertise by forcing change into this one.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-18 17:07:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163135423931138048

    Reply addressees: @szysgt @SgtD_isBack @facebook

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163134964721954818


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @szysgt @SgtD_isBack @facebook Their policy changed, not me. As such, I just want my data. I have all but 90 days of it. Correct response would be “we no longer tolerate this, so here is a 30 day link to download your data” or something of that nature. But no – rule of law, and nationalism: prohibited speech.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163134964721954818


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @szysgt @SgtD_isBack @facebook Their policy changed, not me. As such, I just want my data. I have all but 90 days of it. Correct response would be “we no longer tolerate this, so here is a 30 day link to download your data” or something of that nature. But no – rule of law, and nationalism: prohibited speech.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163134964721954818

  • There is no rule in rule of law, but markets. you are the one who wants to impos

    There is no rule in rule of law, but markets. you are the one who wants to impose rule “discretionary rule” not market competition.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-18 13:46:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163084691953639425

    Reply addressees: @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163044157490978816


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163044157490978816

  • You were not oppressed. You were domesticated. We gave you not only equal rights

    You were not oppressed. You were domesticated. We gave you not only equal rights under the law(juridical), equal rights to property (economic), but equal rights to coercion (politics). And you did exactly what we invented law, property, and politics to achieve: cooperation.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-18 13:42:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163083697983303680

    Reply addressees: @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163082996360126467


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux You mean, they promote methods of theft from men to women. Why do you cover thefts, rent seeking, pseudoscience, sophism and lies instead of engaging in exchange? What do you have to offer such them men should not remove the thefts you impose upon them?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163082996360126467


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux You mean, they promote methods of theft from men to women. Why do you cover thefts, rent seeking, pseudoscience, sophism and lies instead of engaging in exchange? What do you have to offer such them men should not remove the thefts you impose upon them?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163082996360126467

  • Only negative freedoms can exist – both logically, operationally, and empiricall

    Only negative freedoms can exist – both logically, operationally, and empirically. What you mean is you want the privilege of theft from men.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-18 13:40:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163083223242596352

    Reply addressees: @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163082996360126467


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux You mean, they promote methods of theft from men to women. Why do you cover thefts, rent seeking, pseudoscience, sophism and lies instead of engaging in exchange? What do you have to offer such them men should not remove the thefts you impose upon them?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163082996360126467


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux You mean, they promote methods of theft from men to women. Why do you cover thefts, rent seeking, pseudoscience, sophism and lies instead of engaging in exchange? What do you have to offer such them men should not remove the thefts you impose upon them?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163082996360126467

  • All men ask is Rule of Law, equality under the law, reciprocity under the law, v

    All men ask is Rule of Law, equality under the law, reciprocity under the law, voluntary association and disassociation, and TRADE in the production of goods, services, information, and Commons: freedom. What you want is reciprocity, privilege and rent seeking: Parasitism.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-18 09:48:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163024808411635713

    Reply addressees: @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1163023697424334848


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux The evidence is that these statements are true:
    – Zero interest in reciprocity
    – Zero self awareness
    – Zero connection to reality.
    Purely instinctual hyper-consuming, conspicuously consuming, hypergamic, virtue signaling, attention whoring, parasites upon male productivity.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163023697424334848


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @SignHexa @NoahRevoy @StefanMolyneux The evidence is that these statements are true:
    – Zero interest in reciprocity
    – Zero self awareness
    – Zero connection to reality.
    Purely instinctual hyper-consuming, conspicuously consuming, hypergamic, virtue signaling, attention whoring, parasites upon male productivity.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1163023697424334848

  • APPARENTLY RULE OF LAW IS AN EXTREMIST POSITION Apparently we live in an era whe

    APPARENTLY RULE OF LAW IS AN EXTREMIST POSITION

    Apparently we live in an era where Individual Sovereignty, Reciprocity (reciprocal volition), Tort (property), Nomocracy (Rule of Law) under Isonomy (equality under the law) and No-Retroactivity, where the subject of law is the individual, the subject of policy the family, the function of government is the production and preservation of commons across families, and the state the service of the kin group, not a corporation, in the service of all against the kin group is called ‘Radical’ or ‘Extremist’.

    The Purpose of The Abrahamic(religious) > Marxist > Neoliberal > Postmodern > Program: the second destruction of western civilization.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 18:33:04 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102633752732130089

  • A militia is avery able bodied man between 16 and 60. No. You don’t get to choos

    A militia is avery able bodied man between 16 and 60.
    No. You don’t get to choose this fundamental right. If you do, those men will eliminate all your rights, fundamental or not. Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, Judge, Jury, and Markets in everything. That’s meritocracy.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-17 16:17:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1162760344906997760

    Reply addressees: @TheBoltUpright @BaconTwo4Actual @dyllyp

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1162019468924637186


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1162019468924637186

  • **A DECIDEDLY CHRISTIAN SET OF LAWS IN 1603 **December 9th, 2010 I hadn’t read H

    **A DECIDEDLY CHRISTIAN SET OF LAWS IN 1603

    **December 9th, 2010

    I hadn’t read Hugo Grotius’ Commentary before today. It is an interesting attempt to provide a coherent set of legal principles. Even if it is just very simply a recitation of Biblical principles with european legal conventions.

    I would never agree to place such faith in Magistrates, or any other officer of the state. They are only human beings, and not exceptional human beings at that.

    I give my violence to the state to use justly on my behalf, so that I may spend my time in other activities, in our division of knowledge and labor. That does not mean that it has the ability to act justly on my behalf, or the will to act justly on my behalf, nor has it demonstrated that it has the tendency to act justly on my behalf. I do not believe that any officer of the state is better equipped to make judgements over property than I am. And those are the only judgements a man need know. If he must do other than that, he submits to servitude.

    Now, once we possess a significant market, we must have administrators, and regulators of that market, and citizens who adhere to the manners, morals, ethics, taxes and regulations that prevent fraud, theft, and violence within that market, are it’s shareholders. Those shareholders will often seek to escape payment, or to transfer liability and risk onto others, or to draw more than their earnings from the corporation of the market that we call the state. I recognize that such thefts are invisible to men without the adminstration of the state to monitor them. As such, I agree that we must have courts and jurors.

    However, should these men, in the observance of their duties, abridge the laws of property, of theft, of violence, or fraud and deception in the course of their duties — even if it is to pursue just ends, or if such men, in the name of ease, or efficiency, or laziness or stupidity, or most importantly, the fallacy of just democratic law making, then I do not allow them to use my violence on my behalf, to seek reparation from my fellow men. And instead, I must withdraw my violence from the account of the state, and use it at my own discretion.

    Commentary on the Law of Prize and Booty [1603]

    by Hugo Grotius

    Table Of Rules And Laws Compiled From Chapter II Of The Commentary

    **Rules**

    rule i. What God has shown to be His Will, that is law.

    rule ii. What the common consent of mankind has shown to be the will of all, that is law.

    rule iii. What each individual has indicated to be his will, that is law with respect to him.

    rule iv. What the commonwealth has indicated to be its will, that is law for the whole body of citizens.

    rule v. What the commonwealth has indicated to be its will, that is law for the individual citizens in their mutual relations.

    rule vi. What the magistrate has indicated to be his will, that is law in regard to the whole body of citizens.

    rule vii. What the magistrate has indicated to be his will, that is law in regard to the citizens as individuals.

    rule viii. Whatever all states have indicated to be their will, that is law in regard to all of them.

    rule ix. In regard to judicial procedure, precedence shall be given to the state which is the defendant, or whose citizen is the defendant; but if the said state proves remiss in the discharge of its judicial duty, then that state shall be the judge, which is itself the plaintiff, or whose citizen is the plaintiff.

    **Laws**

    law i. It shall be permissible to defend [one’s own] life and to shun that which threatens to prove injurious.

    law ii. It shall be permissible to acquire for oneself, and to retain, those things which are useful for life.

    law iii. Let no one inflict injury upon his fellow.

    law iv. Let no one seize possession of that which has been taken into the possession of another.

    law v. Evil deeds must be corrected.

    law vi. Good deeds must be recompensed.

    law vii. Individual citizens should not only refrain from injuring other citizens, but should furthermore protect them, both as a whole and as individuals.

    law viii. Citizens should not only refrain from seizing one another’s possessions, whether these be held privately or in common, but should furthermore contribute individually both that which is necessary to [other] individuals and that which is necessary to the whole.

    law ix. No citizen shall seek to enforce his own right against a fellow citizen, save by judicial procedure.

    law x. The magistrate shall act in all matters for the good of the state.

    law xi. The state shall uphold as valid every act of the magistrate.

    law xii. Neither the state nor any citizen thereof shall seek to enforce his own right against another state or its citizens, save by judicial procedure.

    law xiii. In cases where [the laws] can be observed simultaneously, let them [all] be observed; when this is impossible, the law of superior rank shall prevail.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-16 08:45:00 UTC