(FB 1551540319 Timestamp) GOVERNMENT UNDER PROPERTARIANISM, NOT PROPERTARIAN GOVERNMENT. (AND THE ABSOLUTIST QUESTION) (core) Propertarianism consists of a methodology for producing truthful, rational, reciprocal, commensurable fully accounted speech that all but prohibits error, bias, deceit, and fraud. And the application of that method to the scope of human knowledge, producing a universal vocabulary and grammar commensurable across all disciplines. With this methodology, applied to law, you can produce arguments, constitutions and bodies of law, that are fully commensurable, fully accounted, and prohibit error, bias, deceit, and fraud. With these arguments, constitutions, and bodies of law you can produce any form of government – you just must do so truthfully with full accounting and transparency. There is no ideal form of government because different forms of government are more or less suitable to different demographic distributions, degrees of neoteny, states of cooperative (middle class) development, and more or less suitable to times of war, peace, and windfalls. There is however, an optimum system of government for european peoples, and any other peoples who wish to produce european standards of life, because this form of government provides the greatest limitation on rents, greatest incentive for production distribution and trade, and the greatest adaptability to change, greatest rates of innovation, and the greatest shared rewards (commons) because of all of the above. That system of government consists in: A Federation (nomocracy). Of Nation States. Under Rule of Law: …Federally Limited to material conflicts between polities. …Locally unlimited production of commons. …Each Administered by an Independent Judiciary. And Defended by: …A Universal militia …In Regimental Orders …And a Cadre of Professional Warriors. And either Limited Monarchy: …A Hereditary Monarchy …A Professional Cabinet …Houses of Juries by Class (assent, veto) …Privatized Bureaucracies Or Narrowly Participatory Monarchy: …A Hereditary Monarchy (assent, veto) …A Professional Cabinet …Houses as a Market between Classes (market) …Privatized Bureaucracies Or Broadly Participatory Monarchy: …A Hereditary Monarchy (assent, veto) …A Professional Cabinet …Virtual Houses as a Market between Classes (market) …Privatized Bureaucracies With each state producing commons suitable to the interests and desires of the people. I work under the model of progressive decline in sovereignty given ability to organize. The lesson of the soviet model is that (Authoritarian ) Monarchy Military Warriors Judiciary Sheriffs Police (Market) Finance, Scientific Elites, Academic Elites Entrepreneur, Scientists, Professors professional, researchers, teachers administrator, research assistants, media. (Mixed Market) craftsman, laborer, dependents, (Non-Market) Soldiers Serfs Slaves Prisoners
Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551549723 Timestamp) When I was in college my education taught me that the law was immoral. It wasn’t until my 30’s I discovered that it’s entirely possible to practice law morally. It just limits your customer base. And for the best lawyers, that’s a great strategy. I’d have been perfectly happy as a full time litigator if I’d switched to law at that point in my life. I just feel like ending up as a tech entrepreneur did a better job of financing my work as a philosopher.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551549723 Timestamp) When I was in college my education taught me that the law was immoral. It wasn’t until my 30’s I discovered that it’s entirely possible to practice law morally. It just limits your customer base. And for the best lawyers, that’s a great strategy. I’d have been perfectly happy as a full time litigator if I’d switched to law at that point in my life. I just feel like ending up as a tech entrepreneur did a better job of financing my work as a philosopher.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551655771 Timestamp) scold
[skÅld]
NOUN a person, in particular a woman, who nags or grumbles constantly. “his mother was the village scold” COMMON SCOLD From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In the common law of crime in England and Wales, a common scold was a type of public nuisanceâa troublesome and angry person who broke the public peace by habitually chastising, arguing and quarrelling with their neighbours. The majority of individuals punished for scolding were women, though men could also be labelled scolds. The offence, which was exported to North America with the colonists, was punished by monetary fines, but also by methods intended to publicly humiliate such as ducking: being placed in a chair and submerged in a river or pond. Although rarely prosecuted it remained on the statute books in England and Wales until 1967. Scolding offences were commonly presented and punished in manorial and borough courts that governed the behaviour of peasants and townspeople across England. Scolds were also presented in church courts.[2] The most common punishment was a monetary fine. Various historians have argued that scolding and bad speech were coded as feminine offences by the late medieval period. Women of all marital statuses were prosecuted for scolding, though married women featured most frequently, while widows were rarely labelled scolds.[3] In some places, such as Exeter, scolds were typically poorer women, whereas elsewhere scolds could include members of the local elite.[4] Women who were also charged with other offences, such as violence, nightwandering, eavesdropping or sexual impropriety were also likely to be labelled scolds.[5] Individuals were frequently labelled ‘common scolds’, indicating the impact of their behaviour and speech on the whole community. Karen Jones identified 13 men prosecuted for scolding in Kent’s secular courts, compared to 94 women and 2 couples.[6] Men accused of scolding were often charged alongside their wives. Helen, wife of Peter Bradwall scolded Hugh Welesson and Isabel, his wife, in Middlewich in 1434, calling Isabel a “child murderer” and Hugh a “skallet [wretched] knave”. Isabel and Hugh also scolded Helen, calling her a “lesyng blebberer” (lying bletherer). All parties were fined for the offences, though Hugh and Isabel were fined jointly.[7] Like women, male scolds were often accused of many other offences, such as fornication, theft, illegal trading, and assault.[8] Note that in american law, Scolding was folded into disorderly conduct in the early 1970’s
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551645681 Timestamp) COURSE UPDATE LAW103 – Foundations Really love the material, but I still am pretty under the weather. I just tried recording and I sound terrible between the wheezing and the sniffling…. lol. And so I won’t record until tomorrow I think. Mirroring the book. Really just copy, paste, simplify, and add assignments. It’s working out wonderfully. Very excited. hugs all And again. Apologies. My health does not like to cooperate no matter how excited I am. You are going to love this stuff because it is the very lowest level that I don’t cover on Facebook. #post
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551655771 Timestamp) scold
[skÅld]
NOUN a person, in particular a woman, who nags or grumbles constantly. “his mother was the village scold” COMMON SCOLD From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In the common law of crime in England and Wales, a common scold was a type of public nuisanceâa troublesome and angry person who broke the public peace by habitually chastising, arguing and quarrelling with their neighbours. The majority of individuals punished for scolding were women, though men could also be labelled scolds. The offence, which was exported to North America with the colonists, was punished by monetary fines, but also by methods intended to publicly humiliate such as ducking: being placed in a chair and submerged in a river or pond. Although rarely prosecuted it remained on the statute books in England and Wales until 1967. Scolding offences were commonly presented and punished in manorial and borough courts that governed the behaviour of peasants and townspeople across England. Scolds were also presented in church courts.[2] The most common punishment was a monetary fine. Various historians have argued that scolding and bad speech were coded as feminine offences by the late medieval period. Women of all marital statuses were prosecuted for scolding, though married women featured most frequently, while widows were rarely labelled scolds.[3] In some places, such as Exeter, scolds were typically poorer women, whereas elsewhere scolds could include members of the local elite.[4] Women who were also charged with other offences, such as violence, nightwandering, eavesdropping or sexual impropriety were also likely to be labelled scolds.[5] Individuals were frequently labelled ‘common scolds’, indicating the impact of their behaviour and speech on the whole community. Karen Jones identified 13 men prosecuted for scolding in Kent’s secular courts, compared to 94 women and 2 couples.[6] Men accused of scolding were often charged alongside their wives. Helen, wife of Peter Bradwall scolded Hugh Welesson and Isabel, his wife, in Middlewich in 1434, calling Isabel a “child murderer” and Hugh a “skallet [wretched] knave”. Isabel and Hugh also scolded Helen, calling her a “lesyng blebberer” (lying bletherer). All parties were fined for the offences, though Hugh and Isabel were fined jointly.[7] Like women, male scolds were often accused of many other offences, such as fornication, theft, illegal trading, and assault.[8] Note that in american law, Scolding was folded into disorderly conduct in the early 1970’s
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551645681 Timestamp) COURSE UPDATE LAW103 – Foundations Really love the material, but I still am pretty under the weather. I just tried recording and I sound terrible between the wheezing and the sniffling…. lol. And so I won’t record until tomorrow I think. Mirroring the book. Really just copy, paste, simplify, and add assignments. It’s working out wonderfully. Very excited. hugs all And again. Apologies. My health does not like to cooperate no matter how excited I am. You are going to love this stuff because it is the very lowest level that I don’t cover on Facebook. #post
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551811141 Timestamp) COURSE UPDATE LAW103: A bit wheezy still but recording today. Really happy with the material. Think I’ve hit the right balance. -cheers
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551811141 Timestamp) COURSE UPDATE LAW103: A bit wheezy still but recording today. Really happy with the material. Think I’ve hit the right balance. -cheers
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1551969700 Timestamp) —“Rule by Judges? Sounds a lot more like Rule by Truth and the Rule of Law. Sure, in the beginning there will be more activity in the courts as people adjust to an honest society. However, once the adjustment to a more “clean” Commons is made. The Courts will calm down as the cost of lying will be far too high to pay.”—Stephen Thomas