Category: Law, Constitution, and Jurisprudence

  • Q: CURT: WHY IS THE COURT RESTORING THE COMMON LAW OF CONCURRENCY AND COMMONALIT

    Q: CURT: WHY IS THE COURT RESTORING THE COMMON LAW OF CONCURRENCY AND COMMONALITY, AND NATURALITY?
    (“to prevent circumvention of the legislature and the people via the legislature”) #law

    Commonality: the requirement that legitimacy of law (findings of the court) is determined by empirical evidence of commonality of judgments across regions.
    Concurrency: the requirement for empirical evidence that all legislation be agreed upon by the concurrency of regions, classes, (and now sexes).
    Therefore: Commonality and Concurrency limit legislation (contracts of the commons), and law (findings of the court), to that which people have already agreed upon.
    Therefore the prohibition on authority, whether by the tyranny of a minority or a majority: the people must be persuaded by a concurrence of regions and classes in legislative contracts and commonality of judgments across regions and classes, such that the legislature that represents them is acting on the will of the people despite their differences.
    Settled Law: The legislature and the courts are required to produce ‘settled law’ by the tests of commonality and concurrency, thereby prohibiting authority.
    Natural Law (Empirical Science of Settled Law): Natural Law is identified by the evidence of dispute resolutions over time – in the case of Europe, over the course of the five thousand years of our history and traditions back to the discovery of contractual civilization on the pontic steppe. Natural law, or what we call ‘tort’ consists of the universal (militia) reciprocal insurance of self-determination by self-determined means, by sovereignty in demonstrated interests (you’ve paid for one way or another), limiting us to reciprocity in display word and deed, and voluntary markets for cooperation, and the courts in matters of non cooperation: the resolution of disputes.
    Natural Rights (Empirical Science of Rights, Obligations and Inalienations): Natural rights, obligations, and inalienations are those discovered and enumerated that are necessary for the preservation of soverignty and reciprocity in display word and deed. As such we have achieved commonality and concurrency over time, independent of the present moment: as such the criminal never voluntarily abandons his crimes without the threat of force. And as such, the court need no approval for the prosecution of violations of natural rights already determined over centuries by commonality. Men and women constantly invent new crimes over time that attempt to violate the natural law and natural rights.
    Transactional Law: Legislation, Regulation, and Law are measures of the concurrency and commonality of the people in a time, place, and context, creating an accounting ledge of rules the people have consented to.
    (a) words are weights and measures of time and place (b) people use terms in the context of time and place. (c) people use terms to express meaning with the available weights and measures provided by those terms.
    (d) as such the interpretation of a term (meaning) is dependent upon both the context of time and place and the context constructed by the person using it within that context of time and place.
    (e) therefore words have no meaning independent of the context of time, place, author, and his intent.
    (f) And laws are interpreted in these contexts.
    (g) Why? To prevent deception of the court and jury on the one hand and to prevent circumvention of the legislature and the people via the legislature on the other.

    Western civilization is just science combined with heroism: the direction of dominance expression to the production of commons. No other civilization is scientific. The rest are either philosophical(China) or theological(MENA), mythical(India), or magical(Africa).

    Why isn’t this taught in gradeschool to every single person is obvious: there are those seditious and treasonous among us who seek to impose their authority by circumvention of the demand for commonality and concurrency.

    We call them ‘leftists’. Because all leftism is crime, sedition, and treason against our civilization. That’s what defines leftism: inventions in criminality that have not yet been outlawed by court or legislature.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-16 14:00:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1658470075232337922

  • I’ve drafted this list but haven’t revised it with my new understanding. I thoug

    I’ve drafted this list but haven’t revised it with my new understanding. I thought it would be larger, but I’m not sure any longer that other than some formalization of law and stoicism I”m not sure much value can be added to the greeks and romans or rather the epic cycle (the matter of greece and rome), the carolingian cycle, the ring cycle, and the arthurian legends. Why? aside from formally articulating the european group evolutionary strategy, and its evolutoin through rome, and explaining that its just natural law, and that natural law is just basically science, everything else is essentially history of the evolution of the application of that strategy

    Reply addressees: @Josh_Ebner @neilmurrayBCE


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-15 02:11:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657931755465191425

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657925795216596996

  • WHAT DO WE MEAN BY MONARCHY? –“It’s not even, technically speaking, a monarchy

    WHAT DO WE MEAN BY MONARCHY?

    –“It’s not even, technically speaking, a monarchy if the monarch doesn’t have a final say, make the exceptions and interpretations.” – Martin Stepan (@TheAutistocrat)

    Agreed.
    0. Kingdom (non european)
    1. … monarchy (christian european, c.e.)
    2. … … vs constitutional monarchy (c.e.)
    3. … … … vs natural law constitutional monarchy.(c.e.)

    Under the natural law modern state invented by the British, the monarchy is a via negative judge of last resort in the hierarchy of courts, that is outside the law only in the preservation and restoration of the law, the natural law, and the defense of the commons of the people.

    Now you won’t find this explicitly stated by others because of the rather archaic romantic traditional, philosophical Christian and enlightenment framing of rights and obligations under the traditional law and traditional philosophy. It is, however, exactly how Elizabeth’s and now Charles’ rights, obligations, and inalienations are captured in British law.

    (Why do I need to be the first person who does the grunt work of ‘sciencing’ anglo, germanic, and western civilization? 😉 )

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @TheAutistocrat


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-14 18:54:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657821750216761345

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657759552538902530

  • “Q: Curt: Why do you advocate for monarchy?”– Technically I advocate for rule o

    –“Q: Curt: Why do you advocate for monarchy?”–

    Technically I advocate for rule of law by the natural law and monarchy is a necessary institution. Meaning monarchy provides a judge of last resort given the tendency of all political organizations to fail, due to accumulated… https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1657682675803496449

  • Sorry but you err. The federalist mission to restore the court, restore the legi

    Sorry but you err. The federalist mission to restore the court, restore the legitimacy of law, by requiring all change go through the legislative process testing concurrency (agreement across regions and classes) reversing the legal positivism and activism of the Marxists, that undermined the law by bypassing the people the congress and due process. The result was unsettled law when the court, through commonality and the legislature through concurrency, are designed to require consensus in both the good (legislation) and the bad (judicial remedy).

    So no. The whole point is to end your demand for authoritarianism and restore due process of legislative and legal change.

    We have the legislature and we have the amendment process, and these require agreement across numbers, classes, and regions – specifically so we don’t result in unsettled law by authority whether false authority of the majority or false authority of the court or false authority of the legislature.

    If you don’t understand these things then you are a threat to rule of law from which democracy is the means of determining concurrency: agreement.

    Reply addressees: @LandSharkJones @TheRichFromCali


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 19:23:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657104106303913984

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657073786934403073

  • Um. No. The SC is the top decision making body. It is just limited to the cases

    Um. No. The SC is the top decision making body. It is just limited to the cases put before it as a resolution of disputes. The SC is correcting for the failures of legal positivism and activism that circumvented the people.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 12:33:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657000923305058304

    Reply addressees: @LandSharkJones @TheRichFromCali

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656944864020275202

  • Well you know, that’s why ‘words are weights and measures in the context of thei

    Well you know, that’s why ‘words are weights and measures in the context of their time’. We know precisely why this amendment was created, and for what purpose and intent – and that’s to recognize the debts of the north (the government) as legitimate payable, but the debts of the southern government and southerners not legitimate.

    This is why there are things such as legal scholars, and legal UNDERMINERS. Scholars read the law like a system of accounting in time and space, and UNDERMINIERS (liars, the seditious) make sh-t up. 😉

    Words don’t mean things. People mean things. ANd they mean them with the weights measures and contexts of the time.

    Reply addressees: @Bwonk_Bwonk @InsideWithPsaki @jrpsaki @RepRaskin


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 16:57:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656342805248348160

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656321384832806912

  • Hardly. I just work in jurisprudence and, in particular, on the postwar attack o

    Hardly. I just work in jurisprudence and, in particular, on the postwar attack on the common law by the legal positivists.

    Culture matters.
    Our logic comes along with it.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-09 22:13:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656059755553513474

    Reply addressees: @clifflyon @ddoregon2020 @InsideWithPsaki @jrpsaki @RepRaskin

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656056175253676032

  • If I call you a bad person using opinion vs. I call you a criminal with evidence

    If I call you a bad person using opinion vs. I call you a criminal with evidence, why is that obfuscation?
    Instead you’re trying to emote.
    And take the bait.
    Which is why you lose


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-09 21:07:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656043250946326550

    Reply addressees: @Will86042755099 @TOOEdit

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656042750926569503

  • Correct. That doesn’t mean that a higher court will not take the cumulative resu

    Correct. That doesn’t mean that a higher court will not take the cumulative results of those settlements into account as either constructive or destructive of common ends.
    I’ve written about this subject since first asked to comment by libertarians a decade ago. IMO the state will have difficulty resisting the temptation to monopolize all asset control if for no other reason to claim that criminal use, violation of legitimate taxation, or interference in monetary or even fiscal policy.
    The community has not exactly done a good job of self regulation sufficient to eliminate baiting the state into control.

    Reply addressees: @JDPARIZEE70


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-09 18:21:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656001439871782915

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655938115486490626