Source: Original Site Post

  • Governments Do Have Currency if Not Money

    Feb 1, 2020, 5:40 PM

    —“Governments don’t have money, citizens do. Will the state fund [whatever] through mandatory force derived taxes or will state funding be purely voluntary on the part of interested citizens (non mandatory tithing).”—

    Hmmm… that’s not entirely true. Just as a thought experiment, assume a government over a territory that is fully autarkic and has no need of foreign currency or trade. This government can issue a currency (each unit a tradable share in the economy), demand it as legal tender for all debts private and public, and it can equidistribute X amount of this currency to every citizen every day, week, month, quarter, year or whatever directly to a bank account. It can then collect some percentage of that in taxes and repeat the process. This is what governments already do. They just put the banks in the middle requiring us to borrow it and giving the banks interest, thereby having the banks inflate 9x times the amount. We are not fully autarkic so the process limits the state’s powers of monetary distribution. Modern monetary theory won’t work, but this will, it will just require collecting and measuring better information than we do now

  • The Three-C,Q Method

    Feb 1, 2020, 6:58 PM THE THREE-C,Q METHOD 1. Compliment 2. Comment 3. Connection 4. Question How to answer questions in text. THE E-PRIME METHOD 1. Eliminate the verb to be, and plan your sentence accordingly. THE OPERATIONAL METHOD 1. Complete sentences 2. Operational vocabulary 3. Single POV 4. Describe a complete change in state. PROPERTARIAN METHOD 1. Using economic terms 2. To describe changes in property in toto as a consequence of both incentives and changes in state.

  • The Three-C,Q Method

    Feb 1, 2020, 6:58 PM THE THREE-C,Q METHOD 1. Compliment 2. Comment 3. Connection 4. Question How to answer questions in text. THE E-PRIME METHOD 1. Eliminate the verb to be, and plan your sentence accordingly. THE OPERATIONAL METHOD 1. Complete sentences 2. Operational vocabulary 3. Single POV 4. Describe a complete change in state. PROPERTARIAN METHOD 1. Using economic terms 2. To describe changes in property in toto as a consequence of both incentives and changes in state.

  • Tri-Partism and The Tri-Functional Hypothesis of Our Natural Gods, and Our Natural Religion

    Feb 1, 2020, 7:02 PM (mandatory understanding on IE origins of Market Gods) (compare with the Monopoly of semitic underclass gods) The Trifunctional Hypothesis of prehistoric Proto-Indo-European society postulates a tripartite ideology (“idéologie tripartite”) reflected in the existence of three classes or castes—priests, warriors, and commoners (farmers or tradesmen)—corresponding to the three functions of the sacral, the martial and the economic, respectively. The trifunctional thesis is primarily associated with the French mythographer Georges Dumézil, who proposed it in 1929 in the book Flamen-Brahman, and later in Mitra-Varuna. According to Dumézil (1898–1986), Proto-Indo-European society comprised three main groups corresponding to three distinct functions:

    1. Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts: … 1.1 one formal, juridical and priestly but worldly; … 1.2 the other powerful, unpredictable, and also priestly but rooted in the supernatural world. 2. Military, connected with force, the military and war. 3. Productivity, herding, farming and crafts; ruled by the other two. In the Proto-Indo-European mythology each social group had its own god or family of gods to represent it and the function of the god or gods matched the function of the group. Many such divisions occur in the history of Indo-European societies: Southern Russia: Bernard Sergent associates the Indo-European language family with certain archaeological cultures in Southern Russia and reconstructs an Indo-European religion based upon the tripartite functions. Early Germanic society: The supposed division between the king, nobility and regular freemen in early Germanic society. Norse mythology: Odin (sovereignty), Týr (law and justice), the Vanir (fertility). Odin is assigned one of the core functions in the Indo-European pantheon as a representative of the first function (sovereignty) corresponding to the Hindu Varuṇa (fury and magic) as opposed to Týr, who corresponds to the Hindu Mitrá (law and justice); while the Vanir represent the third function (fertility). Odin has been also been interpreted as a death-god (“Psychopomp”: transporting us to the afterlife) and connected to cremations, and has also been associated with ecstatic practices. Classic Greece: The three divisions of the ideal society as described by Socrates in Plato’s The Republic. Bernard Sergent examined the trifunctional hypothesis in Greek epic, lyric and dramatic poetry. India: The three Hindu castes, the Brahmins or priests; the Kshatriya, the warriors and military; and the Vaishya, the agriculturalists, cattle rearers and traders. The Shudra, a fourth Indian caste, is a peasant or serf. A 2001 study found that the genetic affinity of Indians to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans whereas lower castes are more like Asians. The researchers believe that the Indo-European speakers entered India from the Northwest, mixing with or displacing proto-Dravidian speakers, and may have established a caste system with themselves primarily in higher castes. TRIPLE (TRIPARTITE) DIETIES A triple deity (sometimes referred to as threefold, tripled, triplicate, tripartite, triune or triadic, or as a trinity) is three deities that are worshipped as one. Such deities are common throughout world mythology; the number three has a long history of mythical associations. Carl Jung considered the arrangement of deities into triplets an archetype in the history of religion. In classical religious iconography or mythological art, three separate beings may represent either a triad who always appear as a group (Greek Moirai, Charites, Erinyes; Norse Norns; or the Irish Morrígan) or a single deity known from literary sources as having three aspects (Greek Hecate, Roman Diana). THE INDO EUROPEAN ORIGINS OF TRIPARTISM, TRIFUNCTIONALISM, TRIPLE GODS, AND TERNARY LOGIC Georges Dumézil’s trifunctional hypothesis proposed that ancient Indo-European society conceived itself as structured around three activities: worship, war, and toil. In later times, when slave labor became common, the three functions came to be seen as separate “classes”, represented each by its own god. Dumézil understood this mythology as reflecting and validating social structures in its content: such a tripartite class system is found in ancient Indian, Iranian, Greek and Celtic texts. In 1970, Dumézil proposed that some goddesses represented these three qualities as different aspects or epithets and identified examples in his interpretation of various deities including the Iranian Anāhitā, the Vedic Sarasvatī and the Roman Juno. Vesna Petreska posits that myths including trinities of female mythical beings from Central and Eastern European cultures may be evidence for an Indo-European belief in trimutive female “spinners” of destiny. But according to the linguist M. L. West, various female deities and mythological figures in Europe show the influence of pre-Indo-European goddess-worship, and triple female fate divinities, typically “spinners” of destiny, are attested all over Europe and in Bronze Age Anatolia. POST BRONZE AGE COLLAPSE CULTURESAncient Celtic cultures The Matres or Matronae are usually represented as a group of three but sometimes with as many as 27 (3 × 3 × 3) inscriptions. They were associated with motherhood and fertility. Inscriptions to these deities have been found in Gaul, Spain, Italy, the Rhineland and Britain, as their worship was carried by Roman soldiery dating from the mid 1st century to the 3rd century AD.[24] Miranda Green observes that “triplism” reflects a way of “expressing the divine rather than presentation of specific god-types. Triads or triple beings are ubiquitous in the Welsh and Irish mythic imagery” (she gives examples including the Irish battle-furies, Macha, and Brigit). “The religious iconographic repertoire of Gaul and Britain during the Roman period includes a wide range of triple forms: the most common triadic depiction is that of the triple mother goddess” (she lists numerous examples).[25] In the case of the Irish Brigid it can be ambiguous whether she is a single goddess or three sisters, all named Brigid.[26] The Morrígan also appears sometimes as one being, and at other times as three sisters,[27][28][29][30] as do the three Irish goddesses of sovereignty, Ériu, Fódla and Banba.[31] Hinduism In Hinduism, the supreme divinity Para Brahman can take the form of the Trimurti, in which the cosmic functions of creation, preservation, and destruction of the universe are performed by the three deities of Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the preserver), and Shiva (the destroyer), who are at the same time three forms of the one Para Brahman.[32] The divine being Dattatreya is a representation of all three of these deities incarnated as a single being.[33] Christianity (the trinity) Christians profess “one God in three divine persons” (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost). This is not to be understood as a belief in (or worship of) three Gods, nor as a belief that there are three subjectively-perceived “aspects” in one God, both of which the Catholic Church condemns as heresy. The Catholic Church also rejects the notions that God is “composed” of its three persons and that “God” is a genus containing the three persons. The Gnostic text Trimorphic Protennoia presents a threefold discourse of the three forms of Divine Thought: the Father, the Son, and the Mother (Sophia). Many Christian saints, especially martyrs, are trios who share a feast day or other remembrance. (See Category:Saints trios.) Whether they are subject to actual veneration and prayed to for supernatural aid, or simply honored, varies by Christian denomination. ESTATES OF THE REALM A 13th-century French representation of the tripartite social order of the Middle Ages – Oratores (“those who pray”), Bellatores (“those who fight”), and Laboratores (“those who work”). The estates of the realm, or three estates, were the broad orders of social hierarchy used in Christendom (Christian Europe) from the medieval period to early modern Europe. Different systems for dividing society members into estates developed and evolved over time. The best known system is the French Ancien Régime (Old Regime), a three-estate system used until the French Revolution (1789–1799). Monarchy was for the king and the queen and this system was made up of clergy (the First Estate), nobles (the Second Estate), and peasants and bourgeoisie (the Third Estate). In some regions, notably Scandinavia and Russia, burghers (the urban merchant class) and rural commoners were split into separate estates, creating a four-estate system with rural commoners ranking the lowest as the Fourth Estate. Furthermore, the non-landowning poor could be left outside the estates, leaving them without political rights. In England, a two-estate system evolved that combined nobility and clergy into one lordly estate with “commons” as the second estate. This system produced the two houses of parliament, the House of Commons and the House of Lords. In southern Germany, a three-estate system of nobility (princes and high clergy), knights, and burghers was used. In Scotland, the Three Estates were the Clergy (First Estate), Nobility (Second Estate), and Shire Commissioners, or “burghers” (Third Estate), representing the bourgeois, middle class, and lower class. The Estates made up a Scottish Parliament. TRIPARTISM (COOPERATIONISM, MARKETS) IN PROPERTARIANISM In P we begin with the three means of coercion: Force-Defense, Remuneration-Deprivation, and Inclusion-Undermining (ostracization) in a market preserved by the judiciary. We argue that the three classes developed three ‘market competitions’ for elites; martial-judicial, priestly-educational, and productive-labor and trade. These three sets of elites we recognize as Conservative-Capitalizing (force), Progressive-consuming(Undermining), and Libertarian-Productive (Trade). In P we restore the “cooperation between the compatible but unequal classes”: The Monarchy as judge of last resort, The Judiciary as preservation of sovereignty, the Senate (nobility) as territorial (tribal) interests, the Upper House as the Commercial Interests, and the Lower House as Family and Labor Interests. Under this interpretation, christianity is migrating to its natural place as the feminine (forgiveness, love), while we are restoring our traditional gods as we try to restore our civlization after the abrahamic dark ages of death and decline. LEARN MORE This info is collected from wikipedia, but read Dumezil or at least the spartk notes version. 😉 If you undestand Dumizel’s description of, Campbell’s Monomyth, and the nordic myths you can begin to reconstruct our natural religions in both northern second generation and southern european first generation forms.

  • Tri-Partism and The Tri-Functional Hypothesis of Our Natural Gods, and Our Natural Religion

    Feb 1, 2020, 7:02 PM (mandatory understanding on IE origins of Market Gods) (compare with the Monopoly of semitic underclass gods) The Trifunctional Hypothesis of prehistoric Proto-Indo-European society postulates a tripartite ideology (“idéologie tripartite”) reflected in the existence of three classes or castes—priests, warriors, and commoners (farmers or tradesmen)—corresponding to the three functions of the sacral, the martial and the economic, respectively. The trifunctional thesis is primarily associated with the French mythographer Georges Dumézil, who proposed it in 1929 in the book Flamen-Brahman, and later in Mitra-Varuna. According to Dumézil (1898–1986), Proto-Indo-European society comprised three main groups corresponding to three distinct functions:

    1. Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts: … 1.1 one formal, juridical and priestly but worldly; … 1.2 the other powerful, unpredictable, and also priestly but rooted in the supernatural world. 2. Military, connected with force, the military and war. 3. Productivity, herding, farming and crafts; ruled by the other two. In the Proto-Indo-European mythology each social group had its own god or family of gods to represent it and the function of the god or gods matched the function of the group. Many such divisions occur in the history of Indo-European societies: Southern Russia: Bernard Sergent associates the Indo-European language family with certain archaeological cultures in Southern Russia and reconstructs an Indo-European religion based upon the tripartite functions. Early Germanic society: The supposed division between the king, nobility and regular freemen in early Germanic society. Norse mythology: Odin (sovereignty), Týr (law and justice), the Vanir (fertility). Odin is assigned one of the core functions in the Indo-European pantheon as a representative of the first function (sovereignty) corresponding to the Hindu Varuṇa (fury and magic) as opposed to Týr, who corresponds to the Hindu Mitrá (law and justice); while the Vanir represent the third function (fertility). Odin has been also been interpreted as a death-god (“Psychopomp”: transporting us to the afterlife) and connected to cremations, and has also been associated with ecstatic practices. Classic Greece: The three divisions of the ideal society as described by Socrates in Plato’s The Republic. Bernard Sergent examined the trifunctional hypothesis in Greek epic, lyric and dramatic poetry. India: The three Hindu castes, the Brahmins or priests; the Kshatriya, the warriors and military; and the Vaishya, the agriculturalists, cattle rearers and traders. The Shudra, a fourth Indian caste, is a peasant or serf. A 2001 study found that the genetic affinity of Indians to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans whereas lower castes are more like Asians. The researchers believe that the Indo-European speakers entered India from the Northwest, mixing with or displacing proto-Dravidian speakers, and may have established a caste system with themselves primarily in higher castes. TRIPLE (TRIPARTITE) DIETIES A triple deity (sometimes referred to as threefold, tripled, triplicate, tripartite, triune or triadic, or as a trinity) is three deities that are worshipped as one. Such deities are common throughout world mythology; the number three has a long history of mythical associations. Carl Jung considered the arrangement of deities into triplets an archetype in the history of religion. In classical religious iconography or mythological art, three separate beings may represent either a triad who always appear as a group (Greek Moirai, Charites, Erinyes; Norse Norns; or the Irish Morrígan) or a single deity known from literary sources as having three aspects (Greek Hecate, Roman Diana). THE INDO EUROPEAN ORIGINS OF TRIPARTISM, TRIFUNCTIONALISM, TRIPLE GODS, AND TERNARY LOGIC Georges Dumézil’s trifunctional hypothesis proposed that ancient Indo-European society conceived itself as structured around three activities: worship, war, and toil. In later times, when slave labor became common, the three functions came to be seen as separate “classes”, represented each by its own god. Dumézil understood this mythology as reflecting and validating social structures in its content: such a tripartite class system is found in ancient Indian, Iranian, Greek and Celtic texts. In 1970, Dumézil proposed that some goddesses represented these three qualities as different aspects or epithets and identified examples in his interpretation of various deities including the Iranian Anāhitā, the Vedic Sarasvatī and the Roman Juno. Vesna Petreska posits that myths including trinities of female mythical beings from Central and Eastern European cultures may be evidence for an Indo-European belief in trimutive female “spinners” of destiny. But according to the linguist M. L. West, various female deities and mythological figures in Europe show the influence of pre-Indo-European goddess-worship, and triple female fate divinities, typically “spinners” of destiny, are attested all over Europe and in Bronze Age Anatolia. POST BRONZE AGE COLLAPSE CULTURESAncient Celtic cultures The Matres or Matronae are usually represented as a group of three but sometimes with as many as 27 (3 × 3 × 3) inscriptions. They were associated with motherhood and fertility. Inscriptions to these deities have been found in Gaul, Spain, Italy, the Rhineland and Britain, as their worship was carried by Roman soldiery dating from the mid 1st century to the 3rd century AD.[24] Miranda Green observes that “triplism” reflects a way of “expressing the divine rather than presentation of specific god-types. Triads or triple beings are ubiquitous in the Welsh and Irish mythic imagery” (she gives examples including the Irish battle-furies, Macha, and Brigit). “The religious iconographic repertoire of Gaul and Britain during the Roman period includes a wide range of triple forms: the most common triadic depiction is that of the triple mother goddess” (she lists numerous examples).[25] In the case of the Irish Brigid it can be ambiguous whether she is a single goddess or three sisters, all named Brigid.[26] The Morrígan also appears sometimes as one being, and at other times as three sisters,[27][28][29][30] as do the three Irish goddesses of sovereignty, Ériu, Fódla and Banba.[31] Hinduism In Hinduism, the supreme divinity Para Brahman can take the form of the Trimurti, in which the cosmic functions of creation, preservation, and destruction of the universe are performed by the three deities of Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the preserver), and Shiva (the destroyer), who are at the same time three forms of the one Para Brahman.[32] The divine being Dattatreya is a representation of all three of these deities incarnated as a single being.[33] Christianity (the trinity) Christians profess “one God in three divine persons” (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost). This is not to be understood as a belief in (or worship of) three Gods, nor as a belief that there are three subjectively-perceived “aspects” in one God, both of which the Catholic Church condemns as heresy. The Catholic Church also rejects the notions that God is “composed” of its three persons and that “God” is a genus containing the three persons. The Gnostic text Trimorphic Protennoia presents a threefold discourse of the three forms of Divine Thought: the Father, the Son, and the Mother (Sophia). Many Christian saints, especially martyrs, are trios who share a feast day or other remembrance. (See Category:Saints trios.) Whether they are subject to actual veneration and prayed to for supernatural aid, or simply honored, varies by Christian denomination. ESTATES OF THE REALM A 13th-century French representation of the tripartite social order of the Middle Ages – Oratores (“those who pray”), Bellatores (“those who fight”), and Laboratores (“those who work”). The estates of the realm, or three estates, were the broad orders of social hierarchy used in Christendom (Christian Europe) from the medieval period to early modern Europe. Different systems for dividing society members into estates developed and evolved over time. The best known system is the French Ancien Régime (Old Regime), a three-estate system used until the French Revolution (1789–1799). Monarchy was for the king and the queen and this system was made up of clergy (the First Estate), nobles (the Second Estate), and peasants and bourgeoisie (the Third Estate). In some regions, notably Scandinavia and Russia, burghers (the urban merchant class) and rural commoners were split into separate estates, creating a four-estate system with rural commoners ranking the lowest as the Fourth Estate. Furthermore, the non-landowning poor could be left outside the estates, leaving them without political rights. In England, a two-estate system evolved that combined nobility and clergy into one lordly estate with “commons” as the second estate. This system produced the two houses of parliament, the House of Commons and the House of Lords. In southern Germany, a three-estate system of nobility (princes and high clergy), knights, and burghers was used. In Scotland, the Three Estates were the Clergy (First Estate), Nobility (Second Estate), and Shire Commissioners, or “burghers” (Third Estate), representing the bourgeois, middle class, and lower class. The Estates made up a Scottish Parliament. TRIPARTISM (COOPERATIONISM, MARKETS) IN PROPERTARIANISM In P we begin with the three means of coercion: Force-Defense, Remuneration-Deprivation, and Inclusion-Undermining (ostracization) in a market preserved by the judiciary. We argue that the three classes developed three ‘market competitions’ for elites; martial-judicial, priestly-educational, and productive-labor and trade. These three sets of elites we recognize as Conservative-Capitalizing (force), Progressive-consuming(Undermining), and Libertarian-Productive (Trade). In P we restore the “cooperation between the compatible but unequal classes”: The Monarchy as judge of last resort, The Judiciary as preservation of sovereignty, the Senate (nobility) as territorial (tribal) interests, the Upper House as the Commercial Interests, and the Lower House as Family and Labor Interests. Under this interpretation, christianity is migrating to its natural place as the feminine (forgiveness, love), while we are restoring our traditional gods as we try to restore our civlization after the abrahamic dark ages of death and decline. LEARN MORE This info is collected from wikipedia, but read Dumezil or at least the spartk notes version. 😉 If you undestand Dumizel’s description of, Campbell’s Monomyth, and the nordic myths you can begin to reconstruct our natural religions in both northern second generation and southern european first generation forms.

  • This Is Why the West Just Works

    THIS IS WHY THE WEST JUST WORKS – NEGATIVA JURIDICAL MATERIAL PRIESTHOOD AND POSITIVA SUPERNATURAL PRIESTHOODS. Proto-Indo-European society comprised three main groups corresponding to three distinct functions:

    1. Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts:
      … 1.1 one formal, juridical and priestly but worldly;
      … 1.2 the other powerful, unpredictable, and also priestly but rooted in the supernatural world.
    2. Military, connected with force, the military and war.
    3. Productivity, herding, farming and crafts; ruled by the other two.
  • This Is Why the West Just Works

    THIS IS WHY THE WEST JUST WORKS – NEGATIVA JURIDICAL MATERIAL PRIESTHOOD AND POSITIVA SUPERNATURAL PRIESTHOODS. Proto-Indo-European society comprised three main groups corresponding to three distinct functions:

    1. Sovereignty, which fell into two distinct and complementary sub-parts:
      … 1.1 one formal, juridical and priestly but worldly;
      … 1.2 the other powerful, unpredictable, and also priestly but rooted in the supernatural world.
    2. Military, connected with force, the military and war.
    3. Productivity, herding, farming and crafts; ruled by the other two.
  • The Anglo Peoples Need …

    Feb 1, 2020, 7:06 PM THE ANGLO PEOPLES NEED WRITTEN CONSTITUTIONS OF INVIOLABLE NATURAL LAW REQUIRING TRANSACTIONAL CHANGES, AND THE PEOPLE NEED JURIDICAL DEFENSE AND THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS JURIDICAL ACCOUNTABILITY by Reece Haynes 5 years in British politics (observing, theorizing, debating, practicing), proves everything you’ve said. The supremacy of Parliament is for nought when that Parliament is filled with the wrong people. And our unwritten constitution, plus the common law, is routinely disobeyed – with no sanctions applied by the judiciary. Not codifying the constitution, not maintaining the Empire, and not preserving the Aristotelian mixed model (hereditary monarchy and nobility, plus limited democracy) were all big mistakes. And then there’s the historical geopolitical mistakes which you also mention.


    CD: The judicial novelties I’ve found are:

    1. The hereditary monarchy as a judge of last resort in defense against the fashions of the people, the malice of a minority, and the failure of the political process, is indispensable.

    2. The commonwealth model is to be embraced by any future american political order, with the monarchy representing the english speaking peoples.

    3. The British parliamentary and debate model is superior to the american.

    4. The British two (or more) Tiered legal system is superior to the american.

    5. The German Proportional Party System is superior to the British and american — allowing superior policy and superior adaptation.

    6. The requirement for strict construction from the first principle of reciprocity, specific statement of the scope(limit), and reference of any prior legislation , legislation, or finding of the court, upon which it depends.

    7. the requirement that the judiciary return the undecidable to the legislature thereby preventing legislation from the bench – and the mechanism for judiciary to require the legislature settle the matter in reasonable time

    8. The liability of legislators, regulators, and judges to warranty (hold involuntary liability) for their actions in so much that they do not violate the constitution of natural law.

    9. The vulnerability of legislators, regulators, judges and their agents to judicial prosecution for violations of the constitution.

    10. The vulnerability of the public to prosecution for advocation in public to the public in matters public, of violation of the constitution.

    11. The addition of involuntary warranty and therefor liability, for the entire scope of baiting into hazard upon which the 20th century deceits were constructed.

    12. The reversal of borrower beware to lender beware.

    13. Universal standing in matters of the commons

    14. Restoration of every man (citizen) a sheriff (deputy), defense of self, property and commons, restoration of extrajudicial punishment; the judicially sanctioned duel; and the sovereignty of men and as such their requirement to bear arms.

    15. The jewish-french cosmopolitan sponsored invasion of western civlization has destroyed our experiment in democracy – and universal democracy must and will end and we have proposed a set of options for polities to choose from, the easiest of which is multiple houses to maintain numbers, or fewer voters by much higher criteria, or lastly, kinship(ethnic) voters only.
      Edit

  • The Anglo Peoples Need …

    Feb 1, 2020, 7:06 PM THE ANGLO PEOPLES NEED WRITTEN CONSTITUTIONS OF INVIOLABLE NATURAL LAW REQUIRING TRANSACTIONAL CHANGES, AND THE PEOPLE NEED JURIDICAL DEFENSE AND THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS JURIDICAL ACCOUNTABILITY by Reece Haynes 5 years in British politics (observing, theorizing, debating, practicing), proves everything you’ve said. The supremacy of Parliament is for nought when that Parliament is filled with the wrong people. And our unwritten constitution, plus the common law, is routinely disobeyed – with no sanctions applied by the judiciary. Not codifying the constitution, not maintaining the Empire, and not preserving the Aristotelian mixed model (hereditary monarchy and nobility, plus limited democracy) were all big mistakes. And then there’s the historical geopolitical mistakes which you also mention.


    CD: The judicial novelties I’ve found are:

    1. The hereditary monarchy as a judge of last resort in defense against the fashions of the people, the malice of a minority, and the failure of the political process, is indispensable.

    2. The commonwealth model is to be embraced by any future american political order, with the monarchy representing the english speaking peoples.

    3. The British parliamentary and debate model is superior to the american.

    4. The British two (or more) Tiered legal system is superior to the american.

    5. The German Proportional Party System is superior to the British and american — allowing superior policy and superior adaptation.

    6. The requirement for strict construction from the first principle of reciprocity, specific statement of the scope(limit), and reference of any prior legislation , legislation, or finding of the court, upon which it depends.

    7. the requirement that the judiciary return the undecidable to the legislature thereby preventing legislation from the bench – and the mechanism for judiciary to require the legislature settle the matter in reasonable time

    8. The liability of legislators, regulators, and judges to warranty (hold involuntary liability) for their actions in so much that they do not violate the constitution of natural law.

    9. The vulnerability of legislators, regulators, judges and their agents to judicial prosecution for violations of the constitution.

    10. The vulnerability of the public to prosecution for advocation in public to the public in matters public, of violation of the constitution.

    11. The addition of involuntary warranty and therefor liability, for the entire scope of baiting into hazard upon which the 20th century deceits were constructed.

    12. The reversal of borrower beware to lender beware.

    13. Universal standing in matters of the commons

    14. Restoration of every man (citizen) a sheriff (deputy), defense of self, property and commons, restoration of extrajudicial punishment; the judicially sanctioned duel; and the sovereignty of men and as such their requirement to bear arms.

    15. The jewish-french cosmopolitan sponsored invasion of western civlization has destroyed our experiment in democracy – and universal democracy must and will end and we have proposed a set of options for polities to choose from, the easiest of which is multiple houses to maintain numbers, or fewer voters by much higher criteria, or lastly, kinship(ethnic) voters only.
      Edit

  • What It Says Right There in Text…

    Feb 1, 2020, 7:38 PM by Jerry Odom

    —“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the “consent” of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, ….”—

    So what it says here is our rights don’t come from government or from words on paper. Let’s be real here the only reason that we actually create government is to protect the rights of the people. So, what are inalienable rights? Among the natural rights of the people, are life, liberty, and property together with the right to protect and defend them with the best possible means possible. So if you don’t have the right to life you’re dead, if you don’t have liberty in your servant of the government you created, if you don’t have a right to property and that you don’t have a right to life and your subject to whoever owns the property, if you don’t have a right to defend these things than you are slave you are not a free man, if you have to ask permission of the government protect my life my and my property then you are not a free man, inalienable rights are not subject to laws of man especially when we gave them the ability to govern based on the consent of the people. Edit