by Daniel Roland Anderson And we have a mechanism for correcting non-correspondence of the constitution with natural law: the Amendment process—which won’t work in our current demographic situation. Do you know many judges you’d trust to implement Natural Law over the plain text of the document? I don’t. When I hear a “constitutionalist” go on about Natural Law, it’s 99.9% ignorant blather. Curt is the first guy in years to use the term Natural Law in a way that doesn’t make me want to punch someone. I suspect Curt provides for decidability whereas others use Natural Law to stand in for “whatever I think is good right now.” Curt has done great things for the Common Law that many constitutionalists would throw out with the bathwater if judicial abuse of discretion. (CD: Bingo)
Source: Original Site Post
-
There is Only One Natural Law
There is only one natural law, and that is reciprocity. That law is empirically evolving at all times in that branch of law we call tort. That tort law evolves by incremental suppression of parasitism by new discoveries of ir-reciprocity that violate the one law of reciprocity. The principle problem in tort history is the failure to define property as property-in-toto, and this problem has been caused by the Ruler’s interest in preventing defectors as well as defeaters, while at the same time collecting fees for doing so. Like regulating an economy via money supply, we have a very hard time finding a measurement that provides us with decidability that produces no even worse externalities. The answer in both cases is markets, rule of law, and universal standing in matters of the commons, such that the governor is not necessary as other than a judge of last resort. The west invented rule without government for the same reason we invented law without discretion: the consequence of a voluntary militia of equal sovereigns is the only decidability that is possible is tort (reciprocity).
-
There is Only One Natural Law
There is only one natural law, and that is reciprocity. That law is empirically evolving at all times in that branch of law we call tort. That tort law evolves by incremental suppression of parasitism by new discoveries of ir-reciprocity that violate the one law of reciprocity. The principle problem in tort history is the failure to define property as property-in-toto, and this problem has been caused by the Ruler’s interest in preventing defectors as well as defeaters, while at the same time collecting fees for doing so. Like regulating an economy via money supply, we have a very hard time finding a measurement that provides us with decidability that produces no even worse externalities. The answer in both cases is markets, rule of law, and universal standing in matters of the commons, such that the governor is not necessary as other than a judge of last resort. The west invented rule without government for the same reason we invented law without discretion: the consequence of a voluntary militia of equal sovereigns is the only decidability that is possible is tort (reciprocity).
-
The Feminine Mask
The Feminine Mask—“Psychopathic personality is also consistently documented more often in men versus women; in fact, the ratio has been as high as 20:1.However, new research suggests that some of the difference between men and women may not be in the existence of deceitful, manipulative, and exploitive personality traits but in the expression of them. Specifically, these researchers found that women may be more likely to express these personality deficits through behaviors that are typically associated with, and diagnosed as, other mental illnesses.For example, these researchers found overlap between some of the symptoms such as histrionic personality disorder or borderline personality disorder. (link is external) A woman whose extreme fear of abandonment leads her to periodic outbursts of rage over real or imagined transgressions, flips between seeing her significant other as either completely perfect or totally evil, or who has to constantly be the center of attention (link is external) certainly isn’t who we think of when we think of the classic psychopath. But she may be just as incapable of true empathy, and just as manipulative and deceitful, as the callous, unemotional male.”—
-
The Feminine Mask
The Feminine Mask—“Psychopathic personality is also consistently documented more often in men versus women; in fact, the ratio has been as high as 20:1.However, new research suggests that some of the difference between men and women may not be in the existence of deceitful, manipulative, and exploitive personality traits but in the expression of them. Specifically, these researchers found that women may be more likely to express these personality deficits through behaviors that are typically associated with, and diagnosed as, other mental illnesses.For example, these researchers found overlap between some of the symptoms such as histrionic personality disorder or borderline personality disorder. (link is external) A woman whose extreme fear of abandonment leads her to periodic outbursts of rage over real or imagined transgressions, flips between seeing her significant other as either completely perfect or totally evil, or who has to constantly be the center of attention (link is external) certainly isn’t who we think of when we think of the classic psychopath. But she may be just as incapable of true empathy, and just as manipulative and deceitful, as the callous, unemotional male.”—
-
–“What’s You’re Political Stance?”–
—“What is your political stance?”— How about Conservative (aristocratic), Libertarian (rule of law), which means my stance is EUGENIC. And certainly not Progressive (priestly), Humanist (rule by discretion), which means DYSGENIC. As far as I know: (a) we either rule by discretion or rule by law (not legislation but law). (b) we either rule by eugenics and wealth, or rule by dysgenics and poverty. Because all political orders are deterministic. You either get a massive middle class (classical liberalism), get a caste system (india, south america), or you get a massive underclass (islam). Because in the end your relative standard of living is dependent upon the size of your underclass. Really. That’s all it is. Seriously. So choose between paying the piper now (conservative wealth and eugenics) or paying the piper later (progressive poverty and dysgenics ).
-
–“What’s You’re Political Stance?”–
—“What is your political stance?”— How about Conservative (aristocratic), Libertarian (rule of law), which means my stance is EUGENIC. And certainly not Progressive (priestly), Humanist (rule by discretion), which means DYSGENIC. As far as I know: (a) we either rule by discretion or rule by law (not legislation but law). (b) we either rule by eugenics and wealth, or rule by dysgenics and poverty. Because all political orders are deterministic. You either get a massive middle class (classical liberalism), get a caste system (india, south america), or you get a massive underclass (islam). Because in the end your relative standard of living is dependent upon the size of your underclass. Really. That’s all it is. Seriously. So choose between paying the piper now (conservative wealth and eugenics) or paying the piper later (progressive poverty and dysgenics ).
-
Progressives are the Establishment
by Ely Harman Progressives are the “establishment.” They are not “rebels” they are not “marginalized.” They are the powers that be and they use their institutional power, which they weild through something like 95% of all instititions to crush dissent, to shut down opposition, to silence criticism, and to squelch discussion. They also use their power only for bad, dysgenia, parasitism, lies fraud, corruption, degeneracy, weakness worship, mediocrity, stagnation, decay, uglification, everything that is mean, gross, defective, foul, or inferior and nothing that is excellent, good, beautiful, truthful or pure.
-
Progressives are the Establishment
by Ely Harman Progressives are the “establishment.” They are not “rebels” they are not “marginalized.” They are the powers that be and they use their institutional power, which they weild through something like 95% of all instititions to crush dissent, to shut down opposition, to silence criticism, and to squelch discussion. They also use their power only for bad, dysgenia, parasitism, lies fraud, corruption, degeneracy, weakness worship, mediocrity, stagnation, decay, uglification, everything that is mean, gross, defective, foul, or inferior and nothing that is excellent, good, beautiful, truthful or pure.
-
The Evolution of Abrahamic Lying
THE EVOLUTION OF THE ART OF LYING: Abrahamism v1: Judaism against Babylon’s Aristocracy Abrahamism v2: Christianity against Western Aristocracy. Abrahamism v3: Islam against the ancient world’s Aristocracy Abrahamism v4: Marxism against the modern world’s Aristocracy. Abrahamism v5: French Postmodernism against the current world’s Aristocracy. Abrahamism v6: Islamism against the entire world’s Aristocracy. Curt Doolittle