Theme: Constitutional Order

  • That ruling violates rule of law. Instead, men can in fact, enter into any contr

    That ruling violates rule of law. Instead, men can in fact, enter into any contract that they wish, and often do – but the state will not enforce them, and the state may find it irreciprocal, or irreciprocal by externality, or in violation of command, regulation and legislation.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 14:42:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174332766265270273

    Reply addressees: @danstrawhun @primalpoly

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174331668804571136


    IN REPLY TO:

    @dstrwhn

    @curtdoolittle @gmiller “The Constitution does not speak of freedom of contract…. Freedom of contract is a qualified and not an absolute right. There is no absolute freedom to do as one wills or to contract as one chooses.”

    W. Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (1937)

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174331668804571136

  • You have it in the constitution. The state simply violates it

    You have it in the constitution. The state simply violates it.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 11:01:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174277297119158272

    Reply addressees: @AffairsHuman @primalpoly

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174143215110414337


    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/1174143215110414337

  • What’s an example of a contract you can’t enter into on terms you see fit? You c

    What’s an example of a contract you can’t enter into on terms you see fit? You can enter into any contract, but the state as an insurer of contracts will not enforce them. And then, of course, the litmus test: what about blackmail?


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-18 11:00:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174277044924035074

    Reply addressees: @KralcTrebor @Darren_B_Lane @primalpoly

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174140544290828290


    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/1174140544290828290

  • The Schedule

    • Finish Course on Law and Promote.
    • Start Courses on War, and Promote (agitate)
    • Revise Constitution, including “White Law” , and “Escalation Clauses” (work)
    • Videos on each section of the constitution with John (agitate)
    • Start Promoting and Expanding Member Mailing List with each video.
    • Podcasts on the conduct of a revolution with list etc. (agitate)
    • Go Mobile. Go Conserv, Libert, Media Bilitz.
    • Announce “Deal” for Revolutionaries, Military, Police, Bureaucracy. (agitate – a lot )
    • Send Hard Copy Pkgs of Declaration and Constitution to Conserv Authors, Media, etc (escalate)
    • Send soft copies to euro, canada, australian groups.
    • Invitation to Convention. (escalate agitation).  world.
    • Time and Place of Convention (make it real)
    • Publish Findings
    • Media Push.
    • Govt Push
    • Announce.
    • Go.
  • The Schedule

    • Finish Course on Law and Promote.
    • Start Courses on War, and Promote (agitate)
    • Revise Constitution, including “White Law” , and “Escalation Clauses” (work)
    • Videos on each section of the constitution with John (agitate)
    • Start Promoting and Expanding Member Mailing List with each video.
    • Podcasts on the conduct of a revolution with list etc. (agitate)
    • Go Mobile. Go Conserv, Libert, Media Bilitz.
    • Announce “Deal” for Revolutionaries, Military, Police, Bureaucracy. (agitate – a lot )
    • Send Hard Copy Pkgs of Declaration and Constitution to Conserv Authors, Media, etc (escalate)
    • Send soft copies to euro, canada, australian groups.
    • Invitation to Convention. (escalate agitation).  world.
    • Time and Place of Convention (make it real)
    • Publish Findings
    • Media Push.
    • Govt Push
    • Announce.
    • Go.
  • Judicial Independence is a Consequence of Rule of Law of Reciprocity

    Judicial Independence is a Consequence of Rule of Law of Reciprocity https://propertarianism.com/2019/09/17/judicial-independence-is-a-consequence-of-rule-of-law-of-reciprocity/


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-17 21:46:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174077300092145664

  • Judicial Independence is a Consequence of Rule of Law of Reciprocity

    Well, judicial independence is in turn dependent upon which theory of jurisprudence, which interpretation of the constitution under it, the limits to Rights, legislation, regulation, findings (judicial discretion), which limits to interpretation of texts used. Fix 1st things 1st. If we use reciprocity (tort, trespass), strict, textual, operational construction of rights from it, strict, textual operation construction of constitution, amendments, legislation, regulation, and findings from it, then fine. That’s Rule of Law and judicial independence. But whether discretionary rule by a dictator, an oligarchy, a legislature, a bureaucracy, or a judge makes no difference.  And the left has done a fine job of inserting dictators who violate that law to the bench – a fine enough job to discredit the judiciary. Our constitution was a good first draft of legal expression of the scientific evidence of the natural law of reciprocity – our customary law for millennia. But judicial independence is a consequence of that one law of reciprocity. Government is just a means of producing commons under that law. And the insurance of that law, those judges, against that government and the people who would usurp it, the only insurance possible. It’s exasperating that a hole in our constitution that neither demands ascent of the supreme court, nor demands warranty by its legislators, nor provides means of returning an undecidable case to the state, is obfuscated by discussions of independence instead. ( Apologies for letting me rant a bit on the primary subject of my work. 😉 Let’s fix the constitution with a third american revolution…. )

  • Judicial Independence is a Consequence of Rule of Law of Reciprocity

    Well, judicial independence is in turn dependent upon which theory of jurisprudence, which interpretation of the constitution under it, the limits to Rights, legislation, regulation, findings (judicial discretion), which limits to interpretation of texts used. Fix 1st things 1st. If we use reciprocity (tort, trespass), strict, textual, operational construction of rights from it, strict, textual operation construction of constitution, amendments, legislation, regulation, and findings from it, then fine. That’s Rule of Law and judicial independence. But whether discretionary rule by a dictator, an oligarchy, a legislature, a bureaucracy, or a judge makes no difference.  And the left has done a fine job of inserting dictators who violate that law to the bench – a fine enough job to discredit the judiciary. Our constitution was a good first draft of legal expression of the scientific evidence of the natural law of reciprocity – our customary law for millennia. But judicial independence is a consequence of that one law of reciprocity. Government is just a means of producing commons under that law. And the insurance of that law, those judges, against that government and the people who would usurp it, the only insurance possible. It’s exasperating that a hole in our constitution that neither demands ascent of the supreme court, nor demands warranty by its legislators, nor provides means of returning an undecidable case to the state, is obfuscated by discussions of independence instead. ( Apologies for letting me rant a bit on the primary subject of my work. 😉 Let’s fix the constitution with a third american revolution…. )

  • ( Apologies for letting me rant a bit on the primary subject of my work. 😉 Let’

    ( Apologies for letting me rant a bit on the primary subject of my work. 😉 Let’s fix the constitution with a third american revolution…. )


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-17 21:43:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174076460866441216

    Reply addressees: @JoshMBlackman @CatoInstitute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174076257140649985


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JoshMBlackman @CatoInstitute It’s exasperating that a hole in our constitution that neither demands ascent of the supreme court, nor demands warranty by its legislators, nor provides means of returning an undecidable case to the state, is obfuscated by discussions of independence instead.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174076257140649985


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @JoshMBlackman @CatoInstitute It’s exasperating that a hole in our constitution that neither demands ascent of the supreme court, nor demands warranty by its legislators, nor provides means of returning an undecidable case to the state, is obfuscated by discussions of independence instead.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174076257140649985

  • It’s exasperating that a hole in our constitution that neither demands ascent of

    It’s exasperating that a hole in our constitution that neither demands ascent of the supreme court, nor demands warranty by its legislators, nor provides means of returning an undecidable case to the state, is obfuscated by discussions of independence instead.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-17 21:42:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174076257140649985

    Reply addressees: @JoshMBlackman @CatoInstitute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174075760807677952


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JoshMBlackman @CatoInstitute But judicial independence is a consequence of that one law of reciprocity. Government is just a means of producing commons under that law. And the insurance of that law, those judges, against that government and the people who would usurp it, the only insurance possible.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174075760807677952


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @JoshMBlackman @CatoInstitute But judicial independence is a consequence of that one law of reciprocity. Government is just a means of producing commons under that law. And the insurance of that law, those judges, against that government and the people who would usurp it, the only insurance possible.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1174075760807677952