Theme: Constitutional Order

  • RULE OF LAW Among modern legal theorists, we will find that at least three commo

    RULE OF LAW

    Among modern legal theorists, we will find that at least three common definitions of the rule of law.

    1 – Rule of Law: a “Substantive” (Skeptical) or “thick” definition that must preserve certain rights;

    2 – Rule by Law: a “Formalist”: (Optimistic) or “thin” definition, that must not preserve any such rights, and;

    3 – Rule of Man: a “Functional” (Fictional) or “ultra-thin” definition that requires neither formal process nor substantial rights be respected, and allows government officials great leeway.

    The ancient concept of rule OF law can be distinguished from rule BY law, in that, under the rule OF law, the law serves as a check against the abuse of power.

    Under rule BY law, the law is a mere tool for a government, that oppresses the population a using legislation as justification for arbitrary commands – a means of violating rights.

    Under Rule of Man, there are no checks on power to violate rights.

    Rule of Law (By Rights)

    1- Substantive (Skeptical) conceptions of the rule of law go beyond this and include certain substantive rights that are said to be based on, or derived from, the rule of law. The substantive interpretation holds that the rule of law intrinsically must protect some or all individual rights.

    Rule By Law (Rule by Legislation)

    2 – Formalist (Optimistic) definitions of the rule of law do not make a judgment about the “justness” of law itself, but define specific procedural attributes that a legal framework must have in order to be in compliance with the rule of law. The formalist interpretation holds that the rule of law has purely formal characteristics, meaning that the law must be publicly declared, with prospective application, and possess the characteristics of generality, equality, and certainty, but there are no requirements with regard to the content of the law.

    In addition, some theorists hold that democracy(majority) can circumvent both procedure and rights, or construct new rights (rather than privileges).

    Why Formalism? Formalism allows laws the pretense of claiming rule of law when rights are not protected by including countries that do not necessarily have such laws protecting democracy or individual rights in the scope of the definition of “rule of law”.

    The “formal” interpretation is more widespread than the “substantive” interpretation. Formalists hold that the law must be prospective, well-known, and have characteristics of generality, equality, and certainty. Other than that, the formal view contains no requirements as to the content of the law.

    Rule of Man (By Arbitrary Discretion)

    3 – The functional (Fictional) interpretation of the term “rule of law”, consistent with the traditional English meaning, contrasts the “rule of law” with the “rule of man.” According to the functional view, a society in which government officers have a great deal of discretion has a low degree of “rule of law”, whereas a society in which government officers have little discretion has a high degree of “rule of law”.

    Closing (Summary)

    In other words, there is only one form of rule of law under which no one can override natural rights (life, liberty, property, reciprocity, truth, and duty). Rule by legislation allows either the state, or the body politic to override those rules. And rule by man allows arbitrary discretion on the part of officials (members of the monopoly bureaucracy).


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-20 10:29:00 UTC

  • THE FALSE DICHOTOMY OF SOCIALISM VS CAPITALISM What kind of government? Rule of

    THE FALSE DICHOTOMY OF SOCIALISM VS CAPITALISM

    What kind of government? Rule of Law, or Rule by Discretion? It’s an easy question.

    Natural Law Capitalism (markets in everything, limited by externality) must emerge under rule of law since no other option is available. The only externality is black markets (crime) to profit by imposition of costs by externalities. All other forms of circumventing rule of law by rule of discretion will simply breed special interests, monopolies, rents, and corruption – as well as black markets

    One of the great intellectual scams of the 19th and 20th centuries is to sell the replacement of rule of law, with arbitrary rule – by selling capitalism (unlimited free trade capitalism that tolerates externalities), versus socialism (discretionary rule socialism that manufactures externalities in volume).

    There is no alternative to a mixed economy. The alternative is between rule of law mixed economy (dividends to shareholder-citizens), and arbitrary rule mixed economy (dividends to the political class and their enablers).


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-20 08:16:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. IN TIME OF CIVIL WAR THE MILITIA WE HAVE JUDI

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    IN TIME OF CIVIL WAR THE MILITIA WE HAVE JUDICIAL LICENSE MOR MILITARY JUSTICE
    —-“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-18 23:44:15 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. The Original draft: —“A well regulated mili

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    The Original draft:

    —“A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-18 23:41:45 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. IT’S SIMPLE: LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY, RECIPRO

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    IT’S SIMPLE: LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY, RECIPROCITY

    The Constitution defines how the government (production of commons) is organized.

    The bill of rights defines the law that may not be discovered, legislation and regulation that may not be passed.

    The constitution does try to implement natural law (life, liberty, property), but it does not state such concretely in the bill of rights, nor does it state the law of reciprocity despite the fact that reciprocity is the basis for germanic common law back into pre-history.

    We could quite easily reorganize the constitution life(existence), liberty(action), property(thing), and reciprocity (volition), and then tie every one of the articles and amendments back to these (reciprocity and three dimensions of its demonstration).

    This set of three rights (existence, action, possession) and the single law of reciprocity are very simple criteria by which any constitution can be strictly constructed.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-18 23:37:06 UTC

  • It’s Simple: Life, Liberty, Property, Reciprocity

    The Constitution defines how the government (production of commons) is organized. The bill of rights defines the law that may not be discovered, legislation and regulation that may not be passed. The constitution does try to implement natural law (life, liberty, property), but it does not state such concretely in the bill of rights, nor does it state the law of reciprocity despite the fact that reciprocity is the basis for germanic common law back into pre-history. We could quite easily reorganize the constitution life(existence), liberty(action), property(thing), and reciprocity (volition), and then tie every one of the articles and amendments back to these (reciprocity and three dimensions of its demonstration). This set of three rights (existence, action, possession) and the single law of reciprocity are very simple criteria by which any constitution can be strictly constructed.

  • It’s Simple: Life, Liberty, Property, Reciprocity

    The Constitution defines how the government (production of commons) is organized. The bill of rights defines the law that may not be discovered, legislation and regulation that may not be passed. The constitution does try to implement natural law (life, liberty, property), but it does not state such concretely in the bill of rights, nor does it state the law of reciprocity despite the fact that reciprocity is the basis for germanic common law back into pre-history. We could quite easily reorganize the constitution life(existence), liberty(action), property(thing), and reciprocity (volition), and then tie every one of the articles and amendments back to these (reciprocity and three dimensions of its demonstration). This set of three rights (existence, action, possession) and the single law of reciprocity are very simple criteria by which any constitution can be strictly constructed.

  • The Original Draft:

    The Original draft: —“A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.”—

  • The Original Draft:

    The Original draft: —“A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.”—

  • In Time of Civil War the Militia We Have Judicial License for Military Justice

    —-“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”—