RT @WilliamE1863: The modern left has completely destroyed Reconciliation. If Reconciliation is gone, the federal union is gone. My God,…
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-02 00:46:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653199306243883012
Theme: Constitutional Order
-
Yes of course I have, and in particular I spent most of my time on Mendelsohn vs
Yes of course I have, and in particular I spent most of my time on Mendelsohn vs Blackstone. And I’m more gentlemanly than you presume or I would ask you to explain the asymmetirc ethics, the hatred of europeans and persians (the indo europeans), the ethics of the industries jews have specialzed in (and continue to), and the reason that the rabbinical movement tried to integrate the legitimacy of greek reason in to jewish law, just as unfortunately, augustine attempted to ingegrate semitic superstition into greek reason. Thankfully Aquinas understood the error granting science primacy as needed. Thankfully Smith, Hume, Blackstone, and finally Darwin finished that project of divorcing european empirical reason from semitic superstition despite the lingering attraction and the conversion of judaism and the ethics of the diaspora in to marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, pc-woke, and the intention undermining of western civilization by sedition by marching through the institutions of cultural produciong taking largely advantage of the suggestibility and magical thinking of women to finance the means of doing so.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-02 00:05:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653188839366590465
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653182749694480388
-
Yes of course I have, and in particular I spent most of my time on Mendelsohn vs
Yes of course I have, and in particular I spent most of my time on Mendelsohn vs Blackstone. And I’m more gentlemanly than you presume or I would ask you to explain the asymmetirc ethics, the hatred of europeans and persians (the indo europeans), the ethics of the industries jews have specialzed in (and continue to), and the reason that the rabbinical movement tried to integrate the legitimacy of greek reason in to jewish law, just as unfortunately, augustine attempted to ingegrate semitic superstition into greek reason. Thankfully Aquinas understood the error granting science primacy as needed. Thankfully Smith, Hume, Blackstone, and finally Darwin finished that project of divorcing european empirical reason from semitic superstition despite the lingering attraction and the conversion of judaism and the ethics of the diaspora in to marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, pc-woke, and the intention undermining of western civilization by sedition by marching through the institutions of cultural produciong taking largely advantage of the suggestibility and magical thinking of women to finance the means of doing so.
Reply addressees: @AmKsheOref @Hamishtadel1 @Vessel_of_Glass
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-02 00:05:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653188839249264642
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653182749694480388
-
“Q: WHAT MESSAGE ARE YOU STAYING ON?” The message I’m ‘Staying On’ is that weste
“Q: WHAT MESSAGE ARE YOU STAYING ON?”
The message I’m ‘Staying On’ is that western government, especially the english invention of the modern rule of law state, creates a market between the classes of different responsibilities for the voluntary exchange and production of commons otherwise not producible by private means – either because of conflict, competing ideas, or cost.
As such, when adding a new ‘class’ to the ‘market’ (voting pool) the solution is to add a new ‘house’ for that class. Forcing the need for consent between houses. This is called “concurrency” in legislation, just as we use house, senate, and electoral college to determine concurrency in elections. As such we live in a concurrent democracy not a majority democracy for good reasons. This prevents a race to the bottom under mass democracy. – which is what we have seen, especially since the introduction of women. Why? women seek irresponsibility the way men seek responsibility.
This is not to claim that this is the only solution. It’s to explain that the only means of decidability on investments in the commons by political means is some organized market that is most resistant to responsibilities for the capital that results from social, economic, and political orders.
Instead, it provides a basic framework for solving the problem of divergent interests between sexes, classes, ethnicities, and yes, races.
Because the alternative, universally is either a race to the bottom resulting in authoritarianism or the production of authoritarianism regardless.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-01 17:35:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653090836576452615
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653087652923740160
-
“Q: WHAT MESSAGE ARE YOU STAYING ON?” The message I’m ‘Staying On’ is that weste
“Q: WHAT MESSAGE ARE YOU STAYING ON?”
The message I’m ‘Staying On’ is that western government, especially the english invention of the modern rule of law state, creates a market between the classes of different responsibilities for the voluntary exchange and production of commons otherwise not producible by private means – either because of conflict, competing ideas, or cost.
As such, when adding a new ‘class’ to the ‘market’ (voting pool) the solution is to add a new ‘house’ for that class. Forcing the need for consent between houses. This is called “concurrency” in legislation, just as we use house, senate, and electoral college to determine concurrency in elections. As such we live in a concurrent democracy not a majority democracy for good reasons. This prevents a race to the bottom under mass democracy. – which is what we have seen, especially since the introduction of women. Why? women seek irresponsibility the way men seek responsibility.
This is not to claim that this is the only solution. It’s to explain that the only means of decidability on investments in the commons by political means is some organized market that is most resistant to responsibilities for the capital that results from social, economic, and political orders.
Instead, it provides a basic framework for solving the problem of divergent interests between sexes, classes, ethnicities, and yes, races.
Because the alternative, universally is either a race to the bottom resulting in authoritarianism or the production of authoritarianism regardless.Reply addressees: @DrMikeHochburns @pearlythingz
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-01 17:35:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653090836429651989
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653087652923740160
-
The only interesting problem is why did the anglos alone survive the centuries o
The only interesting problem is why did the anglos alone survive the centuries of warfare against the natural common concurrent law of prohibition on authority, requiring responsibility, resulting in individual sovereignty as the reward for the responsibility for the defense of the private and common.
Betham tried it.
The French (Catholics) succeeded.
The jews have always practiced it and they are the only other people of law in the sense we mean it – even if it is not natural, moral, or ethical law. But it is this obsession with law that makes the jews and the west the primary producers of ideas.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-01 17:25:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653088151139696641
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653086711100981254
-
The only interesting problem is why did the anglos alone survive the centuries o
The only interesting problem is why did the anglos alone survive the centuries of warfare against the natural common concurrent law of prohibition on authority, requiring responsibility, resulting in individual sovereignty as the reward for the responsibility for the defense of the private and common.
Betham tried it.
The French (Catholics) succeeded.
The jews have always practiced it and they are the only other people of law in the sense we mean it – even if it is not natural, moral, or ethical law. But it is this obsession with law that makes the jews and the west the primary producers of ideas.Reply addressees: @Lunca92
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-01 17:25:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653088151013933075
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653086711100981254
-
RT @curtdoolittle: @William68332190 @briangeraghty2 @pearlythingz Aside from the
RT @curtdoolittle: @William68332190 @briangeraghty2 @pearlythingz Aside from the fact that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional, but inst…
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-01 17:11:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653084800842866689
-
Aside from the fact that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional, but instead a l
Aside from the fact that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional, but instead a legislative device for the conduct of the (unjust) civil war and reparations and reconstruction thereafter, and as such should be repealed (we do so in our reforms) – as usual, the text without the context is easily interpreted as other than it means. “All words are measurements recorded as measurements at the time of their writing.” We don’t get to put our fingers on the ‘legal activism scale’.
–“The primary purpose of this provision was to ensure the federal government’s commitment to repaying the debts incurred during the Civil War while simultaneously preventing the payment of any debts or claims associated with the Confederacy or slaveholders. By doing so, it helped to protect the financial stability of the United States and prevent any political or legal attempts to undermine the Union’s efforts during the Civil War.
In summary, Section 4 of the 14th Amendment aimed to reaffirm the legitimacy of the public debt incurred by the United States during the Civil War, deny any financial claims from the Confederacy or slaveholders, and strengthen the financial foundation of the country during the Reconstruction Era.”–Reply addressees: @William68332190 @briangeraghty2 @pearlythingz
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-01 17:11:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653084777560391707
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653036193347502080
-
Aside from the fact that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional, but instead a l
Aside from the fact that the 14th amendment is unconstitutional, but instead a legislative device for the conduct of the (unjust) civil war and reparations and reconstruction thereafter, and as such should be repealed (we do so in our reforms) – as usual, the text without the context is easily interpreted as other than it means. “All words are measurements recorded as measurements at the time of their writing.” We don’t get to put our fingers on the ‘legal activism scale’.
–“The primary purpose of this provision was to ensure the federal government’s commitment to repaying the debts incurred during the Civil War while simultaneously preventing the payment of any debts or claims associated with the Confederacy or slaveholders. By doing so, it helped to protect the financial stability of the United States and prevent any political or legal attempts to undermine the Union’s efforts during the Civil War.
In summary, Section 4 of the 14th Amendment aimed to reaffirm the legitimacy of the public debt incurred by the United States during the Civil War, deny any financial claims from the Confederacy or slaveholders, and strengthen the financial foundation of the country during the Reconstruction Era.”–
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-01 17:11:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653084777686220821
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1653036193347502080