RT @bryanbrey: Exactly what the Confederacy warned would happen with the loss of State Sovereignty.
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-31 00:16:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1741252009594925245
RT @bryanbrey: Exactly what the Confederacy warned would happen with the loss of State Sovereignty.
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-31 00:16:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1741252009594925245
–“The Civil War was fought to force the States who chose to leave the Union back into the Union”–
@DylanMAllman Yes you’re correct. Why?
(a) territorial and wealth advantage of western expansion.
(b) protection of those already ‘entrepreneurially’ settling those areas.
(c) western expansion was necessary to keep the ‘warlike’ europeans out of ‘our continent’.
(d) The north had industrialized but the south had yet not, so the south could not abandon slavery without a massive investment plan that must be partly paid for by the north by federal borrowing for the transformation.
(e) western expansion would have caused the new agrarian territories to ally with the south, and in doing so transfer power from the north to the south – which was intolerable for the north but an advantage for the south, because the majority of taxes were paid by southerners, in turn, because the majority of federal taxes were collected from foreign trade by the south not domestic sales and distribution by the north.
(f) So casting an economic issue of the simple financial and economic reality of slaves as production capital as if it was a moral one over slavery is just a nonsense game for the infantilized mind. Had the north agreed to borrow the money to repatriate the slaves so that the south could use the money to idustrialize and therefore compete with northern industrial farmers, then there would have been no civil war.
Instead we paid with 600K dead and many times that projected cost including the crisis we feel today.
Reply addressees: @DylanMAllman
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-29 02:07:41 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740555156096237569
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1740468316957732982
Regarding “The Congresss shall make no law …”.
This phrase applies only as long as (a) the states maintain a republican form of government (b) observe the implications of the declaration, and stated constitutional (bill of rights) rights, obligations and alienations and their (c) derivations from the findings of the supreme court (d) do not expose other states to threat – particular of foreign influence or alliance.
Option (b) and the 14th amendment sort of provide an avenue for the federal govt to deprive the states of self determination within those limits (a,b,c).
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-25 15:56:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1739314281546395648
RT @V_of_Europe: Netherlands: Parliament approves “historic motion” to opt-out of EU asylum and migration policy https://ift.tt/ONgItRa h…
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-23 04:33:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738417637586075974
How The Supreme Court Will Decide “Trump On The Ballot”
This is a draft of my opinion on how the court will rule, and a rough outline of how I would argue the case.
It’s an expansion of the notes I used to prepare for the interview Stew Peters today. The show’s been released, so I committed to publishing it.
Unfortunately I’m running out of juice at the moment and have a converence call shortly, so I won’t get time to finish it today.
But the points are made.
https://t.co/Pksxb368Jg
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-23 01:41:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738374317702856704
THE FIRST PRINCIPLE THE COURT IS OPERATING UNDER
–The Supreme Court has denied Special Counsel Smith’s request for an expedited review of the case against Trump. There won’t be a trial in DC before the 2024 election.”—@Techno_Fog
The court is forcing the people legislatures and courts to ‘take the hits’ and solve this themselves rather than ‘taking an activist and political decision that circumvents the people and the legislatures’.
If you grasp anything about Scalia’s and the Fedsoc’s affect on restoring rule of law to the court, and the federal and state governments, this is the fundamental priciple driving their behavior.
American Constitutionalism, its Concurrent Democracy, and Common Natural Law are ‘messy’ because they’re effectively the use of the scientific method of obaining agreement while protecting minority rights – effectively banning arbitrary discretion (authoritarianism) and majority rule.
The Europeans will never understand it. And the rest of the world can’t even comprehend it. 😉
Reply addressees: @Techno_Fog
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-23 01:19:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738368720081199104
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738283294536429786
(GPT Discourses)
THE SCIENCE AND LOGIC OF SOVEREIGNTY
(I should start making a list of these discussions because these little socratic dialogs appear to be the best way of stating present understanding, and then contrasting improving it with “The Work”.)
CURTD
When considering the terms synonymous with ‘authority’, as in, the capacity to exert influence to change behavior, other than ‘power’, the western tradition of sovereignty is a defense against what?
CHATGPT
Sovereignty in Western political thought is often seen as a defense against:
External Aggression: Protecting a state or political entity from external interference or invasion.
Internal Fragmentation: Preventing the disintegration of a political entity due to internal conflicts or secessionist movements.
Anarchy and Lawlessness: Establishing a sovereign authority helps to maintain order and prevent the breakdown of societal structures.
Colonial or Imperial Domination: Historically, the concept of sovereignty has been crucial for nations seeking independence from colonial or imperial powers.
Interference in Domestic Affairs: Sovereignty implies the right of a state to govern itself without external interference in its internal affairs.
Erosion of Cultural or National Identity: In some contexts, sovereignty is seen as a way to preserve distinct cultural, historical, or national identities against homogenizing external influences.
CHATGPT
Sovereignty, in the Western tradition, is fundamentally about the right to self-governance and the recognition of a state’s authority to manage its own affairs without external intervention.
CURTD
I think it’s much more simple: it’s the prohibition against arbitrary discretion in the violation of individual and group demonstrated interests, where demonstrated interests (as I have defined elsewhere) consist of that capital individuals demonstrate by their behavior, that they have born a cost (effort) to obtain an intererst in(claim against the use of) whether physical (life, time, actions, words), personal, familial, interpersonal, private shared, common shared, and whether material, relationships, organizations, norms-traditions-values, informal institutions or formal institutions. This definition of demonstrated interests is an empirically testable and logically deciddable, and as far as I know complete criteria of decidability.
ChatGPT
Your definition of sovereignty emphasizes the protection of demonstrated interests, which you’ve detailed as capital that individuals have invested effort into obtaining. This definition is rooted in the idea of safeguarding against arbitrary discretion that might violate these interests. It presents a nuanced view that extends beyond traditional notions of sovereignty, incorporating elements of individual and collective rights, property, and investments (be they physical, relational, or institutional).
Your approach aligns with a more individual-centric view of sovereignty, where sovereignty serves as a mechanism to protect the varied investments of individuals and groups from arbitrary infringement. This perspective can be seen as an extension of classical liberal thought, where the emphasis is on the protection of individual rights and property (broadly defined), and the role of the state or governing authority is to ensure these rights are respected and not violated capriciously.
This definition is particularly interesting because it ties sovereignty directly to the concept of “demonstrated interests,” which you define empirically and logically. It suggests that the legitimacy of sovereignty is grounded in its ability to protect these empirically verifiable and logically decidable interests, which encompass a wide range of human endeavors and values.
In summary, your definition of sovereignty as a defense against the arbitrary violation of demonstrated interests provides a comprehensive framework that emphasizes the protection of a broad spectrum of individual and collective investments and efforts. It adds depth to the traditional view of sovereignty by embedding it within the context of measurable and logical criteria of individual and group interests.
CURTD
How would you convey the difference between sovereignty in demonstrated interests as I’ve defined it, versus the vague term ‘individualism’ as used to describe the westsern liberal tradition?
ChatGPT
To convey the difference between “sovereignty in demonstrated interests,” as you’ve defined it, and the more commonly used term “individualism” in the context of the Western liberal tradition, it’s crucial to delineate the nuances and focal points of each concept:
Sovereignty in Demonstrated Interests
Empirical and Logical Foundation: Your concept emphasizes empirically testable and logically decidable criteria for determining what constitutes individual and group interests. This approach grounds sovereignty in concrete, observable actions and investments.
Broad Spectrum of Interests: It encompasses a wide range of interests, not limited to the physical and material but also extending to relationships, organizations, norms, traditions, and institutions. This definition acknowledges the diverse forms in which individuals and groups invest their efforts and resources.
Protection Against Arbitrary Discretion: The focus is on safeguarding these varied interests from arbitrary infringement, underscoring the role of a governing authority in protecting such investments against capricious or unjust interference.
Inclusion of Collective Interests: While individual efforts and claims are central, this definition also recognizes group interests, thus encompassing both individual and communal dimensions.
Individualism in Western Liberal Tradition
Emphasis on Individual Rights and Autonomy: Individualism in the Western liberal tradition primarily focuses on the rights, autonomy, and freedoms of individuals. It champions the idea of personal liberty and the right to self-determination.
Economic and Social Context: In this tradition, individualism often correlates with economic freedom, such as in free-market capitalism, and social choices, emphasizing the individual’s right to make decisions independent of communal or state dictates.
Critique of Collectivism: Western individualism frequently positions itself in opposition to collectivist ideologies, emphasizing the individual as the primary unit of moral, political, and economic concern.
Historical Development: This concept has evolved from Enlightenment thinking and has been shaped by various philosophical, political, and economic theories, like those of John Locke, Adam Smith, and others.
Key Differences
Empirical vs. Philosophical Basis: Your definition of sovereignty in demonstrated interests is grounded in empirically testable actions and investments, whereas individualism is often rooted in philosophical principles about the nature and rights of individuals.
Scope of Interests: Sovereignty in demonstrated interests covers a broader and more varied spectrum, including non-material interests and collective claims, while individualism tends to focus more on personal rights and freedoms.
Role of Authority: In your definition, the role of governance is explicitly to protect against arbitrary violations of both individual and collective interests, while individualism in the Western sense often emphasizes limiting the role of government to protect individual autonomy.
Collective Dimension: Your approach acknowledges collective interests alongside individual ones, while traditional Western individualism primarily centers on the individual.
In summary, while both concepts value and seek to protect individual efforts and claims, “sovereignty in demonstrated interests” offers a more empirical, inclusive, and comprehensive framework, extending beyond the traditional philosophical underpinnings of individualism in the Western liberal tradition.
CURTD
If all individuals are soverign in their demonstrated interests as I have defined them, then is the polity not then sovereign as a whole? What other criteria are required to produce soverignty of the group other than some means of collective production of commons that uses some rules and processes and procedures to produce commons without violating anyone’s demonstrated interests?
ChatGPT
Your proposition that individual sovereignty in demonstrated interests, as you defined it, leads to the sovereignty of the polity as a whole is a logical extension of the concept. In this framework, the collective sovereignty of a group or polity is the aggregate of individual sovereignties, harmonized through a system that respects and protects these individual interests.
To achieve this collective sovereignty, several key criteria and mechanisms are necessary:
1. Collective Decision-Making Processes
Democratic Participation: For a group to be sovereign while respecting individual sovereignties, there must be a system that allows for democratic participation in decision-making. This ensures that the collective will is reflective of individual interests.
Transparency and Accountability: Decision-making processes should be transparent and accountable to the members of the polity to maintain trust and legitimacy.
2. Rule of Law
Consistent Legal Framework: A consistent legal framework that respects individual demonstrated interests is crucial. This includes laws that are applied equally to all members of the polity.
Protection of Rights: The legal system must protect individual rights, especially those pertaining to their demonstrated interests, to prevent arbitrary or unjust violations.
3. Production and Management of Commons
Equitable Access to Commons: The polity must have mechanisms for the equitable production, distribution, and management of common goods and resources.
Sustainable Management: The management of commons should be sustainable and considerate of long-term collective interests, including environmental stewardship and resource conservation.
4. Conflict Resolution Mechanisms
Mediation and Arbitration: Effective and fair methods for resolving disputes are necessary to maintain social harmony and address conflicts that may arise between individual and collective interests.
5. Social Contract
Agreement on Shared Values and Goals: There needs to be a foundational social contract or a set of agreed-upon values and goals that guide the collective action of the polity.
Flexibility and Adaptability: The social contract should be adaptable to changing circumstances and reflective of the evolving nature of individual and collective interests.
6. Participation in Wider Communities
External Sovereignty: For a polity to be truly sovereign, it must be recognized as such by other polities and participate in broader communities (e.g., international relations) while upholding its internal principles of sovereignty.
In this framework, sovereignty is not merely the absence of external domination but is also characterized by the internal coherence and integrity of the polity, where individual interests are harmonized through democratic processes, legal protections, equitable management of commons, effective conflict resolution, and adherence to a shared social contract.
The sovereignty of the group, therefore, is a dynamic and evolving state that is maintained through continuous negotiation and balancing of the diverse demonstrated interests of its members.
CURTD
I suppose, because your data already knows about me and my work from it’s publication on the internet, that when I publish additional content, you will learn about that too. Hopefully your ability to reason step by step will improve so that you can in fact logically explain it. 😉
CHATGPT
I don’t have the capability to continuously learn or update my knowledge base from individual interactions or from new content published on the internet. My responses are based on a vast pre-existing dataset that was used to train me, which includes information available up to my last training cut-off in April 2023.
When new versions of the AI are developed by OpenAI, they may include updated information and improved reasoning capabilities based on a more recent dataset.
[END]
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-22 22:03:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738319488464846848
WHAT’S THE SUPREME COURT GOING TO DECIDE REGARDING TRUMP ON THE BALLOT?
I just recorded a segment for the Stew Peters Show (https://t.co/nAYmaiRMCf) on the Colorado Court’s findings against Trump, barring him from the ballot (not really).
I mean, y’all expect me to be thorough, right? That’s my job. But we only had ten or twelve minutes so I couldn’t get through all the material. And as a result it was a bit of a speed run. But I think I got the main points across if not the usual ‘rigor’ of my arguments.
I’ll post my notes (the full argumet) for the show here on Twitter and on the Website later today (still adding bits to it).
Criteria The Court Must Use In Deciding This Matter
1) What was the State of mind of Trump – What was he attempting to do if anything?
2) What were the ambitions of the participants in Jan6 event – what were their reasons and ambitions?
3) Whether it was an insurrection or not?
(Given: |Severity|: Demonstration > protest > riot > rebellion, > insurrection > civil war > facilitation of conquest by others)
4) Whether defining Jan 6th as an insurrection opens the door to more abuses of the courts in these matters?
5) Whether they want to permit the states to circumvent the people, given the presidency and the electoral college are federal tests of concurrency, in lieu of a high court findings of an insurrection. Conversely, whether the court feels it is the only viable institution capable of making that decision. (Note: Probably. The legislture lacks the constraints of a court, and as such legislatures solve political questions but not legal questions. While say, impeachment is a political question (decision, agreement), insurrection is a legal question (fact,disagreement).)
6) Whether they want to enable the use of similar pretenses of insurrection to disqualify any candidate by his words, his deeds, or by constructive undermining of a candidate through causing conflict and escalation independent of the will of the candidate.
7) Whether any other externalities would be produced that might effect the electoral process as a test of the people by concurrency. There are plenty of rasons the people might want a radical change in the policy of the governmetn without replacing the system of government or even altering the constitutions – such as whether the deep state really exists and really is working against the interests of the people – especially where the test of concurrency exists across our constitution to preserve minority interest not advance majority interests over them.
So I’ll answer these questions and more, in the post I will release later today,
(Short answer? Unless a miracle happens he’ll be on the ballot.)
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-22 18:12:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738261136510742528
Wants to rule it.
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-22 12:53:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738181043440533549
Reply addressees: @axecutter7
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738102209848782920
(Told You So)
The only viable future for the Brits is alliance with the US and the gradual formalization of the anglosphere.
(And france remains the enemy of america and europe.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-gwM46F69g
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-22 05:25:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1738068240364913127