Saturday, September 12, 2009

An interesting post in the same thread on CC Forums: Freeman discussions

Bud's free, on the land, living his life as he sees fit. It would have been interesting to see how they would've treated Bud had he not been beaten and threatened with indefinite imprisonment if he refused to sign an undertaking to appear for his former person---by the way, on these forms, the name of the person is listed as follows:

"Re/Objet Surname." That thing is not Bud the Oracle, not in my view.

As for "unsubstantiated claims", well, I could give an argument as to how "to substantiate" is "to understand", but I'll just assert it. Thus, the claims are "not understood"---tell us something we don't know =]

"...and Fred, you are misleading people, selling a product which clearly has never had a successful test drive but is none the less touted as working."

Presuming Fred were selling membership within the WFS, which he doesn't seem to me to be doing, that would not be a product so much as a service; the argument is, roughly, that the governmental (steering) services of Canada are not to the liking of many, and, therefore, they ought to have the option of being listed with a different governmental (steering) service provider. No one is suggesting that there is not a duty to have some sort of governmental service provider---merely that there is some degree of choice.

The argument may be drawn thusly:

(0) Immutable/Natural/Divine Rules:
(I) Thou shalt not murder.
(II) Thou shalt not steal.
(III) Thou shalt not covet.
(IV) Thou shalt not bear false witness of the law.
Whether grounded in Holy Writ or in one's own emotional acceptance of these precepts or otherwise, these are not disagreed upon by any reasonable person.

(1) Jus/Lex Gentium (Right/Law of Man):
"It was by virtue of this jus gentium that wars were introduced (that is, when declared by the prince for the defence of his country or to repel an attack) and nations separated, kingdoms established and rights of ownership distinguished. Individual ownership was not effected de novo by the jus gentium but existed of old, for in the Old Testament things were already mine and thine, theft was prohibited and it was decreed that one not retain his servant's wages. By the jus gentium boundaries were set to holdings, buildings erected next to one another, from which cities, boroughs and vills were formed. And generally, the jus gentium is the source of all contracts and of many other things." (Bracton)

"Manumission is the giving of liberty, that is, the revelation of liberty, according to some, for liberty, which proceeds from the law of nature, cannot be taken away by the jus gentium but only obscured by it, for natural rights are immutable." (Bracton)

Thus, many buildings, both on land and on paper do obscure our liberty and immutable natural rights. Further, these rights are not contained in any charter, as "all jura are incorporeal and cannot be seen" (Bracton). As rights cannot be seen, then, where do we find them? The Judge Henry of Bracton reports that "virtues and jura exist in the soul." Thus, by implication, souls exist and insofar as men have jura, or rights, they must have souls, as rights exist in the soul---no soul = no rights.

This brings us to a curious predicament, however, regarding corporations, for, as Edward Coke observes, "a corporation...has no soul." (10 Rep. 32). Thus, if a corporation has no soul, it has not the thing in which jura reside.

Then how does one come to be member of a corporation? As a corporation is soulless, it has no jura; and, therefore, any right it suggests that it has over an individual must be given it by that individual. I take this to be what "denial of consent" is all about---one refuses to give his own jura to a soulless artificial person.

(2) Exopolitics

"The best way to predict the future is to invent it." --Alan Kay

"Roundhousekick, you are a simpleton that is being misled." --chrisbennett.

Ah, so anyone who believes in immediate exopolitical change is either a simpleton being misled or a huckster selling snake oil to the simpletons. It is misleading to suggest that change may happen overnight; the only change possible is incrementally enacted through a loaded process of dialogue between the oppressors, who hold all/most of the cards, and the oppressed, whose last, best hope for peace is to shame the oppressors into giving up some of their cards---for example, the lovely piece of card paper upon which The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act is drafted.

"A true intellectual doesn’t preach the religion of gradual change but instead steps out of the mental framework of privilege to defend those on the other side. A true intellectual helps the other side develop the tools it needs and does not participate in neutralizing defiance." --Prof. Denis Rancourt,
"My contention is, all kids have tremendous talents. And we squander them, pretty ruthlessly. So I want to talk about education and I want to talk about creativity. My contention is that creativity now is as important in education as literacy, and we should treat it with the same status. (Applause) Thank you. That was it, by the way. Thank you very much. (Laughter) So, 15 minutes left. Well, I was born -- no. (Laughter)

I heard a great story recently -- I love telling it -- of a little girl who was in a drawing lesson. She was six and she was at the back, drawing, and the teacher said this little girl hardly ever paid attention, and in this drawing lesson she did. The teacher was fascinated and she went over to her and she said, "What are you drawing?" And the girl said, "I'm drawing a picture of God." And the teacher said, "But nobody knows what God looks like." And the girl said, "They will in a minute.""

Thus, the literary status quo after the introduction of Wars is quite possibly of some importance, but it is certainly inappropriate to use the literary status quo as ground for neutralization of creative defiance thereof.

The problem goes deep---the simpleton is being misled; misled? Is he an animal, being pulled by a cord down some path, or is he making his own decisions? Again, the language used to critique this stuff speaks quite a bit of the set of the critics of creative defiance.

No comments: