Hahahahahahahaha! You are funny.
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Slavery was only abolished in one form. There are many different forms and variants it can take, but the defining factor is always being coerced to do things against one's will, and the confiscation of productivity or property. There are more or less explicit and more or less brutal forms of slavery, but any form of forced confiscation of labor qualifies, including taxation, regardless of whether it is formally or legally acknowledged.
"The essence of all slavery consists in taking the product of another's labor by force. It is immaterial whether this force be founded upon ownership of the slave or ownership of the money that he must get to live." - Leo Tolstoy
"Through taxation, pacifists are forced at gunpoint to pay for killing machines; vegetarians are forced at gunpoint to subsidize grazing land for cattle; non-smokers are forced at gunpoint to support both the production of tobacco and the research to counter its impact on health." - Dr. Mary Ruwart, Healing Our World
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want, merely because you think it would be good for him." - Robert A. Heinlein
Not that the Constitution means anything AT ALL at this point.
"The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. And the Constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. "
-Lysander Spooner - No Treason, The Constitution of No Authority No. VI. (1870) oll.libertyfund.org/titles/spooner-no-treason-no-vi-the-constitution-of-no-authority-1870
The claim that people within a "jurisdiction" are subject to the "authority" of government is in fact a false claim. No one has the right to claim that others must follow their decrees, that being in fact the definition of slavery, and so the constitution is a document of enslavement.
"...the American government you see today is exactly what its designers wanted when they designed it, and the excuses given by American "patriots" not to burn it to the ground today are the same weak excuses they gave at every stage of its development since 1787. The Constitution of the United States of America was and is a document of enslavement intended to fool the weak minded while pacifying those who possess the moral fortitude and intelligence to stand up to tyranny." - Sedition, Subversion and Sabotage Field Manual No. 1 (fb.com/BadQuakerDotCom)
"The essence of all slavery consists in taking the product of another's labor by force. It is immaterial whether this force be founded upon ownership of the slave or ownership of the money that he must get to live." - Leo Tolstoy
"Through taxation, pacifists are forced at gunpoint to pay for killing machines; vegetarians are forced at gunpoint to subsidize grazing land for cattle; non-smokers are forced at gunpoint to support both the production of tobacco and the research to counter its impact on health." - Dr. Mary Ruwart, Healing Our World
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want, merely because you think it would be good for him." - Robert A. Heinlein
Not that the Constitution means anything AT ALL at this point.
"The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. And the Constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them. They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. "
-Lysander Spooner - No Treason, The Constitution of No Authority No. VI. (1870) oll.libertyfund.org/titles/spooner-no-treason-no-vi-the-constitution-of-no-authority-1870
The claim that people within a "jurisdiction" are subject to the "authority" of government is in fact a false claim. No one has the right to claim that others must follow their decrees, that being in fact the definition of slavery, and so the constitution is a document of enslavement.
"...the American government you see today is exactly what its designers wanted when they designed it, and the excuses given by American "patriots" not to burn it to the ground today are the same weak excuses they gave at every stage of its development since 1787. The Constitution of the United States of America was and is a document of enslavement intended to fool the weak minded while pacifying those who possess the moral fortitude and intelligence to stand up to tyranny." - Sedition, Subversion and Sabotage Field Manual No. 1 (fb.com/BadQuakerDotCom)
No swearing?
Have you ever noticed how cell phones don't have a forward button for the internet? I just lost a reply by accidentally hitting the back button instead of the carriage return key on the popup keyboard.
Here's the bottom line: We need ways to protect the commons, which is the Earth/environment. If we're not doing that, then we're not talking about what is most important for our era.
One could also successfully make the case that "government" should reasonably provide for the well-being of humans, in addition to the well-being of the only known planet capable of sustaining human life.
Note: Government can and should be "the organization of people."
One could also successfully make the case that "government" should reasonably provide for the well-being of humans, in addition to the well-being of the only known planet capable of sustaining human life.
Note: Government can and should be "the organization of people."
noun: jurisdiction
the official power to make legal decisions and judgments.
"federal courts had no jurisdiction over the case"
synonyms: authority, control, power, dominion, rule, administration, command, sway, leadership, sovereignty, ascendancy, hegemony, mastery
In other words, if you are under "jurisdiction", you are under the authority, control, power, dominion, command, and mastery of others. "Jurisdiction" is just the terminology of slavery euphemised.
But people are blinded by their conditioning to accept authority, so they can no more see it than Pavlov's dog could stop drooling at the sound of a bell.
the official power to make legal decisions and judgments.
"federal courts had no jurisdiction over the case"
synonyms: authority, control, power, dominion, rule, administration, command, sway, leadership, sovereignty, ascendancy, hegemony, mastery
In other words, if you are under "jurisdiction", you are under the authority, control, power, dominion, command, and mastery of others. "Jurisdiction" is just the terminology of slavery euphemised.
But people are blinded by their conditioning to accept authority, so they can no more see it than Pavlov's dog could stop drooling at the sound of a bell.
>Here's the bottom line: We need ways to protect the commons,
>which is the Earth/environment. If we're not doing that, then we're
>not talking about what is most important for our era.
As I've belabored in this thread, no human needs justify the use of violence against the masses (or anyone) to solve, which methodology always has and always will produce nothing but corruption, inefficiency and destruction, working counter-productive to any beneficial aims.
>One could also successfully make the case that "government" should reasonably
>provide for the well-being of humans, in addition to the well-being of the only known
>planet capable of sustaining human life.
If one is a child who expects some (violently abusive) authority figure to "provide" what one is too apathetic or cowardly to take responsibility for. This is just the pathetic fear of taking responsibility, and it sickens me.
>Note: Government can and should be "the organization of people."
Good. VOLUNTARY organization. Meaning people are not being forced and violated. But that is NEVER what government ever has been, and in fact is what anarchists and voluntaryists are trying to convey. Anarchists have no problem with communism, democracy, or any other ism or form of "government", as long as people who don't care to voluntarily agree to that form of government aren't being violently forced to participate and fund its agenda, and are left in peace if they are doing no harm.
>which is the Earth/environment. If we're not doing that, then we're
>not talking about what is most important for our era.
As I've belabored in this thread, no human needs justify the use of violence against the masses (or anyone) to solve, which methodology always has and always will produce nothing but corruption, inefficiency and destruction, working counter-productive to any beneficial aims.
>One could also successfully make the case that "government" should reasonably
>provide for the well-being of humans, in addition to the well-being of the only known
>planet capable of sustaining human life.
If one is a child who expects some (violently abusive) authority figure to "provide" what one is too apathetic or cowardly to take responsibility for. This is just the pathetic fear of taking responsibility, and it sickens me.
>Note: Government can and should be "the organization of people."
Good. VOLUNTARY organization. Meaning people are not being forced and violated. But that is NEVER what government ever has been, and in fact is what anarchists and voluntaryists are trying to convey. Anarchists have no problem with communism, democracy, or any other ism or form of "government", as long as people who don't care to voluntarily agree to that form of government aren't being violently forced to participate and fund its agenda, and are left in peace if they are doing no harm.
If you really cared about the environment and providing for human well being, you wouldn't keep blindly outsourcing that task to the most abusive gang of thugs on the planet who delight in being whores for corporations, while the flimsy lip-service they give to the ideal of serving the greater interest easily seduces the cowardice they have bred into their herd by eugenics.
Instead you would TAKE RESPONSIBILITY to acknowledge truth and act morally. You would recognize violence and refuse to participate, support, or consent to it in any way.
Instead you would TAKE RESPONSIBILITY to acknowledge truth and act morally. You would recognize violence and refuse to participate, support, or consent to it in any way.
The idea the State derives its power to act from the consent of the people sounds romantic. Few people, however, are aware that by definition the State’s power is for the specific purpose of engaging in acts of violence. No grant of power is necessary for anyone, or any organization to act peacefully. This is no secret among scholars, and sociologist Max Weber's definition of the State is considered one of the most authoritative:
“A state is a human institution that claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. ... The state is considered the sole source of the `right' to use violence."
[Copied from http://forejustice.org/vote/voting_is_an_act_of_violence.htm]
“A state is a human institution that claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. ... The state is considered the sole source of the `right' to use violence."
[Copied from http://forejustice.org/vote/voting_is_an_act_of_violence.htm]
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.