Cult Union Member Dues III
by Joe Kelley
THE Interview That "Solves The Human Condition And Saves The World!"
Aug 17, 2021
“So saying our competitive and aggressive behavior comes from savage competitive and aggressive instincts is us is simply not true...”
I have stumbled upon this data stream through the work of Kim Lakefort, and my sixth sense tells me that the word “competitive” is used in this context as a synonym for evil, crime, Might Makes Right, and doing onto others that which you yourself would defend against were others to dare to do the same to you.
A.K.A. the kill or be killed competitive option competitively compared to the live and let live option, or other options including rule of law.
Competition, the word itself, is merely a competitive label for those labeling the power of judgment between A, B, C, none of the above, look for more options, etc., as a judge decides competitively among the choices on their own authority. If the choice is made by some process other than abdicating authority, then the judge chooses the more competitive option, choosing better instead of worse.
Abdicating authority is also a competitive choice.
“The state is divided into counties. In every county are appointed magistrates, called justices of the peace, usually from eight to thirty or forty in number, in proportion to the size of the county, of the most discreet and honest inhabitants. They are nominated by their fellows, but commissioned by the governor, and act without reward. These magistrates have jurisdiction both criminal and civil. If the question before them be a question of law only, they decide on it themselves: but if it be of fact, or of fact and law combined, it must be referred to a jury. In the latter case, of a combination of law and fact, it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact, and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact. If they be mistaken, a decision against right, which is casual only, is less dangerous to the state, and less afflicting to the loser, than one which makes part of a regular and uniform system. In truth, it is better to toss up cross and pile in a cause, than to refer it to a judge whose mind is warped by any motive whatever, in that particular case. But the common sense of twelve honest men gives still a better chance of just decision, than the hazard of cross and pile. These judges execute their process by the sheriff or coroner of the county, or by constables of their own appointment.”
Notes on the State of Virginia
by Thomas Jefferson, 1781
Jefferson has the concept of grand and trial juries mistaken if I can understand the intended meanings of those words. A more competitive message about the concept of grand and trial juries can be offered in Public Notices. For now, the choice to flip a coin (toss up cross and pile) is to abdicate authority to a random generator, to chance, or a choice by lot, such as picking a name out of a hat, or a juror picked by the process known as sortition.
"Here then, is the just line of discrimination: It is the duty of the Grand Jury to enquire into the nature and probable grounds of the charge; but it is the exclusive province of the Petty Jury, to hear and determine, with the assistance, and under the direction of the court, upon points of law, whether the Defendant is, or is not guilty, on the whole evidence, for, as well as against, him."
U.S. Supreme Court
RESPUBLICA v. SHAFFER, 1 U.S. 236
Court of Oyer and Terminer, at Philadelphia
February Sessions, 1788
M'Kean, Chief Justice.
Which is the more competitive court system?
Door number 2
Witch Courts run by devil worshipers “in which the judges may be suspected of bias”
Witch is more competitive, going on witch hunts, or whatever is behind door number 1?
Thomas Jefferson was the guy who wrote a Declaration of Independence, which is a common law defiance that proceeds according to the unwritten law, the ancient law, the law of the land, and this same author authorizing that Declaration of Independence had his original draft redacted for reasons that included an unreported choice to ignore due process of law in kidnapping cases where kidnappers formed a Cartel to exploit defenseless Africans by forcing them to work after being kidnapped. Each new buyer buying into the Human Trafficking criminal markets, themselves guilty of receiving stolen goods, or themselves volunteering to kidnap these victims and force them to work too.
Competitive choices of labels, one big happy crime family, cartel, or cabal, you be the judge.
How about a Nation-State Legal Fiction Debt Collection Agency?
It is possible, but not likely, that some people bought kidnap victims to then set them free, just like anyone might choose the competitive option of paying the ransom.
A common law defiance, or a declaration of independence, is also part of bonding code literature, as a Military and Commercial Lien Right.
Judge for yourself, if you care to do so if Jefferson was unjustly censored, or just following orders without question:
Declaration of Independence
"he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another."
Is it competitive to force people to work instead of paying a laborer for their time in a negotiated exchange of agreed-upon value, or is forcing someone to work a crime scene?
Here are Jefferson’s words explaining why the Declaration of Independence was redacted:
In the Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I. p. 10
"The clause, too, reprobating the enslaving the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in complaisance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, still wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe felt a little tender under those censures; for, though their people had very few slaves themselves, yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to others."
Feeling tender about profit losses when the kidnap victims fight back effectively, peacefully, or otherwise, suggests a moral compass, or a capacity for competitive judgment, having lost something of value, making someone feel a little bit tender, notwithstanding the feelings of the kidnap victims forced into labor.
Civil Court Case:
“A jury of twelve local farmers, all men and all white according to Levinson, rule in favor of Freeman in 1781, giving her freedom and awarding her 30 shillings in damages.”
Also claimed to be Civil Law:
"The prevalent practice of fornication by the masters with the female slaves was regarded as “a pleasant method to secure slaves at a cheap rate.”
Conceived in Liberty, by Murray Rothbard
Slavery in Virginia
Nonfeasance is a known crime in common law, not a competitive option for people deciding how to get what they want from other people who have what they want to get from them. Jefferson was very powerful in early American criminal markets as well as in the forming federation of republics under the common law. Why did Jefferson turn the other cheek when "other persons" were claimed as property? Was it a competitive decision to perpetrate nonfeasance, or were there other powers at work other than merely choosing the lawful path by precedent, statute, and law?
Again, you can be the judge, or you can abdicate making any competitive decisions:
“Pilate was not innocent because he washed his hands, and said, He would have nothing to do with the blood of that just one. There are faults of omission as well as commission. When you are legally called to try such a cause, if you shall shuffle out yourself, and thereby persons perhaps less conscientious happen to be made use of, and so a villain escapes justice, or an innocent man is ruined, by a prepossessed or negligent verdict; can you think yourself in such a case wholly blameless? Qui non prohibet cum potest, jubet: That man abets an evil, who prevents it not, when it is in his power. Nec caret scrupulo sosietatis occultae qui evidenter facinori definit obviare: nor can he escape the suspicion of being a secret accomplice, who evidently declines the prevention of an atrocious crime.”
by John Hawles
The data stream flowing through our human world at this time includes competitors seeking to turn hearts, minds, and souls onto crime, and competitors seeking to turn hearts, minds, and souls in the direction of door number 1 instead of crime.
Frankly they lost me at "guilt for flying off to check out an island on the way". Being different and following your curiosity should never cause guilt. If it does you're screwed to begin with.
If their thesis is based on such a weak beginning then the rest also doesn't add up.