Monday, November 27, 2017
  Monetize = civilize 1

I've been thinking about monetizing and demonetizing. Wondered if there was a connection to Natural Law. As we demonetize everything we lose the balancing forces inherent in Natural Law.

Started reading about the old English version of Natural Law. Ran across a REMARKABLY CLEAR AND OBJECTIVE history of laws and courts written in 1906. It fills in some blank spots that I'd wondered about, and answers some questions I hadn't even known how to ask. I hadn't known how deeply and completely the principle of compensation, PAY FOR VALUE, was embedded in proper Natural Legality.

The remarkable book is Common Law Actions by Thomas Street.

He starts from the START, with the development of forms and procedures by tribes. Focuses strongly on Roman times when modern forms developed.



Monetized and balanced. Just like a Wheatstone Bridge or a diff amp.

Both sides wager a fixed amount on the decision. Both have a stake in the results. [stake = sword = wand.] The priest or judge goes into operation when the setup has been nulled by the equal wagers.

The actio sacramenti is obsolete in official channels because property is thoroughly registered and receipted now. Not much opportunity for an open quarrel over possession.

It could still be useful in unofficial disputes such as pimps arguing over their chattel....



No, I guess not. The wands, and swearing by the "law of the Quirites", probably wouldn't work.**

= = = = =

Here's the BIG POINT that stunned me with its clarity:



Semiquoting and modernizing:
A recent book on jurisprudence states that a system of laws by a wise lawgiver would start with a definition of rights, then proceed to describe duties, thence to prohibitions, finally to legal remedies.

HOWEVER: the above method of unfolding legal truth is exactly the reverse of the process by which law has IN FACT developed.

In legal thought as in philosophy we must start with the concrete and build up to the higher abstractions.

In other words, instead of beginning with "right", a term so highly abstract that even now it defies definition, we must begin with the process of adjudication.
Street's analysis of legal "foundations" perfectly parallels what I've been saying forever about the "foundations" of math and science. I had no idea that legal thinkers were capable of clarity, because I've NEVER read anything on the subject that makes sense.

Now that I've finally found one sensible writer ... (long dead) ... I have to ask:

WHY DON'T WE FIND THIS TYPE OF SANITY ANYWHERE ELSE? WHY HAS IT DISAPPEARED?

Every discussion of laws and "rights" starts by assuming the weird nonsensical delusion of "rights" as an absolute axiom, a self-evident truth. All details derive from "rights", which means all details are multiply convoluted weird nonsensical delusions.

I guess we don't find sense in legal thinking for the same fucking reason that we don't find sense in math and science and economics. Because we're fucked.

= = = = =

Conclusion: The Natural Law approach to economics is solidly based on two-way compensation and balance. Each side must give in order to get.

And now I learn that the NL approach to legality is identical.

Natural Law is like natural power. Hydropower. Using the natural gradients of male vs female, owner vs slave, buyer vs seller, and various mixes of talent and drive and morality. Each gradient is harnessed to drive the machines of business and legality. The system requires minimal added power when you ride with Nature, when you start with our REAL GOD-ASSIGNED DUTIES TO CREATE MORE LIFE, MORE ORDER AND MORE VALUE.

Modern theory flattens all gradients. We start with the self-evident lie of equality, and continue by removing all negative feedback mechanisms. Male and female are supposedly equal, boss and worker are supposedly equal, interest is zero, markets are always in equilibrium with perfect information on all sides.

This doesn't work because Nature still exists. Reality still exists. IN FACT male and female are different. IN FACT every person has different tastes and talents and tendencies. IN FACT boss and slave are different. IN FACT we have, and we feel, our GOD-ASSIGNED DUTIES. Nature continues to run in its own ways, and the system must exert maximal artificial force to oppose the natural force.

= = = = =

Language footnote: 'Quirites' doesn't mean what it sounds like. The Romans called the original Romans the Quirites, for reasons that are lost to history. Hmm. Considering that the original Romans were children of Romulus and Remus, maybe it does mean what it sounds like.

Labels: , ,

 


<< Home

blogger hit counter
My Photo
Name:
Location: Spokane

The current icon shows Polistra using a Personal Equation Machine.

My graphics products:

Free stuff at ShareCG

And some leftovers here.

ARCHIVES
March 2005 / April 2005 / May 2005 / June 2005 / July 2005 / August 2005 / September 2005 / October 2005 / November 2005 / December 2005 / January 2006 / February 2006 / March 2006 / April 2006 / May 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 / September 2007 / October 2007 / November 2007 / December 2007 / January 2008 / February 2008 / March 2008 / April 2008 / May 2008 / June 2008 / July 2008 / August 2008 / September 2008 / October 2008 / November 2008 / December 2008 / January 2009 / February 2009 / March 2009 / April 2009 / May 2009 / June 2009 / July 2009 / August 2009 / September 2009 / October 2009 / November 2009 / December 2009 / January 2010 / February 2010 / March 2010 / April 2010 / May 2010 / June 2010 / July 2010 / August 2010 / September 2010 / October 2010 / November 2010 / December 2010 / January 2011 / February 2011 / March 2011 / April 2011 / May 2011 / June 2011 / July 2011 / August 2011 / September 2011 / October 2011 / November 2011 / December 2011 / January 2012 / February 2012 / March 2012 / April 2012 / May 2012 / June 2012 / July 2012 / August 2012 / September 2012 / October 2012 / November 2012 / December 2012 / January 2013 / February 2013 / March 2013 / April 2013 / May 2013 / June 2013 / July 2013 / August 2013 / September 2013 / October 2013 / November 2013 / December 2013 / January 2014 / February 2014 / March 2014 / April 2014 / May 2014 / June 2014 / July 2014 / August 2014 / September 2014 / October 2014 / November 2014 / December 2014 / January 2015 / February 2015 / March 2015 / April 2015 / May 2015 / June 2015 / July 2015 / August 2015 / September 2015 / October 2015 / November 2015 / December 2015 / January 2016 / February 2016 / March 2016 / April 2016 / May 2016 / June 2016 / July 2016 / August 2016 / September 2016 / October 2016 / November 2016 / December 2016 / January 2017 / February 2017 / March 2017 / April 2017 / May 2017 / June 2017 / July 2017 / August 2017 / September 2017 / October 2017 / November 2017 / December 2017 / January 2018 / February 2018 / March 2018 / April 2018 / May 2018 / June 2018 / July 2018 / August 2018 / September 2018 / October 2018 / November 2018 / December 2018 / January 2019 / February 2019 / March 2019 / April 2019 / May 2019 / June 2019 / July 2019 / August 2019 / September 2019 / October 2019 / November 2019 / December 2019 / January 2020 / February 2020 / March 2020 / April 2020 / May 2020 / June 2020 / July 2020 / August 2020 / September 2020 / October 2020 / November 2020 / December 2020 / January 2021 / February 2021 / March 2021 / April 2021 /


Major tags or subjects:

Carbon Cult
Carver
Constants and variables
Defensible Cases
Defensible Times
Defensible Thymes
Defensible Spaces
Equipoise
Experiential education
From rights to duties
Grand Blueprint
Metrology
Morsenet of Things
Natural law = Sharia law
Natural law = Soviet law
Shared Lie
Skill-estate
Trinity House

Powered by Blogger