| ||||
| ||||
| Moderated by: Joe Kelley |
|
||||||||||||||
| Rule of Law | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Thu May 18th, 2006 02:02 pm |
|
1st Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/athens-us.html Challenge sent Thursday, May 18, 2006: Eric Phillips, In response to this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/athens-us.html I suggest that one might respond with this: http://www.lysanderspooner.org/bib_new.htm I will read the rest of your article and my thanks for it cannot be expressed easily. In short: The meaning of the term Justice was once synonymous with equity. Now one might conclude that the term Justice is synonymous with punishment. If one is to conclude, as I am of a mind to think that your article does conclude, that, the common conscience of man is evil, then, one could further conclude that the common conscience of man is aggressive, deceptive, and to be forbidden as a source of justice. On the other hand: if one is to conclude that the common conscience of man is good, then, one could further conclude that the common conscience of man is a source of justice and from that one might endeavor to check the power of a very powerful evil person who has an evil conscience with the power of a common and good conscience of mass man. One might see man as a source of good and a source of evil favoring the good and not focusing on the evil to a point where the calculation arrives at a concept called “common law” AKA “The rule of Law” or even “Natural Law”. If the later is entertained, for a moment, and the former is set aside for a moment, then, one might be able to compare the two concepts head to head in direct competition based upon empirical evidence while utilizing the scientific method. One would have to be objective and one would have to set aside one’s own special interests or rather one would have to focus on the special interest of Mankind as a whole rather than one man’s personal interest. If that short window of opportunity were to arise, even for a moment, then one might see how “Natural Law”, “Common Law”, “The rule of Law”, and “Justice” is a process by which people invest in a negotiated peace whereby each one agrees to limit each one’s power over the other one to a happy medium. One might call that happy medium something. How about equity? I guess the window can’t remain open too long. One is bound to lose interest. Joe Kelley Equity is a challenge: http://www.power-independence.com/view_topic.php?id=67&forum_id=3 Last edited on Thu May 18th, 2006 02:06 pm by Joe Kelley |
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu May 18th, 2006 02:31 pm |
|
2nd Post |
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/athens-us.html I would like to point out that Plato was an early capitalist who probably did this:
And Plato probably said something like this: Only in a society where all services are provided through voluntary association, where consumers hold ultimate sovereignty by providing the most efficient producers of necessary and luxury goods with profits can rule of law, individual liberty, and property rights be upheld. Such a society is not in a state of anarchy; authority is simply decentralized to the lowest possible and most just level — the business, the community, the family. And my point is that "Profit" should be defined before moving on; however that debate does not occur now or ever because the apposing viewpoint is conveniently silenced in each person's mind who had pre-determined that 'there is no profit" in it. A person like Zeno, for example, may find reason to express the opposing viewpoint but when such discussion occurs the evidence is somehow conveniently missing in the historical record or, worse, the ideas resulting from such discussions are marginalized, falsified, and set upon by every possible political strategy so as to make the idea so utterly complex as to be useless: that includes the idea known as negotiated agreement, science applied to society, and Law - in addition to ideas concerning economy. Someone like me would have a very keen interest in, as the proverbial fly on the wall, in discussion between the two viewpoints held by one such as Zeno and the other attributable to Plato. My interest in these discussions aimed at arriving at a more educated common interest has driven me to find such an "argument" and that example is here: http://praxeology.net/HJ-HG-SPA-LMD.htm One might not be able to keep up. Too bad. Common concepts deteriorate for a reason. People end up being too busy to learn anything beyond the need to fight over the last scrap of value in a society based upon the manipulation of scarcity as a direct result of failed, false, and incredibly irresponsible economic 'theories' propagandized by ignorant (ignorant of basic principles making up what is a moral conscience) 'professors' of knowledge. I'm just getting started and my time is up. The pursuit of happiness is calling. Last edited on Thu May 18th, 2006 02:33 pm by Joe Kelley |
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Current time is 12:58 pm | |
| Power Independence > Fight Night > Debate > Rule of Law | Top |
