The Natural Law Institute

(Scrap) Major Reforms

1. Regarding the Military and Geostrategic Mission

1) Reorganize Military, State, Intelligence, Research, Industrial Investment, Economy, Finance, and Education for Total War.

Problems:

The postwar order ended in 1992 and we wasted twenty years of peace. Asymmetric european power, economics, and demographics has been redistributed around the world, and we can no longer afford to police the world patterns of law, finance, and trade with asymmetric power, economics, finance, and demographics.  China, now Russia, Turkey and Iran are … Our related policies include a 35% pay increase for combat military personnel turning the military into a viable career; converting to Russian strategic and Israeli procurement models; increase training even more, and reorganizing for total war (science,intel,mil,econ,fin). 

a) The Postwar Order: We created a postwar order with the goal of world peace, under the pretext we had the only surviving economy in the world, …. And we have run out of the economic, territorial, and demographic advantage to do so. (return to empires, colonies (“allies”), and monopoly networks defended by imperial forces, and therefore restoring the risk of world wars.

b) Equilibration of Advantage: We have distributed trade, including our own strategic production across the world to the point that we are, and the europeans are, extremely fragile given european needs for resources, and american needs for skilled but inexpensive labor. (restoration of strategic production)

c) Private Capitalist Bias In Research and Dvelopment Instead of State Venture Capitalism: Our government is organized optimistically to maximize private sector initiative and to capture the gains of acting as ‘referree’ on that private sector. However the private sector cannot, and never has been, able to fund basic rsearch on the scale that is required for each incremental advancement in basic research. (restoration of strategic research, development, and investment to ‘family’)

d) Inventories of Capacity: While we have maintained power projection with the illusion of the ability to wage war, we have reduced our inventory of weaponry both strategic and defensive, as well as our production of strategic weapons components, and perhaps worst, reduced the number of people with military experience who can be called upon in times of crisis. So while we can ‘threaten’ we cannot ‘fight’ for any lenght of time – including that we cannot defend for any length of time. In fact, we would run out of armaments in under three weeks. (“we have guns but no ammo”)

e) Restore Mixed Public Private Military Our military is organized with a strategic planning cadre, a clerical force, a logistics force, a mechanic force, and a fighting force. Where there is a hard disconnect between military service and commercial markets. We circumvent this with contractors. ( explain how we segment and pay differently.) Priority to fighting men. (we’re keeping talent out of the military, and out of the government as a consequence) (we want men to stay in the military).

f) Restore Adaptive Government: Our government is organized as an ideal, going concern, given the slow rate of early modern change, instead of organized flexibly as the Romans and Greeks, for times of war, times of going concerns, and times of windfalls. Largely because monarchis handled warfare, and parliaments domestic matters. The two came together on financing and conflict resolution. And we have trained our polity not to expect migration between the three. (need mechanism for converting between conditions)g) We have no means of certifying that the people in the government understand the natural law the constitution of natural law, concurrency, or commonality, the transactional nature of law, testimonal truth, reciprocity, demonstrated interests, language as weights and measures of the time, nor that they have a basic understanding of the laws of the universe, wiether physical, behavioral, or evolutionary. Yet we have certifications for therapists, psychiatrists, doctors, lawyers, accountants, and investment advisors. (need test of natural law, constitution, rights and obligations, and transactional government. note: one of our key contributions is the ability to test for competency for government. Or more colloquially, “if you want to wear a tie, we can then use it as a noose”-BH)

(Goal: “Make it difficult to impossible for bad people to get into government, survive in government, and evade prosecution in government.”)

Solutions:

2. Regarding the Political

SELF DETERMINATION

2.1 Restore the Federation of Several States:

Restoration of the American Project as a repeat of the thousand-year successful European project, as a federation of Sovereign States (countries) under military, court, treasury, insurer, while maintaining rights under natural law, but devolving “liberty” – under the original meaning of “the right to retain local custom” that does not violate the law or the rights, replicating the successes of the Trifunctionalism of The Holy Roman Empire, The Traditional Law, and the Catholic Church, in secular scientific, and legal form, while allowing peoples to produce those commons most suitable to there interests.

2.2 Restoring the constitution to its original intention of a large number of small European states, each serving the interests of their citizens.  

Thus fixing six major holes in our constitution, including the full enumeration of our rights, so that there is no more ‘legal interpretation’ of anything, or legislation from the bench, or laws that ‘pass’ before they are known legal, and understood. And where legislators are personally liable for life for the legislation they approve. This is the most important but most technical aspect of our movement. We have been told it’s the government that matters. It isn’t. It’s rule of law that matters. And governments limited to rule of law that make the European miracles of the ancient and modern worlds possible.

2.3 Restore Political Power and Choice To The States:

Limiting the federal government to original intent, as defense of the continent and dispute resolution over property between the states. Closing all federal agencies except defense, court, treasury, interior, research, and insurer of last resort (benefits). Devolving the rest – social and political preferences – to the states. Then states can create social, economic, and political policies that suit their interests while preserving the territorial integrity and financial security of our continent. So the different ‘american nations’ can customize life to their cultural wants and needs.

2.6 – Restore The Market for Commons in the Legislature: 

Restoration of our system of government to one of houses of the classes for the purpose of producing commons by trades, and out of majoritarian mob rule the English were correct – and the French, as always, were wrong. And the conversion of Acts of legislation to Contracts of the Commons explicitly placing their contents and enforceability as inferior to the Law.

2.7 – Restore Monarchies and if Possible Nobilities

Nobility: Intergenerational Capital
One of the more minor but meaningful mistakes of our ancestors was to eliminate the value of monarchy and nobility intstead of subject them to equality under the law. This was, at the time, a pragmatic choice, that in retrospect was damaging, because monarchy and nobility give families an incentive to produce intergenerational capital of all forms that continously improve the commons and the people, leading to ‘europe being a vast open air museum’. Whereas, unfortunately, ‘renters’ (politicians), especially elected politicians, are pressured into and incentivized to universalize the tragedy of the commons. If we are to correctly frame our degeneration as a civilization it is reducibl to the tragedy of the commons: privatization of accumulated capital for the benefit of all.

One of the worst misakes the USA has made is the conversion of the senate to a directly elected body instead of a substitute for the governors of the states, given the distance between the states and the capitol of the federation. Similarly one of the worst mistakes the british have made is the degredation of the house of lords, away from those with intergenerational interests in the condition of the state and the people. The house of lords acted as a limit on the ‘fashions and passions’ of the people. The senate was likewise designed to act as a limit on the ‘fashions and passions’ of the people. And while the british lacked a constitution and supreme court, the house of lords filled that role for not only the law, but for the culture itself.  

Now we have taken pains in our reforms to the constitution to prohibit degeneracy by simply measuring all capital in the commons and preventing privatization by private AND public institutions. You get what you measure. We would not have the high crimes against the commons in San Francisco or Los Angeles or Chicago today if we conducted that full accounting. So we are including that full accounting so that houses of nobility (intergenerational responsibility for people culture state constitution and civilization) can play that role in addition to the courts, but where we still have appeal to the courts.

Monarchies: Judges of Last Resort
Given the history of propaganda to undermine the monarchies, despite the record of monarchies, and despite the catastrophes of those nations that have abandoned them, it is all but impossible to convince Americans that the British model of a constitutional monarchy serving as “judge of last resort”, in case any or all of the military, legal, political, economic and social procedures, and processes fail – as they are frequently want to do.

But the logic and evidence are clear that a monarchy as judge of last resort, rule of law by natural law, and the supremacy of the law, multiple houses of parliament or congress, a professional cabinet, and a prime minister, are the optimum form of democratic government in an educated, industrialized, prosperous and democratic christian European polity. And withing that optimum system of government, Monarchies are the final defense against fashions of the people, failure of political processes, and usurpation by our enemies.

2.8 Reorganization of Elites from Credentialist(Hypothetical) to Meritocracy(Demonstrated competency)

a) Restore Competent and Replace Credentialed Government. With the rise of Communism and Socialist Atheistic totalitarian States, vs the Prussian protestant administrative State, vs the French Catholic administrative state, and their superiority at organizing war and economy, the west gradually accepted the ‘Managerial’ state revolution – meaning the more benevolent (‘liberal’) version of the sequence of Leninist > Prussian > French > Anglosphere. The illusion of the benefits of the managerial state took root in europe, a bit less so in the UK, and less so in the USA – though it is arising in Canada as it did in europe, and it’s attempting to in Australia and New Zealand. 

Secondly, with the postwar demand for scientific, technological, medical, and political competitive advantage, we generated a new class of credentialists that did not have experience in military, industry, or pre-war state governmnet that was largely one of economic progression and social integration.

This combination of credentialism, growth of the administrative state, and the long feedback loop on the failures of the administrative state, converted our government from a majority of people with demonstrated competency managing people and resources in the real world, to a majority, and now a near exclusivity of people lacking demonstrated competency managing people and resources in the real world. And these credentialists are (a) in vast over supply (b) motivated to pursue political extremes to build alliances and careers, rather than demonstrated competency in improving the competitive position of the polity and the state.  

Solution:  (Purge, closure, teach natural law constitution, test, reconstruction, regulations and policies pass congress. liability for all persons in decision chain. Basically we want to move people from military and industry into government after they’ve demonstrated competency and ‘paid for the privilege’.)

b) Professionalizing vs Credentializing Government Employees: We have no means of certifying that the people in the government understand the natural law the constitution of natural law, concurrency, or commonality, the transactional nature of law, testimonal truth, reciprocity, demonstrated interests, language as weights and measures of the time, nor that they have a basic understanding of the laws of the universe, whether physical, behavioral, or evolutionary. Yet we have certifications for therapists, psychiatrists, doctors, lawyers, accountants, and investment advisors. (Need test of natural law, constitution, rights and obligations, and transactional government. note: one of our key contributions is the ability to test for competency for government. Or more colloquially, “if you want to wear a tie, we can then use it as a noose”-BH)

(Goal: “Make it difficult to impossible for bad people to get into government, survive in government, and evade prosecution in government.”)

2.9 Provide Self Determinaton By State Formation for Everyone

Allowing voluntary state formation with only 300k people (the population of Iceland or the Dakotas). In most cases we will see many small states form and they will be more like the princedoms of the Holy Roman Empire (Greater Germany) that the founders were trying to imitate. This creates small homogeneous polities with low power distance, with limited difference in interests.

2.10 – Restore the Sovereignty of the Several States

We begin by defining different political organizations, rights, responsibilities and inalienations of each. Our purpose here is to account for the difference in opportunity costs between small territories with dense popoulations and lower individual responsibility and lower opportunity costs and larger less dense populations with higher individual responsibility and higher opportunity costs. Thus we preserve the requirement for concurrency between polities and we prevent the race to the bottom by majorities.

  • Territories, Possessions,
  • City States, States, Regions,
  • Cities, Districts, Counties, Shires,
  • Towns, Villages, and Homesteads
  • Gypsies, Seasonal Migrants, Vagrants, Dysfunctionals, Addicts, The Mentally Ill

The strategic security of the north american island continent is such that the value may not be compromised by any without imposing an intolerable cost on the rest. As such we are constrained to the integrity of the continent as a federation in prohibition of the threat caused by such an alienation. (French Quebec is bad enough as it is)

The same applies to the island of Britain, Australia or New Zealand, or the   ‘world island’ of eurasia, or vast continent of africa: there is very little difference between racial presence, civilizational boundaries, ethnic boundaries within them, and the many federations of nation states that logically arise within them. There are territorial constraints and ‘torn countries’ that bridge civilizations. it’s these torn countries and zones of compeition, contention and conflict that generate wars, destruction, suffering, and death. 

The territory is and always will be a commons of the federation. So all are constrained to the use of natural resources, limiting to usus and prohibiting abusus both intergenerational and by externalization of costs. Thus the governmentn and the people  have sovereignty in usus but not of abusus.

We guarrantee the right to self determination thus preventing hoarding of territories rather than distributing territories to suit the wants and needs of our differences, and enumerate the criteria necessary for self determination of any territory and it’s people by the formation of a polity.

We guarrantee a republican government of Rule of Law of Natural Law, Commonality, Concurrency, and Liberty in the production of economy, culture, and custom – because it is the only moral government possible under the natural law of cooperation for the benefit of all, and together for the benefit of man.

We provide a Menu (set of choices) for different methods of regional, state, and
local government, that conform to this reupblican government, the constitution and the natural law because human groups prefer and often need different means of decision making and management because of different trust structures in the populations, different diversities that cause that trust differences, and different degrees of complexity that increase the demand for greater generalization (abstraction) of government decisions by general rules.

We place limits on bureaucracies, legislation, and especialy externalization of costs against demonstrated interest – some of which may result from simple differences in preference or local philosophy between higher capitalization and higher consumption and impulse satisfaction polities.

In general we prohibit conspiracy by any organization of polities against the interests of other polities or the federation.

In specific we limit the autonomy and behavior of the governments and the polities from undermining neighbors, other states, or the federation, with harsh penalties for even proposing such.

The reasoning is simple: there are basic human behaviors, largely for satisfaction and status, that are both genetic, cultural, and economic, and the genetic, cultural, and economic continuously reinforce one another. By providing all people with a market for polities we provide a range of cultures in which to satisfy our need for mindfulness, belonging, shared ambitions, and the joy of achieving them together, but we are limited to not imposing the costs of doing so on other polities – preserving natural law of cooperation and as such our cooperation with one another for our mutual benefit.

2.11 – Separate Urban Individualism and Consumption from the Suburban and Rural Familism and Capitalization.

Separate Blue Cities: The conversion of Deep Blue Immigrant Cities to City-States, in the tradition of “Free Cities” of the European Tradition under the Holy Roman Empire.

The Blue Cities have violated the Constitution, and effectively seceded already. We convert blue cities to city-states in the European Free Cities model, to contain them. Letting them have ‘multicultural’ social policies and the rest of us have what we want – decency, and priority of family. Thus preventing the blue cities and the Democratic party – that have been destroying the country one city at a time – from taking the rest of our civilization down with them. As such this is a repetition of the containment policy against communism, and communism’s transformation from class warfare against European civilization into multiculturalism and socialism against European civilization.

This will account for nearly half of the population. These cities have intentionally defected from the American and European Project in pursuit of the profits for Elites under of The Cosmopolitan Project. We have made bankruptcy possible for States. Our expectation is that as the continued competitive advantage of the States declines, these cities will continue to bankruptcy, write down their debts, restructure, the remaining ‘conservative’ people will flee, causing more reforms, but that over the century they will adapt to necessity. These cities will follow global norms of a small White, Jewish, or East Asian central district surrounded by slums. But the contagion will be contained, and while these cities will continue to die off, new core cities will form outside of them but under the Law and Constitution that has criminalized Cosmopolitan policies.

So the present crisis begs we present the facts, and let the people decide to continue the false promise of politics that has led us here, or return to the demonstrated evidence that constitutional monarchs with powers of assent and dissent but not initiative, are necessary for the preservation of a free people.

2.12 Restore Voluntary Association and Disassociation

Restore Voluntary Association and Disassociation so that we can one again regulate norms and culture to our preferences: Among those rights and obligations is the right to freedom of association and dissociation thereby ending forced integration. So that those who wish individual expression and hyperconsumption can revel in it, and those of us who put family and commons before self can create the safe secure aesthetically pleasing lifestyles – and the self discipline, and intolerance for selfishness that goes with it. We are no longer alike enough to share neighborhoods, cities, territories, or political orders – that was the purpose of multiculturalism: to stop integration into Western civilization and the high trust commons and results of them, that all other civilizations envy.

Solutions:

3. Regarding Legitimacy of Constitution, Legislation, Regulation, and Law

PROBLEM STATEMENT

One of the reasons for our ongoing conflict, and the sedition against the constitution, the law, and western civilization that produces that conflict, is the presumption that the constitution is a statement of strategy, preference, or presumption, rather than one of the empirical science and logic of the natural law of cooperation discovered over millennia by the continuous use of the western tradition’s prohibition on discretionary authority (right, discretion, hierarchy, legitimacy, granted) and reliance on duty by responsibility for decidability(obligation, responsibility, peerage, hired for) using the test of tort (tresspass) in the common (traditional and common) law.

The larger the polity the more divergent the interests, then the more limited the scope of commonality of law and concurrency of legislation. The largest scope possible at all scales is the natural common concurrent law of self determination by sovereignty, reciprocity, truth, duty and excellence( sometime stated as beauty). While local variations of commons, norms, traditions, regulations, and legislation may vary on top of that natural common concurrent law – the origin of the meaning of liberty: the right to preserve, maintain, and produce local custom that does not violate the natural law – persists as we scale: self determination by sovereignty reciprocity truth, duty, and excellence, and does not impose costs upon the demonstrated interests of others.

So our Constitution and our constitution alone, is a statement of the logic of human cooperation discovered by scientific discovery of patterns of dispute resolutions by centuries empirical debates under the common law of tresspass, where trespass refers to any demonstrated interest. And any demonstrated interest refers to cost born to obtain that interest, without imposing a cost on the existing interests of others.

As such our constitution merely lacked some of these explanations, leaving about six to eight holes that explicitly state them – even though the author Blackstone who had described this history, was known to all the constitution’s authors the way Biochemistry, Darwinian Evolution, or Electromagnetism is known to all educated people in the present age. 

In this sense the constitutional reforms we have provided herein, plug those holes and refine the constitution so that we no longer need assume an understanding of the science of cooperation, the common law means of dispute resolution under it, or the necessity of concurrency in enacting legislation, leaving us with a science of cooperation and adjudication of disputes in the law, and a science of legislation and governance.

The result is a government that requires more debate and more consensus at the federal level where experimentation is costly, causing it to move very slow and cautiously, but less debate and less consensus at the state or regional or local level allowing localities to move quickly and inexpensively. Thereby continuing the scientific and empirical discovery of successes and failures in social, political, and economic experimentations via legislation and law. And as such local successes can accumulate into commonality and concurrency from localities, to states, to federal governments, and into legislation for all by demonstrated success rather than utopian, ideal, imaginary, fraudulent, and often criminal means we have seen over the past century. 

But for this system of the scientific discovery of social, political, and economic competitive excellence to exist, persist, and evolve, requires we restore priority for the natural law in the federal government, but restore priority for social regulation to the local level. Thus creating a market for excellent vs degenerate behavior, with the benefits and losses earned and born by those who favor one set of behaviors or another.  And we should expect to see local, state, and regional markets for social and economic policy that serves their interests, and in doing so isolates all of us from political conflict over those social and economic policies.

Therefore, we explicitly state the science and the logic of human cooperation, how it is applied in the law, the means of dispute resolution in court, the means of legislating and regulating, and the means of governing the federal, state, and local levels, and then specifically articulate this the consistency coherience and excellence of this process because no process is or can be superior to this one.

DECONFLATION OF TERMS

3.1 Ending conflation under the term ‘law’.

Problem Statement

Given the use of pseudoscience, and in particular the positive law and lawfare movements, to destroy he natural law, our sovereignty under it, our constitution of it, our government of natura law under it, the articles, legislation, regulation, findings of the law, and the institutions of cultural production of our responsibility to one another codified in that natural law, we must restore the legitimacy of constitution, government, legislation, regulation, and findings of the law with sufficient precision and clarity that they can be restored, repaird, improved, and defended against future abuses

We historically conflate the term law with those things that we treat equal to law in the court of the law. As such we treat rules that differ in origin, as the same in application in court. But this avoids the test of the legitmacy of law. That spectrum consists in:

Laws of Nature > The Natural Law > The Constitution of the Natural Law > Legislation(contract) within that constitution > Regulation to procdurally insure that legislation is implemented > Findings of the Court by Judge Discovered Application of all of the above > Commands external to court, regulation, legislation, and perhaps constitution, and perhaps natural law, in times of disaster or war.

So to maintain the natural law of self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity, we must protect against illegitimacy, by defining the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the spectrum of rules – so that false rules and abuse of those rules do not make their way into the court, and therefore bypass the court as insurer of the natural law.

The present constitution assumes the natural, common, concurrent law, and presumes that the readers possess a knowledge of Blackstone’s history of the common law. But because ths is inferred but isn’t explicitly stated, we’ve seen abuses of that natural, common, concurrent law – this time not by monarchy, nobility and church, but by the credentialists in the academy, among politicians, lawyers, activists, activist jurists, and those in the managerial state. As such, just as we held revolutions to prevent authority under the monarchies and the church, we are now performing a restoration under the credentialists in academy, private sector and state, in their repetition of the pursuit of authority and the debasement of the natural, common, concurrent, law.

IMMUTABILITY

3.5 – Immutability: Define and Declare Immutability Natural Law, Constitution of Natural Law, and Government of Natural Law

GIVEN the determinism of:

Entropy > Negative Entropy > Evolutionary Computation > Atomic, Molecular, Biological, Intracellular, Cellular, and Sexual Instinctual Involuntary cooperation > Conscious Voluntary cooperation limited by the demand for self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity that prevents retaliation and collapse of cooperation.

AND GIVEN:

The Natural law of cooperation, or more precisely, the natural law of evolutionary computation, by test of reciprocal voluntary cooperation and prevention of retaliation and retaliation cycles, is existential, empircally discovered, and an immutable law of nature.

AND WHEREAS:

The Natural Law, a Constitution under the natural law, a government and courts under that constitution, and policies under that government and courts will deterministically without exception maximize human cooperation, evolutionary compuation, evolutionary development, and the prosperity therefrom.  Just as variation from the natural law will produce an accumulation of losses of opportunity, accumulation of non cooperation, acumulation of corruption, rent seeking, black markets, crime, and untrustworthiness will accrue of debts to the natural law, culminating in stagnation, decline, clusters of violence, economic collapse, institutional collapse, demographic collapse, and civilizational collapse. And worse the only terms that have violated the law of evolutionary computation by evolutionary cooperation have delivered people to a condition of equality in ignorance poverty starvation suffering and early death are disaster, plague, bad government, worse religion, and war

THEREFORE; 

As such the natural law is empirical, the constitution is empirical constitution and both are is immutable. The policies under that constitution are mutable. And any attempt to conflate the constitution and the policies under it is an act of treason, sedition, crime, punishable as a high crime, with the most severe consequences. Because any attempt to undermine this constitution is an attempt to undermine mankind itself, and bring about another attempt at our ruin, and prevent our evolution into the gods we imagine.

SOVEREIGNTY

Sovereignty refers to the means of decision of last resort (the final authority) and the prohibition on external forces from violating those decisions of the decider of last resort.

Five common forms of sovereignty are sovereignty of the natural aw, Sovereignty of the Individual, sovereignty of the people , sovereignty of the constitution, sovereignty of the court, sovereignty of the state.

|Sovereignty|: Natural Law > Individual > People > Constitution > Court > State

No sovereignty dependent on a prior may violate the sovereignty of the prior.

Sovereignty of the law:

The law is the final means of decidability in a society. The rule of law ensures that all individuals, including government officials, are subject to and accountable to the law, that the law is supreme and can overrule any other authority or power, including the state or individuals, is essential for protecting individual rights obligations and inalienations.

Sovereignty of the individual:

Each individual who mutually insures others sovereignty over themselves, their own body, and their own actions for the purpose of collective agency and individual autonomy and self-determination. These insurers have certain necessary rights, such as the right to life, action, and demonstrated interests, that cannot be taken away by any means of justification, nor can they be forgone or abandoned.

Sovereignty of the People:

( … )

Sovereignty of the Constitution

( … )

Sovereignty of the Court:

In any conflict between individuals, groups, organizations, and the state, whether internal or external, the court is sovereign over the state and the people within the constraints of the natural law and a constitution of natural law. As such the people must use concurrency of the people, by the legislative and amendment process, to alter the constitution, Acts of the legislature, or findings of the court, within the limits of the natural law.

Sovereignty of the State:

This refers to the idea that the state is the highest authority in a society. The state has the power to make and enforce laws, maintain order, provide public services, and protect the country’s borders. The sovereignty of the state means the state has the right to govern itself without interference from external powers.

In comparing these three types of sovereignty, it’s important to note that they are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they can complement each other in a well-functioning society. Sovereignty of the law provides a framework for individuals to exercise their own sovereignty within the bounds of the law. Sovereignty of the state provides the structure and resources necessary to protect individual sovereignty and ensure the rule of law. And sovereignty of the individual is necessary for a democratic society, where individuals have the freedom to express themselves and participate in the political process

3.6 Restore the Sovereignty of the Natural Law, the Constitution of it, and the criteria for legitimacy of articles within it, and legislation, regulation, findings, and commands under it.

3.7 Restore the Sovereignty of the Individual – Who is willing and able: 

Given that sovereignty requires both the demonstrated ability(natural), competency(learned), and will(choice) to reciprocally insure the sovereignty of others.  And given the variation in ability, competency, and will of individuals to bear that responsibility, and the ability, competency, and will of individuals to expand the sphere of their responsibility, not all individuals are competent for all responsibilities extant in the polity. As such Sovereignty can exist only within the limits of your demonstrated competency for responsibility for self, others, the polity, and the polity in relation to those external to it.

As such we divide those who are uninsured, insured, and insurers and divide negative sovereignty into insurance of the right of defense under the law that requires only responsibiity for the self, from the positive right to vote for legislation that requires demonstrated ability, competency and will in the exercise of responsibility for others.

|Sovereignty|: Non Sovereign (outlaws) > Conditionally Sovereign > Internally Sovereign Dependents > Internally Sovereign Independents

  • Non-Sovereign (Outlaws) – No sovereignty, rights, obligations, or inalienations.
  • Conditionally Sovereign (outsiders, outgroup, uninsured) – 
  • Internally Sovereign – Dependents (ingroup, insured)
    Those whose negative sovereignty is insured by others
    Negative Sovereignty (via Negativa) –  natural right, obligation, and inalienation to defense by their insurers: protection via law.
  • Internally Sovereign – Independents (ingroup, insured)
    Those who insure the sovereignty themselves and others in the polity.
    Negative Sovereignty (via Negativa): Natural right, obligation, and inalienation to defense by their insurers: protection via law.
    And;
    Positive Sovereignty (via Positiva): The natural right to determine decisions, costs, and the allocation of resources by means of voting  via legislation.

3.7 Restore The Sovereignty of the People under the Natural Law, of the constitution under the people, and the legitimacy of the articles, legislation, regulation, and findings and commands under the constitution.

3.8 – Restore Rule of Law of Natural Law Under the Constitution of Natural Law: 

Systematic inclusion of the Rule of Law, Natural Law, Rights and Obligations Under that law, and requirements for the construction of legal acts in all their forms. Explicitly stating that The Law is Sovereign (the last word), not court parliaments, executives, or the fashions of the people. This ends the attempt to undermine Rule of Law by various schemes collectively called positive law, but are nothing more than arbitrary rule seeking to circumvent Natural Law.

3.9 – Restore the Inviolability of the natural law, the people, the constitution, and the state by prohibition on circumvention of any of them for any reason by any and all others, and any and all other means.

It is presently possible to circumvent sovereignty of the natural law, constitution, the people, the courts, by the state’s use of treaties.  We prohibit any and all violations of that sovereignty, and the inviolabilty of the law, the people, and the constitution regardless of the actoins of state, court, or other actors internal or external.

LEGITIMACY

3.9 Restore Legitimacy of Acts by Defining, and Expanding the criteria for Legitimacy

PROBLEM: Solve the problem of the tendency of the quality of legislation, regulation, and findings of the court to degrade over time, as legislators, regulators, the judiciary, lawyers, activists and pubic intelectuals find means of bypasssing the command of natural law, and demand for constitutionality, concurency and commonality, and liability. 

As with the definition of Natural law, and the criteria for constucting a polity of natural law, the criteria for sovereignty, demonstrated interest, and reciprocity, we can produce the criteria for Legitimacy.

With the criteria for legitimacy we produce a method for the testabiilty and insurabilty of an act. And any act is not legitimate and insurable if it can’t survive the test of these criteria.

Restore the Legitimacy of Responsible Authority:
… In the context of natural law, authority refers to the contract between the citizens and an individual or group, for bearing responsibilty to make and enforce natural law, the constitution, legislation, regulations, findings of the court, and commercial, social, and parental decisions, that are consistent with the principles of natural law.  Authority derives its legitimacy from its conformity to natural law and contractual agreement to make and enforce constitution, legislation, regulation, and contract, and even tradition and norm, and to warranty delivering those results, and for liability for not delivering those results. The authority of a government, for example, is legitimate only to the extent that its laws and policies are consistent with natural law. In this sense, natural law provides a basis for evaluating the legitimacy of authority and for determining when it is necessary to resist or challenge authority that violates natural law. 
Authority Requires:
… A responsible party whether individuals or group…. A contract between the people and the individual or members of a group enumerating responsibilities of the individual or members of the group.
… Adherence to the hieararchy of laws of nature, natural law, the constitution, legislation, regulations, findings of the court.
… Enforcement of the hieararchy of laws of nature, natural law, the constitution, legislation, regulations, findings of the court.
… Prohibition on discretion other than by the above, by demand for Decidability by all of the above. 
… Warranty and Liability for those responsibilities, that adherence and enforcement, and the consequences of the actions taken in those responsibilities, adherence, and enforcement.

Legitimacy requires acts that are:
… Nomocratic: All Acts shall descend from, the demand for, the premise of, the logical necessity of, the Natural law of Self Determination by Sovereignty and Reciprocity.
… Algorithmic: All Acts shall be strictly constructed from a logical, sequential, test of reciprocity.
… Isonomic: All Acts shall be general rules, universally applicable to all or all within a Class, and specific Rules not applicable to all within a Class are prohibited.
With Stated Objectives to:
… 1. Maintain The Individual, Group, Organization, Community’s ability to act.
… 2. Regulate Behavior in the via positiva and the via negativa
… 3. Within the limits of the individuals’ abilty to act.
… 4. For some period of time… laws should expire if they are not universal and eternal.
With Stated Goals of:
… Disambiguated, Restitution, Punishment, Prevention, Adaptation
That are:
… Contingent Upon What? ( … )
With:
Complete Content (Decidability, Unambiguous) including:
… Concurrent Approval(consent),
… Leglislative decision,
… Regulatory methods,
… Judicial possibility(legality)
That is:
… Internally consistent: stare decisis
… Non Retroactive
… Understandable
… Adherable
… Enforcible
… Enforced (has been, will be, must be)
… Transactional
… Severable And Severed
… Durable
… Perishable
… Specifically Stated Measurable Goals
… Limited
… Including Failure Criteria
… Reversible and Restitutable
… Warrantable and Warrantied

3.10 – Require Lawful Acts: 

Repairing the oversight of the requirement that Acts to pass the court before they ascend (now implemented in the UK). And repairing the oversight in both the UK and United States, that the court may (must) return undecidable Acts to the Government for clarification, and the government’s liability to resolve it. Thus ending both the government’s ability to pass Acts that aren’t legal – or even adjudicable or enforceable, as well as ending the court’s ability to legislate from the bench. And lastly, to subject all people, including members of the government and the court, to liability for violating the law in Public Speech, in Acts, in Judgements (findings), or Enforcement. In other words, it’s not possible to even propose illegal legislation. (Similar to defense of the Crown in UK law).

The Sciences

The Science of Cooperation

The Government Under that Science

4. Regarding Rights, Obligations and Inalienations (Federal)

PROBLEM STATEMENT HERE ( … )

How does the individual know how to apply the natural law in all aspects of life?

the minium rules of contextual decidabiilty for responsible sovereign actors.
So this is the basic system of weights and measures for the preservation of self determinaton by self determined means by sovereignty and reciprocity.

OUTLINE

  • Explanation (weights and measures)
  • Definitions of Rights Obligations and Inalienations (ROIs)
  • Spectrum of ROIs
  • The Necessity of Articulating and Enumerating ROIs
  • The Causal Origin of ROIs
  • The Causal Relationship between ROIs
  • The Strict Construction of ROIs
  • Enumerating the Natural, Necessary, Fundamental, ROIs
    • Index of Section
  • 4 – Immutability of Fundamental, Natural, Rights
  • 4- Disambiguate Negative and Natural from Positive and Contractual
  • 4- Disambiguate Rights by Enumerating Differences Between The Spectrum of Necessary to Arbitrary Rights.
  • Limits
    • 4- Variation from Negativa Natural Rights by Positiva Contractual and Legislative
    • 4– Variation in Rights By Conditions: All rights are conditional given the three states of a polity
    • 4- Variation by Duty to the Priority of Obligations, Rights, and Inalienations under Trifunctionalism:

A SYSTEM OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

( … )

DEFINITIONS

(note:  DECISION on Definitions: (a) reference the original defintion for brevity (b) repeat the definition for readability, (c) repeat and reference the definition for testability.)

Natural Necessary Negative Rights vs Contractual Utilitarian Positive Rights:

Natural rights obligations and inalienations are necessary for the production of the insurance of sovereignty in demonstrated interests for all insurers and their dependents in the polity.

Contractual rights are those of utility produced by legislative contract 

|Rights|: Natural > Conditional(ability) > Contractual(contingent)

Right: A claim on community of insurers for defense of one’s demonstrated interests.

Obligation: A claim by the community of insurerers for all insured to defend their demonstrated interests.

Inalienation: A demand by the community of insurers  that prohibits all insured from the voluntary abandonment, or legislative revokation of a right or responsibility.

Natural Negative Rights: All Natural Rights Obligations and Inalienations consist of negative rights: prohibitions on actions that would require the intervention of the insurers to bring about judgement, restitution, punishment, and prevention for the purpose of restoring sovereignty in demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed.

Contractual Positive Rights: All Contractual Rights Obligations and Inalienations consist of positive rights: Prohibition or Requiremetn for actions that are necessary to produce a desired common on behalf of the insurers and their dependents.

Public Contractual vs Semi-Private vs Private Positive Rights: whether legislative, corporate, or private contract is irrelevant, in that no contract may violate the Natural Rights, Obligations, and Inalienations of the members of the polity whether the insurers of the polity or their dependents. Even if it is possible to either create an exchange that equilibrates variations and maintains sovereignty and reciprocity in the process, or whether the polity accepts a debt in order to produce a future return that restores sovereignty and reciprocity over a limited time.

Internal Reciprocity of Rights: All rights require a reciprocal obligation and all obligations require a reciprocal right. Natural rights and obligations require inalienability. Contractual rights and and obligations may be alienated by revocation or cancelation by due process.

External Reciprocity of Rights: All those whose rights and obligations are insured, are required insure those same rights and obligations for all others insured in the polity.

Natural Necessary Right: A claim on community of insurers for defense of a demonstrated interest, that is necessary (natural, negative) or granted (contractual, positive) to all insured members of the polity.

Natural Necessary Obligation: A duty to the community of insurers to defend the demonstrated interests of insurers, by display, word, and deed, in behavior, speech, action, court, with force, or with war – whether the obligation is necessary (natural) or granted (contractual) to all insured members of the polity.

Natural Necessary Inalienation: The inviolability of these rights and obligations whether by the individual himself, by other individuals or by internal groups or by external groups. One may neither abandon those rights and obligations nor propose, threaten, enact, or act the abandonment or violation of those rights and obligations to the self or others.

Negative Legitimacy by Commonality ( … )

Positive Legitimacy by Concurrency ( …. )

Contractual (Legislated, Positive) Rights:  The rights obligations and inalienations under the terms of a legislative contract produced by prescribed due process of legitimacy, by the due process of legitimacy agreed to by the insurers.

Alienability of Contractual Rights: Inalienability of Natural (negative, defensive, law) Rights and Obligations, and alienability of Contractual (positive, assertive, legislation) Rights and Obligations.

The Spectrum of The Scopes of Rights

  1. Universal Demand (human nature for self determination, will to live)
  2. Internally Necessary (for non-conflict, and cooperation)
  3. Internally Imposed (unwillingly by force, barbarian, slave, serf)
  4. Internally Conditional (reciprocally insured by force: freeman, citizen, sovereign)
  5. Internally Contingent (on state of the polity by agreement and necessity, all)
  6. Internally Preferential (contractual, legislative)
  7. Externally Agreed
  8. Externally Opportunistic

4.1 – Spectrum of Rights: Existential, Natural Rights vs Preferential Contractually Constructed Rights.

The difference between a natural right and a legislated right or privilege is whether the rule is a natural necessity for satisfying the terms of self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity, or whether it is a preference, or contractual right produced by concurrent legislation. Natural rights are discovered. Legislative (contractual) rights, obligations, and inalienations are constructed to serve preferences.

Any natural right we must possess under the natural law of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity, by reciprocity must produce an equal obligation, and inalienation. 

Additionally, all natural rights must be expressed as obligation, reciprocal right of that obligation from others, and the inaliability of that right and obligation either voluntarily or involuntarily, because these rights are necessary not preferential for the prservation of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity.

Additionally, while rule of law requires all law apply equally to everyone, and all legislation at least be general and not specific in application. This is the difference between a natural and existential right, and an unnatural or constructed right.

4.2 – The necessity of articulating natural existentially necessary rights obligations and inalienations

All natural rights derive from the necessity of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity. And by presuming self determination by self determined means we need only define the terms of creaeting and preserving reciprocity under sovereignty and reciprocity.

By enumerating these rights we create a system of measurement for deciding the legitimacy (or criminality) of all subsequent rights, obligations, and inalienations.  This system of measurement can be used to construct all subsequent rights. And we prevent attempts at fraudulent construction of such rights, and fraudulent evasion of such rights and their obligations and inalienations.

4.3 – The Causal Origin of Rights, Obligations, and Inalienations.

Whereas the forces of:

The Universe (cold, radiation, many dangers)
… The Solar system (sun, and many dangers)
… … The Planet (geology, atmosphere, climate),
… … … Nature(flora and fauna),
… … … … Scarcity (resources)

Therefore, Given the requirements of:

Acquisition (Resources)
… Self Defense(Survival),
… … Self Determination(Agency),
… … … Cooperation(Capacity),
… … … … Sovereignty(Choice),
… … … … … Reciprocity(terms),
… … … … … … Duty(responsibilty), (This is where equality breaks down.)
… … … … … … … … Forbearance(Investment), (account for inequality)
… … … … … … … … … … (Returns: Variability, compatibility, divison of labor,
… … … … … … … … … … … ability(investment))
… … … … … … … … … … … (Losses: Dependence, Charity (insurance))
… … … … … … … … … … … … (Failure: Tolerance (Evasion))
… … … … … … … Liability(Accountability),
… … … … … … … … Warranty(Insurance)

Where Reciprocity Requires:

Productive,
Fully (exhaustively) Informed,
Warrantied,
Voluntary Transfer,
… Of Demonstrated Interests, 
… … Free of Imposition of costs, 
… … … Upon the demonstrated intersets of others, 
… … … … By externality,
Within the limits of possible due diligence,
Within the limits of restitution and liability.

Therefore;
Reciprocity places limits on our behavior in the form of:

Obligations to others
… Rights in the form of obligations from others
… … And Inalienations for ourselves and others.

Therefore;

As such, it is the responsibility of those who are able and willing to exchange the burden of insuring self derermination, by carrying the burden of responsibility and accountability for creating and maintaining reciprocity by those who are less able and willinng to do so.

Therefore;

It is only the form and magnitude of training, education, advice, persuasion, coercion, and punishment that those who are responsible and accountable for creating and maintaining reciprocity duty must apply, and submission to and duty of submission of those who require it, until able to equally share that responsibility and accountability – or to abandon one’s sovereignty as a consequence, thus limiting ones actions to what he or she is capable of, without imposing costs upon others.

Therefore;

Mankind as evolved a range of institutions both normative, informal, and formal for the purposes of training, educating, advising, persuading, coercing, and punishing humans to their maximum ability to bear responsibility and accountability and therefore share the labor, and reduce the cost, of producing  non aggression, non-conflict, and cooperation by reciprocal insurance of self determination by sovereignty in demonstrated interest and reciprocity in display word and deed.

To achieve the goal of duty to steward the production of self determination by self determined means, by sovereignty and reciprocity, there by domesticating humans, we have only three possible means of influence, persuasion, coercion and punishment:

  • Moral: Inclusion or Exclusion
  • Exchange: Reumuneration or Boycott
  • Force: Defense or Force

All influence is reducible to one or more (in combination) of these means of influence.

And
Therefore we developed Institutions of Cultural Production:

|Institutions|: Means Organization > Formalization > Scale

Moral: (social, normative, threat of exclusion)
… Scales to: Norms, Traditions, Religion, Religious Law
Exchanges: (commercial, material, threat of deprivation)
… Scales to: Norms, Weights and measures, Economy, Contract LawForce: (police, military, state, threat of harm)
… Scales to: Norms, Courts, States, Militaries, Rule(Legislative Law)

And
Therefore;

We require a spectrum of means of communication and Intergeneral transfer: a system of weigths and measures that can scale up and down with the ability and willingness of the people in the polity.

|Precision|: Wisdom(obedience) > Advice(Choice) > Knowledge(Decidability)

Wisdom and Obedience: Fairy Tale, Fable, Parable, Myth, Theology
… Advice and Choice: Literature, Biography, History, Phililosophy
… … Knowledge and Decidability: Logics, Sciences, Economics, Law

And
A Sequence of Skills:

|Skills|: Training > Fitness > Cooperation > Education > Skills > Civil Service

  1. Training (Inclusion): Hygiene, Dress, Manners, Ethics, Morals, Traditions
  2. Fitness (Compatibility): physical fitness(physical), mindfulness(emotional), Environmental (basic life skills)
  3. Cooperation(Acquisition): Competition, Teamwork, Friendship, Mating, and Family (social)
  4. Education(Survival): the logic and grammars of measurement: reading and writing, arithmetic and mathematics, and the basics of geography and history, the basics of the physical sciences, the cooperative sciences including economics finance law and government – necessary for behavioral compatibility and commensurability with others in the polity. (economic commensurability)
  5. Skills (Depth of your value add): Training in one or more means of self determined means – productivity by the service of the self through the service of others. (Economic Self Determination)
  6. Civil Service: Parenting > Stewarding (the commons) > Management(organizing) > Governing (choice) > Ruling (conflict) ?

And
A Sequence of Institutions of Education:

|Education|: Family > Religion > Education > Academy > Military > Apprenticeship >  Experience > Administration > Judgment 

4.4 – The Causal Relationship between Inalienabilities, Obligations, and Rights.

Inalienables (duties) are the required to satisfy the demands of the exchange of insurance of self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity. Obligations arise as necessary service to fulfill that duty. And Rights are the forbearances and affordances that result from the performance of those duties, by those who perform perform those obligatory duties, satisfying inalienability of those duties, and the priority of those duties in continous production of self determination by reciprocal insurance of sovereignty and reciprocity.

The Returns on Cooperation:

Require Suppression of Conflict, retaliation, and retaliation cycles
… Require Self Determination by self determined means
… … Require Sovereignty in demonstrated interests
… … … Require Reciprocity in display word and deed

Where self determination by soverignty and reciprocity requires;

Inalienabilities
… Obligations
… … Rights

And
Whereas we vary in ability and willingness for responsibility, accountability, and the scope of accountability;

Infant > Animal (Dependent, Unresponsible )
… Child > Slave (Dependent, Non-responsible and Unaccountable )
… … Youth > Serf (Dependent, Responsible but Unaccountable)
… … … Adult > Commoner > National (Responsible and accountable for self, commonsm “Single Men and Women”, Social)
… … … … Parent > (Responsible and Accountable for Self, and Family)
… … … … … … Visitor > Resident (Temporary or Contingent membership, responsible  and Accountable to do no harm to private and common, having via negativa court defense of natural ROIs, no via positiva political ROIs.)
… … … … … … Mother > Civilian (dependent for defense, but responsible for  offspring)
… … … … … … Freeman > Civilian (Responsible and Accountable for Defense and Maintenance of the commons.)
… … … … … Citizen (Responsible and Accountable for the Commons Creation, Holding Freemen Accountable, Political(responsible for many)
… … … … … … Headman > Sovereign (Responsible and Accountable for the Polity, Holding Citizens Accountable. Geopolitical (military and courts))

Where;

Originally a Freeman(Adult) was insured by himself, and his family, and had access to the courts domestically. A National was additionally insured by the State anywhere in the world. A Citizen additionally held duties for administration of the polity. And a Sovereign held the additional rsponsibility of a judge of last resort – providing decidability when necessary. So we have conflated freeman, national, citizen, and sovereign by universal enfranchisement, without maintaining demonstrated sufficiency of willingness and ability to produce equality of responsibility and accountability.

Therefore;

Either we are capable of entering into the exchange or not, if not and we are a dependent, then our participation in the benefits of the polity are predicated on our submission to reciprocity within the limits of your ability, imposed by those who have demonstrated ability and willingness to enter into the exchange of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity.

Therefore;

The challenge we face is the sufficient enumeration of causality, obligations, rights, and inalienations, that we can determine whether we are correctly or incorrectly domesticating one another into the maximum responsibility and accountability that we are cabable of, even if we may not be willing to. 

Therefore;

We must enumerate a sufficient scope of obligations, rights, and inalienations that such determination and decidability is possible across the spectrum of human ability, whether dependent, freeman, national, citizen, or sovereign.

And we achieve that through construction from first principles of self determination below.

4.5 – All fundamental rights and obligations are strictly constructed from self-determination by sovereignty and reciprocity and inviolable and as such closed to modification or interpretation. 

All rights cover the range of, are organized by, and stated by display, word, and deed.

|Action|: Display > Word > Deed

Therefore;

  1. All rights require mutual (mirrored) reciprocity and so include mirrored obligations.
  2. All rights and obligations require universal obligation to defend rights and enforce obligations of others.
  3. All rights are inalienable, meaning that not only can you not surrender them (avoid obligations), but that any attempt by display word or deed to undermine them is a criminal act in and of itself.

This is the most rigorous definition of rights in human history. As such there are no positive fundamental rights, only negative, and all positive rights are contractual and conditional on possibility of fulfillment. This ends the ‘rights-labeling’ game by defining rights strictly.

Enumerating Natural, Necessary, Fundamental, Rights

4.6 – Enumerate All Fundamental, Natural Rights and Corresponding Obligations and Inalienations: 

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

The constitution includes the bill of rights. Founders debate whether enumeration of those rights was necessary because there was risk in enumerating them and engaging in risk of insufficiently doing so, versus the risk that subsequent generations would do worse. The reason being that they did not articulate Blackstone’s foundations of the natural common concurrent law in the constitution, assuming it was unnecessary. So they only partly solved the problem of preventing abuse of natural rights under the natural law, by enumeerating those they could, but failing to enumerate others, or enumerating them poorly as in the rights to free speech and religion, which are two of the weaknesses through which dissent and undermining has occurred.

So we have strictly, operationally, constructed the spectrum of natural rights and obligations to limit opportunities for the abuse of natural rigts and obligations given variations in the competency and bias of individuals who seek to produce political persuasion, argument, and decisions.

THEREFORE:
Disambiguate and enumerate all fundamental rights, obligations, and inalienations (ROI) under Natural Law. ROI can be disambiguated into the conditions under which people act as individuals and groups, as organizations, or as public institutions:

  • Personal (private)
  • Organizational (common)
  • Institutional (public).

Our ROIs remain the same whether we refer to individuals, organizations of individuals, or institutions consisting of individuals: reciprocal insurance of the self determination by self determined means of all insured by sovereignty in demonstrated interests, and reciprocity in display word and deed.

OUTLINE

  • 0. Sovereignty 
  • 1. Reciprocal Insurance of Sovereignty
    • 1.1 – Before Inclusion in the insured
    • 1.2 – Inclusion into the insured
    • 1.3 – During Inclusion in the insured
      • 1.3.1 – Insurance
      • 1.3.2 – Reciprocity
      • 1.3.3 – Truth
        • I.3.3.1 – Decidability
        • 1.3.3.2 – Testifiability
        • 1.3.3.3 – Epistemology
        • 1.3.3.4 – Truth
      • 1.3.4 – Irreciprocity
        • 1.3.4.1 – Deceptions
        • 1.3.4.2 – Crimes
        • 1.3.4.3 – Seditions
        • 1.3.4.4 – Treasons
      • 1.3.5 – Due Process
        • Negative Common Law
        • Positive Concurrent Legislation (Contractural ROIs (legislative, regulatory, command)
      • 1.3.6 – Exclusion
    • 1.4 – After Inclusion in the insured

THEREFORE:
GIVEN
… The Necessity of Solving the Preference for Survival;
AND
… The scarcity of time, and scarcity of resources to satisfy needs, preferences, and wants;
AND
… The necessity of cooperation across our lifetimes, and the irreplacable disproportionate returns on cooperation;
AND
… The persistent choice of predation, parasitism and conflict versus cooperation, versus avoidance and boycott;
REQUIRES
… The prevention of incentive for non-cooperation, retaliation, and retaliation cycles
REQUIRES
… Reciprocal Guarranty of Insurance of:
… … Self Determination By Self Determined Means
REQUIRES
… Rights, Obligations, and Inalienations of:
… … Minimum knowledge of this law, capacity of argument supporting it, parley (parliament) to codify it, parleys (houses) to produce commons under it, individual self defense of it, discipline of those failing it, court resolving it, judicial duel as escalation of it, posse as escalation of it, and force of arms (militia) to insure all of the above.

(Note: duel: a sovereign can deny the legitimacy of the court in the matter and thus resort to duel if both sides agree (judicially sanctioned duel), or abandon the contract for insurance, becoming an outlaw, thus enabling retaliation against one by the individual or the group. ergo criminals have the protection of the  insurers the court and the law. Outlaws rescind their insurance of others and their insurance of the outlaw. Therefore sovereignty cannot exist without the choice to abandon insurance by the group.)

WHERE The Possibility of:
… Self Determination by Self Determined Means
Requires
… Sovereignty (Before) Demonstrated interests
That Requires
… knowledge of the spectrum of demonstrated interests.
Consisting of:
… The Existential (Natural), 
… The Obtained (Direct),
… And The Common (Indirect).AND the possibilty of:
… Sovereignty in Demonstrated interests
Requires:
… Reciprocity (During) in:
… … Deed, Words (truth, testimony), and Display
AND the Possibility of:
… Reciprocity in Deed and Display
Requires
… Knowledge of the criteria for reciprocity
Requring:
… the terms of Reciprocity:
… … Productive, Exhaustively Informed truthful speech, and Warrantied, Voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others.

AND WHERE the possibility of:
… Exhaustively informed truthful speech
Requires
… Reciprocal Testimonial Truth
Requires:
… Knowledge of truthful speech
Requires:
… The Criteria for truthful speech:
Requires the complete criteria for the testifiability of speech:
… Realism, Naturalism, Identity, Internal Consistency, Operational Possibiilty, External Correspondence, Bounded Rational Choice, Reciprocal Bounded Rational Choice, with Causal Parsimony, and Full Accounting, within Stated Limits, and within the limits of Liability and Restitutability.

Requires:
… Institutions of Insurance of Cooperative Assistance, Dispute Prevention, and Dispute Resolution
Consisting of:
… Weights and Measures 
Consisting of:
…  Habits, Manners, Norms, Traditions, Values, Ethics, Morals, Quantitative and qualitative Weights and Measures, certifications(trademarks), insurance (regulation, licenses), codes, legislation, laws, and constitutions.

AND Requring

… Institutions of Cooperative Assistance
… … Consisting of:
… … … freedom of truthful reciprocal speech, freedom of association, freedom of contract, contracts, regulation of weights and measures, money, banks, credit, treasuries, codes, regulations, parliaments, legislation for the production of private and common.

AND Consisting of:
… Prohibitons on the incentive to dispute, retaliate, engage in cycles of retaliation, cause repetition, cause imitation, cause defection, or war.

AND Requiring:
… Institutions of Dispute Resolution
… … Consisting of:
… … … Courts, Parliaments, (Monarchies), Citizens, Sheriffs, Militia, and Militaries

AS SUCH (THEREFORE):

THE FUNDAMENTAL OBLIGATIONS, RIGHTS, AND INALIENATIONS (ROIS) consist of:

I. RECIPROCAL INSURANCE OF SOVEREIGNTY:
The production Individual, private, common, and state Sovereignty in Demonstrated Interest:

WHERE
DEMONSTRATED INTEREST consists in
|Demonstrated Interests|: Natural > Acquired > Common.
(See Article III – Man – Demonstrated Interests)

  1. Natural Interests
  2. Acquired Interests (obtained)
  3. Common Interests

REQUIRES:

  1. … (Via Positiva) Obligation to insure by the Defense of the private and common demonstrated interests by display word and deed.
  2. … (Via Negativa) Rights to the insurance of one’s demonstrated interests both private and common in display word and deed.
  3. … (Via Equality) and the Inalienability of both those obligations and rights insuring of private and common demonstrated interests in display word and deed.

REQUIRES;
… Duty To The Institutions of Insurance, of the Production of Institutions of Cultural production of rights, obligations, inalienations, sovereignty and reciprocity:
… … personal, familial, interpersonal, local, social, economic, political, and geostrategic;

BY MEANS OF:
… Display BY;
… …  dress, manners, behavior, and all other means of non-verbal communication.
… Word BY;
… … Informing(ignorance), Correction(error, bias), Warning and Threat(Coercion), Courts(determination, restitution, punishment, prevention), Parliaments (Public Record of Right, Obligation, Inalienation), (Monarchies (decider of last resort)),
… And Deed BY;
… … Physical force(violence), Bearing and Using Arms(Bearable Arms), Bearing and Crewing Armaments and Equipment whether individual, group, or institutional, 
… BY the necessary scale of:
… … Citizens, Sheriffs, Posses(criminal), Militia(organized), and Militaries(states);
… BY necessary scale of:
… … coercion, restraint, relocation, imprisonment, punishment, harm, or death
… AND where required:
… … Punishment by psychological means in time.
… … Abuse by psychological or physical means over time.
… … Torture in those rare cases where the individual is acting against the innocent in pursuit of personal or collective interest or ambition, but never in the case of duty under natural rights and obligations.

THEREFORE: 
… You have the inalienable right and obligation to lead a lawful life, where lawfulness is determined this natural law – or to exit the polity and the insurance it provides, whether by limitation on your rights, your departure, your incarceration, or your extermination.

AND;
Those fundamental rights are produced before inclusion, maintained during inclusion, and withdrawn after inclusion.

1.1 – BEFORE INCLUSION:
GIVEN the difference betwen: 
… The Ingroup Insurers vs Outgroup and their insurers.
And the duration and durability of duration of rights, obligations, and inalienations (ROIs);
THEN;
… Given the insurers of self determination by self determined means, by sovereignty and reciprocity determine the membership or ‘ingroup’ then Ingroup Natural Rights (insured, unconditional, existential) vs Outgroup Allied Contractual Rights (insured, conditional) vs  Outgroup Offered Potential Rights (uninsured, contitional) vs Outgroup Offered Opportunistic Rights (uninsured, transactional).

|Conditionality of Rights|: Ingroup Necessary Natural Rights > Ingroup Contractual Rights > Outgroup Allied Contractual Rights >  Potential Rights > Opportunistic Rights 

THEREFORE;
Given the three persistent possibilities and availability of the choices of interaction, by the incentives to predation, parasitism, deception, conflict and war, versus the incentives for cooperation, whether opportunistic, contingent, continuous versus the incentive for avoidance, boycott, disassociation, speparation, and defense;

AND GIVEN;
The extent of rights that are rational and useful are in proportion to the value and consistency of reciprocal cooperation minus the cost of irreciprocal non-cooperation,

THEREFORE;
The offering of rights in anticipation of reciprocal exchange of those rights is a utility for the purpose of developing that exchange of rights, and otherwise no rights exist; and as such no crime, ethics, or morals can exist between those who have not exchanged the rights of sovereignty and reciprocity.

AND;
Additionally, instead of assuming or granting rights, we offer the promise of exchange of rights, to the degree we wish to either incentivize coopration or incentivize war, conflict, predation, and parasitism.

THEREFORE;
The process of incremental increase in the exchange of promise of rights of sovereignty and reciprocity may continue, abate, or restart until the rights are fully exchanged.

UNTIL;
Parties fully integrate into the same polity and means of political decision making, by reciprocal insurance of Self Determination by Self Determined means by Sovereignty, Reciprocity, and Rights Obligations and Inalienations of marginal indifference between members and groups of members.

1.2 – THE PROCESS OF INCLUSION: NATURALIZATION (ENTRY AND ASSOCIATION) AND DENATURALIZATION (EXIT AND DISASSOCIATION) SECESSION

WHEREAS;
Integration into a polity consists of a spectrim of ROIs of Association with The Spectrum of a Polity’s Capital whether:

|Capital|: Territorial(Space), Social(people), Economic(trade), Political(influence), Institutional(Insurance), Military(insurers).

GIVEN;
One can be insured or uninsured by the insurers of a polity because:

|Entry|: One is Born Into (dependent) > Mature Into (independent) > Outsider Immigrate into (potential independent) > or Outsider Captured Into(dependent to potential independent)

AND one can exit or be exited from the polity:

|Exit|:Voluntary Disassociation (exit) > Or Responsibility Status reduced > 

AND;
One’s Capacity for responsibility can be demonstrated:

|Responsibility for ROIs|: ability (maturity, mind, and body) > competency (knowledge and skill) > and willingness(choice), for insuring the ROIs of other members of the polity;

AND;
One’s Capacity for Radius(scope) of Responsibility can be demonstrated:

|Radius|: Self > Others(social) > Spouse > Dependents > Others  in Production of goods, services, information, or organization, whether private or common, and whether of materials, tools, production, business, political, regional, state, federation, geopolitical, military-militial-police.

THEREFORE;
One’s Responsibility Status as:

|Status|: Dependent > Resident(visitor) > National > Civilian > Citizen > Sovereign Responsibility Status (Class)

… must be determined by meeting criteria for the responsibility and accountability necessary for the performance of the duties of the role in the class.

AND WHEREAS;
A political decision by the insurers of successful integration of this individual into the polity by contributing on one hand and doing no harm on the other.
… (a) Politically set the terms of entry and exit, of requirements and limits on display word and deed, of costs, of insurance, and of benefits.
… (b) Politically obtain permission for entry or force of exit by those terms, whether because of political interest for a class, organizational interest in the utility of the individual, or a private interest in an individual or family.
… (c) Politically determine the Responsibility Status of the individual on the spectrum of dependent to sovereign.
… (d) Politically determine the insurer of the group or individual as either political (all), organizational (some) or individual (one).

THEREFORE;
All polities must produce and maintain a public ritual or administrative process and procedure for:
… (a) the naturalization of individuals and groups into the habits, norms, traditions, values institutions that must be achieved within a time frame that prevents them from doing any harm to any of the above, and establishes their degree of responsibility and accountability to the polity for their actions and those of any of their dependents.
… (b) the change in status and class of the individual as the individual’s ability, competency, and choice, by demonstrated behavior, whether by success or failure.
… (c) the expulsion of the individual group or class, the time frame for doing so, the force necessary to do so if any, and the restitution demanded of them for any harms done.

AND THEREFORE;
One cannot claim to exercise or apply to others demand for insurance of any natural rights without success at the process of naturalization. And outside of naturalization all natural ROIs are merely useful or not in obtaining and preserving coopreation on specifically exchanged terms.

AND THEREFORE;
One cannnot claim natural rights for any form of life or imitation of life, that cannot equally, reciprocally, exchange Natural ROIs.

AND THEREFORE;
Insurers may only insure non-human life, artificial life, imitation of life, or objects as Dependents or as Private or Common Demonstrated Interests, determined by utility or preference – and if for no other reason than the aesthetic in the positive, or in the negative that people who do not insured such life and objects are not those we wish among us in our polity because such behavior poses the risk such behavior will be repeated by application harmfully elsewhere.

1.3 – DURING INCLUSION (IN THE POLITY(INGROUP))

Once Naturalized (Included) into the polity, every insurer guarrantees that he reciprocally insures the rights, obglibations, and inalienations of every other insurer and his or her dependents, whether those RIOs are natural or contractual.

NATURAL, NEGATIVE, RIGHTS, OBLIGATIONS, INALIENATIONS AND CONTRACTUAL POSITIVE RIGHTS OBLIGTIONS AND INALIENATIONS
( … )

( … link these … , turn the list in to dependent sentence form in hierarchy )

1.3.1 – INSURANCE (DUTIES, OBLIGATIONS)

WHEREAS;
All political organization, and as such, all governance, consists of reciprocal insurance, by the insurers of the polity, of the all capital of the polity, as in all demonstrated interests of the polity:

|Capital|: natural, cooperative, obtained, several, shareholder, title, common, formal, informal, and future.

IN THE CONTEXT of all markets in the polity:

|Markets😐 association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities, and war.

WHERE Insurance is produced by:

|Insurance|: display, behavior, speech, physical action, force, court, political action, organized violence, or war.

WHERE all rights, obligations, and inalienations, consist of criteria for insurance of all capital of the polity. All rights consist of either negative rights, obligations, and inalienations applicable to all whether Insurer or Dependent, or of positive rights obligations and alienations applicable to those Insurers with the demonstrated ability, competency, and will to exercise them.

AND WHERE;
Natural, Negative Rights Obligations and Inalienations (ROIs) include:

|Natural ROIs|: Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, and Due Process.

AND WHERE;
Contractual Positive Rights Obligations and Inalienations (ROIs) include:

|Contractual ROIs|: Legislation, Regulation, and Contract

AND WHERE; 
The all such Insurance of Natural and Contractual Rights, Obligations, Inalienations and Due process constrains all actors to Reciprocity.

WHERE;
1.3.2 – RECIPROCITY

Reciprocity consists of the via-negativa elimination of incentives to avoid cooperation, to boycott, to retaliate, and to engage in retaliation cycles, whether by interpersonal personal social, economic, political, military, and strategic, by evasion or boycott, undermining or sedition, and theft, harm, or war.

Reason for Cooperation

Cooperation requires a coincidence of wants that can be voluntarily satisfied by the actions of both parties.

Benefits of Cooperation

Cooperation provides a disproportionate return on time and effort that is not achievable by an individual alone. The benefits of cooperation scale from the individual to the group to very large groups. These benefits are dute to division of labor (concentration of time), division of knowledge (concentration of time), reduction or elimination of switching costs (concentration of time), reduction or elimination of transaction costs (concentration of time), and division of and reduction of responsibility (risk). The result is a non linear increase in returns on cooperation, and an additinoal decrease in overall costs, and an additional increase in overall returns of roughly twenty percent, with every doubling of the number of people cooperating. This concentration of productivity in time is the reason for the value of cooperation, and why voluntary cooperation determines the condition of a people.

  1. Division of Labor,
  2. Division of Knowledge,
  3. Reduction of Switching Costs,
  4. Reduction of Transaction Costs, 
  5. Division of and Reduction of Responsibility (Risk)

Logic of Cooperation

The logic of cooperation consists of only three choices, within those choices, and the time duration of that choice:

  1. Conflict: Extermination(Permanent) > Predation(Opportunistic) > Parasitism(Continous)
  2. … Avoidance: Boycott(Permanent) > Evasion(Opportunistic) > Avoidance(Continuous)  
  3. … … Cooperation: Exchange (Opportunistic) > Contract(Temporary) > Duty(Continuous)

Criteria for Cooperation

The criteria for cooperation is the reduction of risk sufficient to justify the returns, where the lower the risk of cooperation the more frequent the cooperation the lower the costs of cooperation and the greater the returns on cooperation. (Note that this is a via-negativa explanation of cooperation.)

  1. Absence of disincentive to cooperation, by the absence of the spectrum of conflict (risk)
  2. Presence of opportunity for increasing demonstrated interests (capital increases reduce risk over time (create benefits in time))
  3. Presence of the conditions for the reduction or elimination of risk (reciprocity).

Committment to Cooperation

This sequence consists of the process of increasing commitment and specificity:

|Specificity|: cooperation > agreement > consent

It starts with a general intention to work together (cooperation), becomes more specific with a mutual understanding about what that work will involve (agreement), and culminates in a voluntary and informed decision to proceed with the agreed-upon action (consent).

The Dimensions of Reciprocity:

Reciprocity requires limiting our display, word, and deed to:
… Productive and;
… Fully informed (truthful and complete);
… … Free of Hazards (Baitings into Hazard)
… … … and Regardless of cost;
… Voluntary(and Subjective) Transfer (or exchange);
… … of Demonstrated (and objective) Interests… … … … Free of Imposition of costs… … … … Upon the Demonstrated Interests of Others;
… … … … … Either Directly or indirectly by Externality
… Within the limit of possible due diligence (by the actors); (part of what the law achieves is a collection of due diligences within a domain).
… Within the limit of incentive for in-group defection (proportionality);
… Within The Limit of the Utility of Future Cooperation with outgroups;
… And liable and warrantied,
… … within the limits of restitutability;
… Eliminating the incentive of retaliation and retaliation cycles,
… And imposition of costs upon the commons of trust by which all ingroup cooperate;
… Leaving only the knowledge and incentive to cooperate, and gain the continous benefits of continued cooperation.
… (Velocity of cooperation, prosperity from velocity)

WHERE
Display Word Deed Consists of:
Any means by which information can be produced and transferred, or unproduced and witheld:
… Display: passive observable information or behavior, signaled or unsignaled
… Word: active sounds, or words, stated or unstated
… Deed: actions or inactions
Or any combination thereof: Such as Writing (display and word), Flag Waving (display and deed), Acting in a Play(word and deed).

AND;
Productive (Gain, Beneficial, Not a Loss) Consists of:Any action, transfer, or exchange causes all parties increase the inventory of their demonstrated interests, and no party experiences a net loss in demonstrated interests.

AND;
Fully Informed (Not under-informed) Consists of:
Exhaustively informed (complete), by truthful (testimonial) speech, within the limits of possible due diligence.

AND;
Free of Baitings into Hazard Consists of:
Seduction, enticement, baiting, or entrapment into an asymmetric risk, where one benefits from other’s bearing of risk, cost, or harm and takes advantage of human tendency to seek gains now and minimize incremental risks over time. Especially when Advertising, Gambling, Usury, Prostitution, Drugs, and deceptive, false, or impossible political, religious, pseudoscientific, and promises are the most common moral hazards.

Note: Disambiguation: Hazard (risk), Hazarding (the act by it’s nature), and Baiting into Hazard(unintuitive that the act is a hazard due to ignorance, possibility, or probability.).  limit risky exchanges to people who fully understand the risks, and are capable of managing regulating avoiding them, especially over time.

AND;
Regardless of Cost (to what and whom) Consists of:
The requirement to bear these costs and the costs of warranty and insuring them regardless of emotional, psychological, physical, material, costs to your demonstrated interests and the demonstrated interests of others by externality.  

AND;
Voluntary Transfer (Not involuntary) Consists of:
The disposition (use, release, consumption, destruction) of a demonstrated interest, knowingly, willingly, by choice, and free of coercion to do so, in exchange for a subjective or objective benefit or gain.

AND;
Demonstrated interests Consists of:
An investment by action or forgoing of action, in a monopoly, proportional, or partial control of, or benefit from, any form of capital (resource) whether personal, familial, kin, kith, associative, cooperative, material, behavioral, informational, informal or formal, existential or opportunistic, which humans demonstrate they desire to save, use, transform, trade, consume, or destroy.

AND:
Externality Consists of:
Any side effect or consequence of an display word or deed that affects the demonstrated interests of other parties involved in the action.

AND;
Due Diligence Consists of:
The care that a reasonable person, given the limits of his abilities, exercises to avoid the imposition of costs on the demonstrated interests of others by a comprehensive, systematic, and investigative process undertaken to assess and evaluate the potential risks, rewards, and opportunities associated the action or actions – thereby permitting truthful warranty, and even if requiring restitution (Tort), eliminating incentive for retaliation and punishment (crime) in the case of any undesired outcome.

AND;
Ingroup, Outgroup Consists of:
The ingroup refers to those members of the polity that are insured by the insurers of the polity vs the outgroup refers to those that are not insured by the insurers of those members of the polity, where the polity is defined by the insurers and insured.

AND;
Warrantied Consists of:
Liability for restitution (repair, replacement, compensation), punishment, and prevention should the transfer result in imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others internal or external to the transfer because of a failure to meet the terms of Reciprocity.

AND;
Limit Of Resitutability Consists of:
One cannot warranty the restitutability when restitution is either impossible or beyond one’s means, without including an additional insurer external to the transfer who will provide restitution in the event of conflict. As such one is limited to actions transfers and exchanges that are within his limits of resitution.
(“Don’t write a check your ass can’t cash”, “Can you pay for that? Then don’t touch it”)

AND;
Retaliation and retaliation cycles Consists of:
Imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of another or others as a response to an imposition of costs on one’s demonstrated interests, and most often occurs when one individual or group seeks to punish or dissuade another individual or group from imposition of costs upon their demonstrated interests. 

AND;
Commons of Trust Consists of:
The informal capital consisting of the expectation that all other parties in the polity will insure the sovereignty of every other party’s demonstrated interests, and one another’s reciprocity in display word and deed, thereby incrementally reducing all risk, increasing the complexity, scale and rate of cooperative, innovative, adaptive, and evolutionary coooperation, maximizing the prosperity of all members of the polity. This is the most costly capital to produce requiring the most diligence, but having the highest returns of all.

OR;
Combinations thereof:

Such as Productive AND Voluntary:
Productive and Voluntary is easiest to explain by the case of blackmail that may include a voluntary exchange but represents a net loss of demonstrated interest capital by the blackmailed. If we include the female means of antisocial behavior, in addition to the male then blackmail is also involuntary as well as unproductive. Blackmail forces a cost of defense, violating the principle of insurance of the demonstrated intersets of others. a) must not violate the principle of reciprocal insurance of demonstrated interests. b) must not impose a cost on the demonstrated interests of another or others c) must not force an exchange by the force of a threat against the demonstrated interest of another or others. Conversely, ‘we don’t need your approval to increase your capital demonstrated interests’ because that’s how we create value (capital) in the commons by so much indirection. (To what ends, to what capital, over what time scale?) 

THEREFORE;
Inalienability of Responsibility: And in summary, there are no conditions under which one can avoid responsibility for the imposition of costs.

AND;
1.3.3 – TRUTH (RECIPROCITY IN WORD)
WHERE;

Fully Informed, Complete, Truthful Speech Consists In:

Testimony that Satisfies Demand for Infallibility in the context in question, including, liability given the number of people and severity of the imposition of costs on their demonstrated interests as a consequences of failure.

|Tests of Truth|: Sufficiency of Testifiability vs Decidability vs Liability vs Population vs Severity vs Risk Against The Spectrum of Irreciprocities.

AND 
1.3.3.1 – DECIDABILITY
WHERE Decidability consists in:

  • Decidability is a criterion used to evaluate whether a statement can be tested and resolved as true or false.
  • While Truth is a criterion used to evaluate whether a statement is testifiable in all dimensions humans are capable of testifying to.
  • And Liability is the criterion used to determine whether a satement can satisfy the demand for infallibilty in the context in question,
  • Determined by the number of people dependent upon it,
  • and the severity of the effect on their demonstrated interests.

AND

Decidability requires bottom up survival from falsification by the possibility of construction from first principles, and truthfulness requires top down survival from falsification by tests of consistency, correspondence, and coherence with observables. And decidable truth consists of surviving both the bottom up and top down attempts at falsification. (This is also the difference between computation and mathematics, as well as operationalism and verbal logic of sets.)

THEREFORE;

|Decidability| Decidable(computable) < Discretionary(Reasonableness) < Choice(preference, presumed good) < Random Selection (undecidable) < In-actionable < Incoherent

THEREFORE;

Tests of Decidability by Decidable Truth,

REQUIRES

Tests of the Testifiability of Testimonial Truth (Truthfulness).

WHERE;

Tests of Decidability Consists In:

  1. In the REVERSE: a question (statement) is DECIDABLE if an algorithm (set of operations) exists within the limits of the system (rules, axioms, theories) that can produce a decision (choice). In other words, if information sufficient for the decision is present (ie: is decidable) within the system(ie: grammar) in the absence of appeal (default to) intuition.
  2. In the OBVERSE: Instead, we should determine if there is a means of choosing without the need for additional information supplied from outside the system (ie: not discretionary).

Or;
If DISCRETION, by appeal to (default to) intuition or preference, is necessary then the question is undecidable, and if discretion is unnecessary, a proposition is decidable. This separates reasoning (in the narrow sense) from calculation (in the wider sense) from computation (algorithm).

AND WHERE;
The Sufficiency of Decidability consists in the Spectrum of Demand for Infallibility of Decidability, Consists of:

|Sufficiency of Decidability|: Intelligible > Reasonable > Actionable > Ethical and Moral > Normative > Judicial > Scientific > Logical > Tautological.

BEFORE
Me:

  • Intelligible: (Observe) Decidable enough to imagine a conceptual relationship
  • Reasonable: (Orient) Decidable enough for me to feel confident that my decision will satisfy my needs, and is not a waste of time, energy, resources.
  • Actionable: (Decide)Decidable enough for me to take actions given time, effort, knowledge, resources.

    DURING (Action)
    Others:

  • Ethical and Moral: Decidable enough for me to not impose risk or costs upon the interests of others, or cause others to retaliate against me, if they have knowledge of and transparency into my actions.
  • Normative: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values.
  • Judicial: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different knowledge, comprehension and values.
  • AFTER (Next ‘Before’ condition)
    Informational (Public Speech)
  •  
  • Scientific: Decidable regardless of all opinions or perspectives (True)
  • Logical: Decidable out of physical or logical necessity
  • Tautological: Decidedly identical in properties (referents) if not references (terms). So to borrow the one of many terms from Economics, we can see in this series (list) a market demand for increasingly infallible decidability.

AND;

1.3.3.2 – TESTIFIABILITY
WHERE; 
GIVEN;
the Human Faculties that limit testifiability:

|Human Faculties|: Sense > Perception > Auto Association > Prediction > Imagination >  Attention > Comparison > Reason > Seelction

  1. Sense (stimuli)
    … … Perception (composition)
    … … … Auto-Association
    … … … … Imagination Facility (prediction)
    … … … … … Attention
  2. Logic Facility (constant relations)
    … … Comparison (competition)
    … … … Reason Facility (wayfinding, permutation)
    … … … … Selection (decision, choice)
  3. Grammar facility (statements)
    … … Episode Formation (organization)
    … … … Disambiguation (indexing)
    … … … … Wayfinding (navigation)
    … … … … … Search For Agreement(Cooperation) (understanding, agreement – or not)

AND;
Given the human grammatical facility: 

The Human Grammatical Facility consists of the evolution of human navigational way-finding between locations, places, spaces, and objects, then into human memory of and the ability to manipulate states of spaces, objects, and people from one state to another, then into description of episodes (contexts), actors(people, objects, processes) in states, and the operations (processes, actions) that change states, then into new episodes (states) by the cognitive process of wayfinding: by “continous recursive disambiguation” of ambiguity into an unambiguous episode (context) that others can agree with(understand, true, cooperate) or disagree with (fail to undrstand, false, not cooperate.)

  1. Grammar facility (statements)
    … … Paradigms (‘metaphysics’, ‘dimensions’, ‘episodes’)
    … … Vocabulary
    … … … Sounds
    … … … Signs (acts, actions)
    … … … Marks (records)
    … … … … accidental
    … … … … intentional
    … … … … … Mark
    … … … … … Symbol
    … … … … … … Glyph
    … … … … … Pictogram
    … … … … … Picture
    … … … … … Picture Series
    … … … … … Animation
  2. And capacity for logical:
    … imprecision
    … inflation
    … conflation
    … failure of disambiguation
  3. And therefore capacity for (precision)
    … Measurements
    … Testimonal Langauge
    … Persuasive Langauge
    … Narrative Language
    … Ordinary Language
    … Idiomatic Language
    … Fictional Language
    … Fraudulent Language
    … Denial, Reversal, Projection and Reflection

THEREBY;
Producing the Spectrum of Human Communication Facilities

WHERE GIVEN;

The construction of communication:

|Communication|: Human Senses > Human Embodiment > Human Perception > Human Memory > Human Spatial-Temporal Organizational Facility > Human Wayfinding Facility > Human Grammatical Facility > Permissible Dimensions > Resulting Paradigms > Measurements(vocabulary) > Names(Nouns) > State Changes(Verbs) > Agreements(Yes/No,True/False,Comprehensible/Not) > Recursion(Combination) > Transactions (Events) > Ledgers (Episodes) > Journals(Narratives). 

WHERE;

Dimensions

What dimensions of measurement are permissible when attempting to measure some context, where that context is a subset of experience?
(Note that there are a large number but limited number of dimensions percievable by man, and most dimensions consist of sets of dimensions for the purpose of disambiguation.) 

Paradigms

These dimensions of measurement produce a paradigm or set of dimensions that limit the information we can include and consider in any ‘calculation’ (in the loosest sense). This assists us in disambiguation of experience into increasingly precise measurements.

Vocabulary

Vocabulary consists of measurements organized into scales that describe a dimension within the paradigm. This assists us in disambiguation of experience into even more precise measurements.

Nouns(Names of States in time)

Nouns(general) and Adjectives(precision) consists of names of states in time.

Verbs

Verbs(general) and Adverbs(Precision) consist of Names of Transitions(abstract) or Operations(actions) over time.

Agreements

Agreements consist of Tests of Equality between the communication used by the author, and understanding produced in the audience. (Including the self.)

THEREFORE;
RESULTING IN:

The “Spectrum of Grammars (rules) of continous recursive disambiguation within a paradigm” for the purpose of communicating measurements within this paradim such that they are sufficiently unambiguous for communication, understanding, and agreement or not. In other words, all langauge consists of measurements of varying degrees of precision to imprecision to deception.

  1. Communication Facility (“Language”)
    … Measurements
    … … .Formal Science
    … … … Logics (deflationary Grammars)
    … … … Mathematics
    … … … Algorithms
    … … Physical Sciences
    … … … Physics
    … … … Chemistry
    … … … Biology
    … … … Sentience (Consciousness)
    … … Behavioral Sciences
    … … … Metaphysics (Language)
    … … … Psychology
    … … … Sociology
    … Disciplines (Applied)
    … … … Medicine (Repair and Maintenance)
    … … … Engineering (Transformation)
    … … … Accounting, Finance, Economics (Measurement)
    … … … Economics (Cooperation)
    … … … History (Categorization and Summation)
    … … … Law (Dispute Resolution)
    … Communication
    … … Testimony (warrantied by due diligence
    … … Rhetorics (argumentative, persuasive Grammars)
    … … Written (Formal) Language
    … … ORDINARY LANGUAGE (Informal, colloquial, and Idiomatic)
    … … Narrative (description)
    … Education
    … … Narrations (inflationary Grammars)
    … … Storytelling (loading, framing)
    … Deceits
    … … Fictionalism
    … … … Pseudoscience -> Magic (including math)
    … … … Idealism-> Surrealism, and
    … … … Supernaturalism->Occult
    … … Obscurantism (Obscuring, Overloading)
    … … … Misdirection (Deceit)
    … … … Propaganda
    … … … Disinformation
    … … … Social Construction
    … … Fraud (for gain)
    … … Undermining
    … … Harm (Evil, for harm regardless of gain)

AND;
WHERE;

The Grammar of Testifiable Speech Consists in the 

  1. Fully expanded Complete Sentences
  2. Consisting of all actors, actions, and consequences of change in state
  3. From an observer’s point of view (first person)
  4. In promissory form
    … Stated or Implied beginning with “I promise that …”
  5. In operational vocabulary (as actions)
  6. In testimonial form 
    … where all descriptions are observable and testifiable by the testifier (first person) (Not reading minds, etc.)
  7. Absent the verb to-be (is, are, was, were…)
    … Absent ambiguity, conflation, inflation, loading, framing by removing the copula, and therefor requiring explicity description of means of existence, unless expressing the continuous tense. (such as  standing, speaking, digging, visiting).
  8. And where any assumption you made or make is declared as such.
  9. Including all changes in state
  10. Producing a series of testable transactions.

AND;
Where Grammatical Testifiability consists of:

Expanding any ordinary language, from ideomatic to casual, to formal, to formal written, into grammatically testifiable form, where in can then be falsified as surviving Grammatical Testifiability or not. 

As such one need not necessarily speak in Grammatically Testifable form, but that one’s testimony must survive Grammatical Testifiabiilty.

AND;
Where the Criteria for Testifiable Speech Consists in:

Coherence Across the Dimensions Testifiable by Man, in The Series:

  1. Existential > The Physical Laws of the Universe
    … 1. Realism >
    … 2. Naturalism >
  2. Possible > The Formal Laws of the Universe
    … 7. Operational – Demonstrable Sequence >
    … 8. Empirical – Externally Correspondent >
    … 9. Logical – Internally Consistent >
    … 10. Unambiguous – categorical identity >
  3. Rational > Behavioral (Natural) Laws of the Universe
    … 10. Rational Choice – Demonstrated Preference >
    … … 11. Incentives – Demonstrated Interest >
    … … … 12. Body, Mind, Memory, Effort, Time
    … … … 13. Mates, Offspring, Kin
    … … … 14. Status, Reputation, Kith
    … … … 15. Several Interests (in many forms)
    … … … 16. Common Interests (in many forms)
    … 17. Reciprocal >
    … … 18. Productive (reciprocal increase in capital)
    … … 19. Exhaustively Informed (due diligence gainst deceit)
    … … 20. Voluntary Transfer >
    … … 20. Free of Negative Externality >
    … 21. Organizable >
    … … 22. Power Distribution of Law >
    … … 23. Pareto Distribution of Assets >
    … … 24. Nash Distribution of Rewards >
  4. Survivable > Evolutionary Laws of the Universe 
    … 25. Prevents Regression to the Mean (loss of biological capital)
    … 25. Preserves Natural Selection (selection by merit)
    … 27. Increases Adaptivity (biological capital)
  5. Complete >
    … 26. Limits, Completeness, Full Accounting,
    … 27. Consistency, Coherence, Parsimony
  6. Competitive – in the market for theories
    … 29. Sufficient – Satisfies the Demand For Infallibility
    … 30. Parsimony – In competition with other testimonies
  7. Warrantable >
    … 32. (i)as having performed due diligence in the above dimensions;
    … 33. (ii)where due diligence is sufficient to satisfy the demand for infallibility;
    … 34. (iii)and where one entertains no risk that one cannot perform restitution for.

AND;
1.3.3.3 –  EPISTEMOLOGY
WHERE;
The confidence in our knowledge is produced by the epistemology life cycle consists of a series of recursive steps:

|Knowledge, Epistemic Process|: Problem, Question, Experience  -> Observation -> [stage: hypothesis, theory, establsihed theory, law] -> Falsification -> and either Fail and Repeat, Restart or -> Increase Falsification, Repeat.

AND
WHERE;
the epistemic process requires;

|Epistemology|: Fact > Theory > Law

  1. A Fact consists in a repeatable test producing a repeatable observation, recorded as a commensurable(standard) measurement, by instrumentation, thereby limiting human bias and error, within the context a hypothesis or theory.
  2. A Theory consists of an explanation for cause and effect, and a logic, formula or measurement that describes the state, transformation, or states, that has been tested in the market for applied theories and so far survived.
  3. A Law consists of the description of the theory in formula form, whether logical, ordinal, or mathematical and cardinal, that describes a irreducible first principle consistent with all observables.

AND
WHERE;
The epistemic process (cycle) consists in; A Sequence of disambiguation by cycles of:

|Disambiguation Cycle|: Problem -> Theory -> Test

Because all new knowledge consists of the discovery of wayfinding our way to a solution using the human wayfinding facility applied to that faculty we call reason.

And the full epistemic cycle of continuous recursive disambiguation using the disambiguation cycle consists of:

|Epistemic Cycle|: Problem > Free Association > Hypothesis > Working Theory > Settled Theory > Law > Metaphysical Presumption.

WHERE;

1) Free association: results from Observation (Experience).
2) Hypothesis: results from The Test of Reasonableness (Mental test)
… Reasonable: wiIthin the limits of your ability and knowledge, including whith knowledge you can obtain without attempting an experiment.
3) Working Theory: results from Performing Due Diligence (Existential test)
… A Physical Test: within the limits of your ability to perform and measure a a test against the real world.
4) Scientific, Settled, or Established Theory: results from the test of Survival in the market for application (market test)
… An Applied Test: within the limits of the market for the application of the theory.
5) Law if Mathematical or First Principle if not mathematical (Survival): results from Testing the Exhaustion of Falsification: Reduced to Irreducible first cause (First Principle)
… A Surival Test: A exhaustively tested irreducible description for which the market for application has eliminated all known means of falsification.
6) Habituation into metaphysical presumptions: results from Survival in the market for Convention.
… Survival by integration into the presumptions (metaphysics) of the population as a general rule or rule of thumb.
7) Repeating this cycle: results from Falsification and reformation (re-falsification) by the failure of any step in this cycle.
… When a new application has been discovered that falsifies the degree of precision of the theory, established theory, or law, requring alteration of the law to address the newly required degree of precision.

Note: while the market for hypotheses produces majority falsehood, the general trend in science is not necessarily that surviving theories are falsified, but that they discover a demand for increase in precision. 

AND
1.3.3.4 – TESTIFIABLE TRUTH
WHERE;
Truth consists of the series:

|Truth|: Treason > Sedition > Fraud > Deceit > Dishonesty > Incaution > Honesty > Reasonableness > Truthfulness > Testifiable Truth > Decidable Truth > Ideal Truth > Analytic Truth > Tautological Truth.

  1. Tautological Truth: That testimony you give when promising the equality of two statements using different terms: A circular definition, a statement of equality or a statement of identity.
  2. Analytic Truth: The testimony you give promising the internal consistency of one or more statements used in the construction of a proof in an axiomatic(declarative) system. (a Logical Truth).
  3. Ideal Truth: That testimony (description) you would give, if your knowledge (information) was complete, your language was sufficient, stated without error, cleansed of bias, and absent deceit, within the scope of precision limited to the context of the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possessed of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony. (Ideal Truth = Perfect Parsimony.  The Completely disambiguated description constructed exclusively from first prinicples. We tend only to know reductio ideal truths.)
  4. Decidable Truth: Truthtfulness that satisfies the demand for infallibility in the context inquestion. (See Decidability below.)
  5. Testifiable Truth: That testimony you give that survives the tests of possibility of testifiabiilty in the dimensions it is possible for humans to testify to: realism, naturalism, identity(unambiguity), logical consistency, operational possibility, observable external correspondence, rational choice within the limits of bounded rationality, reciprocal rational choice, complete and fully accounted within stated limits, and within the limits of restitutability.
  6. Truthfulness: High Due Diligence: A Performative Truth: that testimony (description) you give if your knowledge (information) is incomplete, your language is insufficient, you have performed due diligence in the elimination of error, imaginary content, wishful thinking, bias, fictionalism, and deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and which you warranty to be so; and the promise that another possessed of the knowledge, performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
    1. Hypothesis (reasoning)
    2. Theory (empirical testing)
    3. Survival (survived empirical testing in the market)
  7. Reasonableness: Medium Due Diligence: that testimony (description) you give, as justification for your reporting of your belief, justification, preference, coice, or actions with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
  8. Honesty: Low Due Diligence: that testimony (description) you give with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
  9. Incaution: No due diligence. That explanation you would give without self regulation self auditing and not compensating for human tendency to ‘fill in’ by assumption and prediction, loading nad framing.
  10. Dishonesty: Evading any due diligence: That explanation you would give with knowledge that your explanation is incomplete, biased, loaded, framed, conflated, inflated, and niether testimony nor testifiable.
  11. Deceit: That explanation you would give with the intent to mislead away from the truth, that is neither testimony nor tesitifiable, nor even excusable as the imprecision of ordinary language, or plausible deniability given our tendency to bias.
  12. Fraud: That explanation you would give with the intent to directly defraud, that is not testimony, testifiable, excusable, or plausible, because of the motive of self interest in the involuntary transfer of a private, semi-private, or institutional demonstrated interest from another or others to you, or you and yours.
  13. Sedition: That explanation you would give with intent to indirectly defraud or harm the common demonstrated interests of others, that is not testimony, testifiable, excusable, plausible because of the motive of your intersts and others interest in committing that harm.
  14. Treason: That explanation you would give with intent to indirectly defraud or harm the common demonstrated interests of others, for the benefit of others external to the polity, that is not testimony, testifiable, excusable, plausible because of the motive of your intersts and others interest in committing that harm.

THEREFORE;

In summary, Truth consists of testimony sufficient for the satisfaction of demand for decidability in the context in question, given the consequences and liability for error. And therefore truth consists of insurance of preservation of self determination by sovereignty reciprocity.

WHERE;

Honesty, due diligence, truthfulness, testifiability, decidability, liability and warranty, used together, defend against the Series of Irreciprocities within the limits of Sufficiency for Decidability (Meaning, who is to be harmed and by how much).

AND;
1.3.4 – IRRECIPROCITIES

WHERE;

Irreciprocity consists in:
Involuntary net decrease in inventory of individual and ingroup demonstrated interests by the asymmetry of knowledge, and evasion of insurance and liability,

BY TESTS OF:

DIMENSIONS OF IRRECIPROCITY:

Inventory:
… Not Productive, producing a net decrease in demonstrated interests;

Knowledge:
… Not Fully informed,
… … by witholding information,
… … … including Forseeable Risks
… … … including Baitings into Hazard (Baitings into Hazard)
… … … … thereby producing a Symmetry of knowledge;
… … … … … Regardless of cost;

Volition:
… Coercive. Not Voluntary(and Subjective) Transfer (or exchange);
… … of Demonstrated (and objective) Interests… … … Not Free of Imposition of costs… … … … Upon the Demonstrated Interests of Others;
… … … … … Either Directly or indirectly by Externality

Insurance:
… Not sufficient given the limit of possible due diligence (by the actors); 
(Reasonable is a generalization (arbitrary, suggestable average), and possible refers to a particular individual or group, therefore we use ‘possible’.)
… Not sufficient to limit the incentive for in-group defection (proportionality);
… Not within the limit of the Utility of ingroup Future Cooperation with outgroups;
… And not liable and warrantied,
… … or not within the limits of restitutability;

Therefore (Consequences of ):
… Not Eliminating the incentive of retaliation and retaliation cycles,
… … And thereby imposing costs upon the commons of trust by which all ingroup cooperate;
… … And thereby Inhibiting or preventing the knowledge and incentive to cooperate, and gain the continous benefits of continued ingroup cooperation.
… … And thereby Inhibiting the Velocity of cooperation, innovation, adaptation, and evolution, and the prosperity that results from that velocity)

For the  Purpose (Motive, Intention, intended consequence) of:

  1. Advancing an interest
  2. Obtaining an interest
  3. Preserving an interest 
  4. Transferring an interest
  5. Harming an Interest
  6. Destroying an Interest of others

By Imposition of Costs upon Demonstrated Interests:

  1. Natural Interests
  2. Acquired Interests (obtained)
  3. Common Interests

Within The Legitimacy (Insurability Under Sovereignty and Reciprocity) of those Demonstrated Interests:

NOTE: Given that demonstrating an interest includes defense of an interest, and given people retaliate against an imposition of costs upon an interest whether it’s legitimate or not, insurers will only insure legitimate demonstrated interests, and not illegitimate interests whether demonstrated or not. 

  1. Legitimate Interest (Natural)
    • Demonstrated Interests:
      • Costs born to obtain an interest without imposing a cost upon the demonstrated interests of others
  2. Illegitimate Interest (Natural)
    • Undemonstrated Interests
      • Presuming an interest without imposing a costs upon the demonstrated interests of others.
    • Unmaintained Interests
      • Failure of defense, failure of maintenance, abandonment of an interest. (“denial of usus and fructus producing abusus”)
    • CriminallyObtained Interests
      • Costs born to obtain the control of or benefits of an interest by the imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others whether legitimate or not.

Using the three means of coercion (against demonstrated interests):

  1. Physical: Force vs Defense: Resulting in Destructive (violence)
  2. Material: Remuneration vs Boycott: Resulting in Extractive (trades)
  3. Social: Insurance vs Ostracization: Resulting in Seditious (words)

Conveyed By:

  • Deception by Abuse of:
    • Ignorance
    • Error
    • Bias
    • Information
  • Threat by:
    • Undermining
    • Deprivation
    • Physical Force
  • Harm By:
    • Undermining
    • Deprivation
    • Physical Force

Using The Degree of Direction to Indirection of relation:

  1. Destructive: Physical Harm for personal gain. (Direct Personal)
  2. Unethical: Harm by abuse of interpersonal asymmetry of information. (indirect interpersonal)
  3. Immoral: Harm by abuse of total public asymmetry of information. (Indirect social)
  4. Evil: Harm by intention regardless of personal gain. (Indirect Political)

Motivated by the Spectrum of Causes of one’s behavior consists of:
(provide decidability between Cause, responsibility, blame, liability)

  1. Unpredictable
    1. Acts of Nature (Black Swans) (due diligence not possible)
    2. Accidental, despite due diligence,
  2. Incompetence (incapable of due diligence)
    1. Irresponsibility of Guardian or Ward
  3. Bias (Unconscious)
    1. A genetic predisposition to decieve, or harm
    2. Carrier of tradition and culture of deception, or harm.
    3. Carrier of and distributor of decepetion, or harm
  4. Failure of due diligence against deception, or harm (Irresponsible)
  5. Intent to decieve, or harm (Intentional)

BY MEANS OF:
The Spectrum of Actions:
Display > Word > Deed

  1. Display, Signal(information),
  2. Word(decption)
    1. Consciously and Intentionally or Unconsciously and Unintentionally Exploiting:
      1. One’s Own Knowledge, Biases, Ability
      2. Others’ Knowledge, Biases, Ability
  3. Deed(action) 

AND WHERE;
The Spectrum of Harms consists of:

1) Personal Irreciprocities

Destructive:

… (a) Murder: An unlawful killing of another human.
… (b) Harm, Damage, Imposition of a material cost an a demonstrated interest by harm to it.
… (c) Theft: Imposition of a material cost an a demonstrated interest by deprivation of it.

Unethical:

… (c) Fraud, Fraud by Omission, Fraud by Indirection, Baiting Into Hazard: Imposing a cost on a demonstrated interest by any of the means of deception – especially due to informational asymmetry.

2) Social Irreciprocities

Immoral:

… (d) Informational(normative): Undermining, Social Construction: Imposing a cost of the demonstrated interests of others, in particular on the status and reputation of others, organizations, ideas, policies, informal and formal institutions.…

… (e) Material: Free Riding, Socialization of Losses, Privatization of Commons: Obtaining benefit without compensating for the Using of, Taking the Fruits of, Abusing, Trasferrring, Harming, or Destroying a demonstrated interest of the commons, and without having been demonstrated by concurrent approval of such. 

… (f) Markets: External Labor Arbitrage, Market manipulation, Internal and External Financialism, monetary manipulation. Obtaining an irreciprocal benefit at the cost of the polity.

… (g) Institutional: Rent Seeking, Monopoly Seeking, Conspiracy, Statism/corporatism: Seeking or obtaining benefit by circumvention of reciprocity without contributing to the productivity of a transfer, by contrivance, conspiracy, corruption, or construction, either directly or indirectly, and whether private, semi private, or public.

3) Political Irreciprocities

Evil:

… (h) Institutional: Conversion (religion/ philosophy/ ideology/ pseudoscience): Sedition or Treason by conversion rather than integration, as performed by seduction, persuasion, coercion, policy, or force, used for undermining or replacing the informal institutions of the polity, whether information, habit, norm, tradition, value, informal institution, or formal institution, when such change creates greater deviation from the natural law, and the laws of nature. Especially when combined with baiting into hazard as a false promise of escaping nature’s laws.

… (i) Genetic: Displacement, Replacement (immigration/overbreeding): Sedition or Treason by encouragement, promotion, advocacy, assistance, participation, organization, or influence, in the reproduction, migration, or immigration of those who would impose costs whether temporary, sustaining, or permanent, on the demonstrated interests of the polity, especially given the disproportionate utility of ethnic homogeneity, ethic government, ethnocentirc government and policy, and other formal and informal institutions of the polity.  Or, the converse, producing the opposite by causing flight of the host ethnicity by the inability for the host to compenstae for the spectrum of costs imposed by the introduction of competing demonstrated interests, especially when those competing interests diverge further from the natural law and adaptation to the laws of nature.

… (j) Physical: War, Conquest: War consists of the sustained use of force, trade, economics, finance, policy, information, sedition, coercion, conversion, displacement, migration or immigration, designed to and used to impose costs on the demonstrated interests of the polity for the purpose of altering informal behavior or formal policy, where causing greater deviation from the natural law and laws of nature. Conquest consists of the use of the above to not only alter behavior and policy but to take control over the demonstrated interests of the people and alter their organization, purpose, and use.

THEREBY;
Harmful to the demonstrated Interests of:

  1. the commons(all) (externality)
  2. others (internality or externality), or
  3. another (internality or externality),
  4. self (via ward, or other responsible party)

THEREBY;
Producing a Conflict Relationship Between Parties:

  1. Political: Crime (on behalf of the polity)
  2. Civil: Tort (Harm on behalf of between coincidential parties)
  3. Contract: (Dispute loss on behalf of a Contractual relationship)

AND THEREBY;
Producing Harm Against The Markets for Cooperation:

  1. Survival
  2. Association
  3. Cooperation
  4. Reproduction* 
  5. Production (economy, consumption)
  6. Commons (capitalization)
  7. Polities (organization)
  8. Defense(War) (control)

AND
THEREFORE;
The Dimensions of Irreciprocity (Harm) consist of:

1. |Irreciprocity|: Inventory > Knowlege > Volition > Insurance > Consequence > Purposes > Cost > Coercions > Motivations > Actions

2. |Demonstrated Interests|: Natural(Personal) > Acquired > Common

3. |Legitimacy|: Legitimate (Demonstrated) > Illegitimate (Undemonstrated, Unmaintained, Criminally Obtained)

3. |Means of Harm:: Three Means of Coercion|: Force (Physical Harm, Theft, Extortion) > Remunitarive or Material (Frauds, Free Riding, Corruption) > Social (Underminings, Seditions, and Treasons)

4. |Conveyed By|: Deception > Threat > Harm

4. |Purpose: For Demonstrated Interests|: Advancing, Obtaining, Preserving, Transferring, Harming

5. |Motivation: to Harm|: Predisposition > Tradition and Culture > Carrier Distributor > Failure of Due Diligence > Intent

6: |Means of Action|: Display > Word > Deed

7. |Harms: Direct to Indirect|: Destructive > Unethical > Immoral > Evil

8. |Harms To|: Commons < Others < Another < Self

9. |Realtionship Between Parties| : Political Crime > Civil Tort > Contractual Dispute

10. |Scale of Harms|: Personal > Social > Political

11. |Harming Markets|: Survival > Association > Cooperation > Reproduction > Production (economy) > Commons > Polities > Defense(War)

 BY USE OF:

1.3.4.0 – Irreciprocities

  • 1.3.4.1 – “Failures of Due Diligence”
    By Means of:
    • 1.3.?.? – Ignorance
    • 1.3.?.? – Error
    • 1.3.?.? – Bias
    • 1.3.?.? – Deceit
  • 1.3.4.? – Deception
    By Use of:
    Means(Resources) > Methods(Strategy) > Techniques(Tactics > Application)
    • 1.3.4.? – Means
      • Illogical > Irrational > Immoral > Criminal > Seditious (scale inside the group) > Treasonous (scale outside the group)
    • 1.3.4.2 – Methods of Deception (categories) by breaches of
      • Logic (Intuitionistic)
      • Testifiability (Verbal)
      • Rationality (Incentives)
      • Agreement (Consent)
      • Responsibility (Morality)
      • Demonstrated Interests (Crime)
    • 1.3.4.3 Techniques of Deception
      • Due Diligence
      • Logical 
      • Rational
      • Evasion
      • Moral
      • Coherence
  • 1.3.4.4 – Threats
    • coercions
  • 1.3.4.5 – Force
    • Criminal
  • 1.3.4.6 – Seditions
    • Seditious 
  • 1.3.4.7 – Treasons
    • Treasonous

WHERE;

The Series of Irreciprocities that violate self determination by self determined means by reciprocal insurance of sovereignty in demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed consists of:

1.3.5 THE FAILURES OF DUE DILIGENCE AGAINST IRRECIPROCITY

The violation of reciprocity by one’s failure of due diligence in compensating for the human capacity and tendency for Ignorance, Error, Bias, And Deceit. Where Ignorance error bias and deciet consist of:

1.3.5.1 MEANS OF IGNORANCE 

Where one’s knowledge and faculties are insufficient, producing a false, illogical, or irreciprocal result – requiring correction.

|Ignorance|:  Inculturation(family, society) > Training(early ed) > Education(later ed) > Experience(applied)

1.3.5.2 MEANS OF ERROR

Where one’s faculties produce a false, inconsistent, or illogical, or irreciprocal result – requiring Correction

|Error|: Sensation(nervous system) > Perception (disambiguation, modeling, integration) > Auto Association (memory) > Prediction (time) > Instincts (biological valuation) > Intuition (experiential valuation) > Reasoning(wayfinding) > Rationalizing(justifying) > Logical(consistency) > Empirical(correspondence) > Calculative(permuation, inputs into outputs) > Computational(measurement, precision)

1.3.5.3 MEANS OF BIAS (failure of due diligence, error)

Where one’s intuitions and instincts are wrong(false, inapplicable) – Requiring:

|Self Regulation|: Self Reguation > Self Auditing > Self Correction.

Because of the human faculties of:

|Self or Autonomic Deception|: Embodiment > Anthropic bias > Memory bias > Predictive bias > Normalcy bias (self) > Social bias.

Our brains predict. They predict with what they can. They can only predict with whatever they know. They only know what they have learned. Brains learn sequentially in time. In utero they learn embodiment (proprioception), meaning where our body parts are in relation to one another, and how to coordinate them; how we feel in reaction to stimuli internal and external. How we percieve, imagine and think: the physical, intuitive, and cognitive. When we percieve the outside world, we have only one system of measurement: ourselves. So we predict the world from ourselves: by Anthropic bias and anthropomorphism. Our brains must predict quickly in time for our survival, so our memories evololved to seek efficiency. That efficiency is determined by our priorities, and our priorities by our various genetic and learned biases. So we predict using our memories as the system of measurement, and biasing our subsequent predictions and memories in favor of our existing memories and biases. And because our memories must generalized to be efficiently accessed and compared, this means we tend to predict those causes and effects that are consistent with our experience (normal) instead of predicting variations on normal and outliers.  And consequently we predict the minds of others are like our own – when they are not. And we predict the general thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of people in our class, society, country, civilization and outside of them in the broader world, are similar to our own – when they are not – and are often the opposite. And finally, given this sequence of accumulated biases and memories, we increase our resistance to changing our perception, understanding, prediction, and valuation of the world around us. And the reason is very simple: we can predict what we know better than what we don’t know. And we seek security in our predictions. And in many cases, we are willing to pretend imagine or engiange in magical thinking that the world is different from how it really is, in order to maintain our sense of control over our minds, ourselves, our lives, and our conditions becaue the work, uncertainty, discomfort, and fear we experience otherwise. This is the fundamental problem of neural economies.

Note: Causality: Given that the difference between our baises originates in a division of labor by time frame and number of people, or more simply, empathizing in time for a small number versus systematizing over time for a population, when negotiating terms of cooperation we’re trying to solve for an equilibrium between people who differ by solving the time series of problems given the time bias of perception of problems facing different individuals groups and factions.

The problem then, is that empathizing doesn’t scale to accumulated costs to the polity and systematizing doesn’t regard. adaptive costs to the least adaptive individuals. (women and children). In other words, regarding women and children as peers disregards them as women and children.

It’s not that systematizers are ignorant of or disregard adaptive costs, but that under normal conditions they wouldn’t force them to compete in the market (treat them as peers (or wards)).  

In most societies it’s both sexes that are anti-market. It’s the west where men take responsibility for the market and advance it. We accept that if we get out competed in the market that it’s a good for the commons, not something to retaliate against – the opposite of most societies.

Bias Versus Deceit

Bias is a property of the brain and mind, and deceit is a property of incentives and intention, even if that intention is to limit due diligence against that deception.

Given that the demarcation between bias and deceit is an internal property, we can’t observe the difference between bias and deceit in another unless there is a conflict between, or no relation between, the person’s biases and the harm done. (reasonable man nonsense) Therefore we must understand biases and eliminate them in order to determine deceit. To do so, we need motive. So motive decides. If the motive aligns with the bias. It may be bias. If not it’s deceit. And while overcoming bias is a skill, while overcoming deception is an act of will. Therefore we may choose to forgive bias in the less competent, even if not deceit.

|Biases|: Cognitive Bias(Urgency, Efficiency, Scarcity Ambiguity) > Sex Bias(origin > behavior > cooperation > acquisition > returns > reproductive causes > behavioral consequences > signals > Summary) > Scale Bias (Personality > Kinship > Capital > Class > Normative)

  1. Cognitive Bias. Our brains calculate differences – they are difference engines – so everything we experience and everything that draws our attention as a result, is biased to the similarity to and difference from our prior experiences. All biases are the result of the need for urgency in reaction, action, or decision, need for efficiency (generalization, auto associative, indexable(recoverable) of the neural economy, the ever present sarcity of the information necessary for decisions, and the ambiguity of information in the context in question given the causal density of information in the universe.

    Given that humans must make decisions in real time with limited information, there are four categories of bias: Urgency, Efficiency, Scarcity, and Ambiguity.

    1. Urgency Bias: Need To Act In Time (Insufficient information problem)
      1. Attention is biased to the most present and urgent object of our attention.
      2. Attention is biased to the most simple unambiguous properties.
      3. Attention is biased to whatever we’ve already invested effort into.
      4. Attention is biased away from whatever is irreversible and will expose us to status risk, or social risk.
    2. Efficiency Bias: Need to Remember (Selection of meaning problem)
      1. Memories are stored by novelty and emotional valence (intensity)
      2. Memories are reduced to the minimum outstanding properties for differentiation
      3. Memories are stored by generalizations for broadest association, by eliminating details.
      4. Memories are edited after the fact to assist in generalization for broadest association and utility in pursuit of wants, needs, priors.
    3. Scarcity Bias: Insufficiency of Associations (Insufficient meaning problem)
      1. We assume our thoughts, intuitions, and feelings the average – default measure bias. (generalization by projection)
      2. We assume we understand the thoughts of others more so than we do or can. (interpersonal and social empathic, sympathetic, cognitive generalization)
      3. We assume people, places, things, and events we are familiar with are more valuable or better than the unfamiliar. (Familiarity Generalization of Valence. “Novelty in identity but regularity in quality”)
      4. We substitute memories, generalizations, and stereotypes for people, places, things, and episodes when we lack information. (Recall for Generalization)
      5. We identify patterns that aren’t there in sparse information (Pattern projection for generalization) 
      6. We simplify numbers and probabilities for efficiency (Generalization by Reduction)
    4. Ambiguity Bias: Overload of Information (Inability to derive meaning problem)
      1. We identify whatever is already primed in memory (context) and most familiar. (familiarity bias)
      2. We identify and attribute value to detail that confirms our priors (familiarity bias).
      3. When we identify a novelty or change we compare it by prior contexts (generalization) rather than in isoation in its context.(Anchoring, familiarity bias)
      4. We identify novel gains (rewards) and losses (punishments), attribute higher value to these novelty, and they serve as indexes for memories.
        1. Novelties (Positive). Especially when those gains are humorous, stimulating, or anthropomorphic (surprises).
        2. Flaws (Negative). We notice and attribute higher valence to the flaws of others that we would ignore or overlook in ourselves.
  2. Sex Bias: The Sexes differ in biases:
    1. All human behaviororiginates with the demand for:
      1. acquisition (+),
      2. retention (=), and
      3. consumption (-).
    2. And the resultingbehavior is a bias toward the greatest return, at the lowest cost, in the shortest time with the lowest risk, and the greatest certainty:
      1. Returns,
      2. Cost,
      3. Time,
      4. Risk,
      5. Certainty.
    3. Cooperation is disproportionately more rewarding than non cooperation in time, and cooperation is necessary for survival over time.
    4. Acquisition with or without cooperation carries a sequence of costs and risks:
      1. Acquisitive (Productive(+)),
      2. Signaling (Reproductive)==)),
      3. Opportunity, (Cooperative(++)),
      4. Conflict(Harm(–))
    5. Sexes differ in bias for returns, because Cost, Signaling Cost, and Opportunity Cost vary between the sexes:
      1. Productive costs
      2. Reproductive costs
      3. Cooperative costs
      4. Conflict costs.
    6. The ReproductiveCause of those biases (In Time vs Over Time, Demand vs Supply):
      1. Female vs Male Role
      2. Mass vs Speed
      3. Demand vs Supply
      4. In Time vs Over Time
      5. Reproductive Value vs Reproductive Expendability
      6. Low Risk Tolerance vs High risk Tolerance
      7. Reactive (Impulsivity) vs Active (Self Regulation)
      8. Internalization vs Externalization
      9. Prey vs Predator
    7. The Behavioral consequences that result from those causes(in time vs over time, demand vs supply)
      1. Interal (offspring) vs External (environment)
      2. Small Scale vs Large Scale
      3. Hyperconsumption vs Capitalization
      4. Emotional(Experiences) vs Physical(Outcomes)
      5. Desirable(Optimistic,Preference) vs Empirical(Pessimistic,true/false)
      6. Empathizing in Time(Experiences) vs Systematizing Over Time(outcomes)
      7. Interpersonal and Social vs Political and Material
      8. Seeking status evading responsibility for commons and obtaining resources by proxy, vs seeking for status by responsibility for commons.
      9. Presumption of equality (vs distribution)
      10. Conceiving a Line (equality) by Priority of Outliers (NAXALT) or the Inverse(AXALT) vs Concieving a Distribution (Generalization)
      11. Equating and Prioritizing Approval/Disapproval over True/False vs Disambiguating and prioritizing True/False over Approval/Disapproval.
      12. Denying, Outraging, Undermining vs Proposing a Counter Argument (“GSRRM”)
      13. Oppression myth vs Conspiracy Myth
      14. Social Undermining vs Physical Harming
      15. Sedition and Treason vs Civil War and War
    8. The Signaling behavior that results is (in time vs over time):
      1. Consumption (Redistributive) vs Capitalization (Productive)
      2. Being In time vs Doing Over Time
      3. Devotion in Time vs Loyalty Over Time
        1. Offspring Responsibility vs Political Responsibiity
        2. Non Aggression(Submission) vs Non-Submission(Aggression)
        3. Virtue Signaling vs Virtue Demonstrating
        4. Conformity(equalitarian herd) vs Duty(hierarchical pack)
    9. Summarized As:
      Feminine      , prey, empathizing, in-time, hyperconsumption and status by evasion of responsibility for the common and externalization of responsibility for the common in exchange for opportunity for access to consumption by proxy.
      vs
      Masculine predator, systematizing, over time, capitalization, and status by responsibility seeking and accumulation of responsibility for the commons in exchange or access to opportunity and reproduction.
  3. Scale Biases
    1. Personality Bias (myself, demonstrated, acquisitional)
    2. Kinship Bias (family, demonstrated, defensive)
    3. Moral(Political Bias) (community, signaling but not demonstrated)
      1. Suffering, Purity, Reciprocity, Hierarchy. 
      2. Individual Empathizing
        1. Care/Harm (prey, empathizing, small scale, in time, non aggression, asking for action and resources)
        2. Fairness/Cheating
          1. Equality vs Proportionality (empathizing, systematizing, scale, meritless(child) meritocracy(adult,political))
        3. Liberty/Oppression
          1. Oppression vs Conspiracy
      3. Group Systematizing
        1. Loyalty/Betrayal
        2. Authority/Subversion
        3. Sanctity/Degradation,
    4. Capital Bias (by market value)
      1. Association
      2. Cooperation
      3. Reproduction
      4. Production
      5. Commons
      6. Polities
      7. War
    5. Class Bias (class)
      Class: What capital (responsibility) do you control and over how many generations (rotations)?
      While there is a linear relationship between Genetic > Social > Economic classes, because of genetic recombination, education, and economic outcomes, the result is a triangular relationship between Genetic, Social, and Economic classess. Which may be more easily understood as a stacked set of bars for each class. In other words there is little rotation between the classes other than temporary economic rotation largely in and out of the middle classes.
      However in the most general terms, one’s class is determined by one’s genetic capacity to carry capital responsibililty for demonstrated interests of self, family, and others. But that capacity may be put to good(producing, capitalizing) or ill(parasitic) ends. Ergo class isn’t a moral property, but a resource that can be put to moral or immoral ends.
      1. Genetic Class (low or no rotation: Including outlier Aesthetic Elites)
      2. Popular Class (high rotation)
      3. Economic Class (Medium rotation, including Private Sector Elites)
      4. Political Class (High rotation, Temporary Military and Political Elites)
      5. Social Class (Low rotation, including intergenerational families,  Occupational Elites, Nobility, Ruling Elites)
    6. Normative (civilizational,institutional Bias) (polity)
      What responsibility (defense, decidabilty) for capital are all members of the polity held to by one another, by adherence to group strategy, institutions, traditions, norms, values, and habits. And more specifically, what institutions of behavior in expression of responsibility, accountability, liability for capital do the civilization or polity enforce by interpersonal, social, political, and juridical means.
      1. Group Strategy
        1. Demographic Distribution, meaning degree of neotenic evolution and resulting ratio between classes given the responsibilities each class is capable of demonstrating.
        2. Geography especially fertility of land, waterways, and climate.
        3. Resources such as plants, animals, water, minerals.
        4. Homogeneity limits conflict and encourages prosociality where heterogeniety increase conflict and discourages prosociality – especially political prosociality.
        5. Competitors whether peers, more developed, or less, more civilizationally and ethnically different or less, determine much of our world view.
        6. Relationship between the founding aristocracy and the working classes, which can be predatory (middle east) managerial (china), responsible (europe), or almost non existent and tribal (africa).
      2. Means of Propagation of Strategy
        1. Metaphysical Presumptions about our relationship to, and the value of: one another, the sexes, families, classes, institutions, outgroups(others), nature, and the universe.
        2. Language to contain paradigm, concepts, and weights(values) of that strategy
        3. Myths to education, explain and perpetuate it by analogy 
        4. Means of argument and persuasion to enforce and defend it.
        5. Elites to specilize in it
        6. Institutions of elites to perpetuate it.
      3. Institutional (Cultural) Biases That result
        1. Geographical Biases: These biases are influenced by the geographical conditions and locations of a civilization. They can include biases related to climate, natural resources, and attitudes towards different geographical regions or environments.
        2. Historical Biases: These biases are shaped by the historical experiences and narratives of a civilization. They can include biases related to historical events, historical figures, and attitudes towards different historical periods or civilizations.
        3. Cultural Biases: biases related to language, customs, traditions, and values. These biases require defense of cultural capital, that forms a system of measurement to which all are required to conform.
        4. Societal Biases: biases that can include gender biases, age biases, and biases related to social class or caste. These biases require defense of social organzing capital: cooperation between our differences.
        5. Religious Biases: These biases are influenced by the religious beliefs and practices of a civilization. They can include biases related to religious affiliation, religious doctrines, and attitudes towards different religions or religious groups.
        6. Economic Biases: biases are influenced by the economic conditions and structures of a civilization. They can include biases related to wealth, income, occupation, and economic inequality. These biases require defense of economic merit within the limits by which economic merit creates friction between the classes harming cultural social, political, and economic capital.
        7. Political Biases: biases are shaped by the political systems, ideologies, and conflicts of a civilization. They can include biases related to political affiliation, nationalism, and attitudes towards different forms of government. These biases require defense of the capital in political institutions meaning the power structure that allows the organization of individuals, sexes, classes, elites, and institutions.

AND
1.3.5.4 MEANS OF DECEIT (DECEPTION)
WHERE;

Where one’s intentions and intuitions are irreciprocal – requiring Correction and Punishment.

Means 

|Means of Deception|:  Illogical > Irrational > Immoral > Criminal > Seditious (scale inside the group) > Treasonous (scale outside the group)

This sequence represents a progression and escalation of deceptive behaviors, starting from relatively minor infractions and moving towards more serious and harmful actions:

  1. Illogical: This is the least severe form of deception in this sequence. It involves using arguments or reasoning that doesn’t follow logical principles. 
  2. Irrational: This refers to behavior or thinking that is not based on sound reasoning or judgment. Irrational deception might involve making decisions or arguments that go against evidence or reason, often driven by emotions, biases, or misconceptions.
  3. Immoral: This level of deception involves actions that are considered wrong or unethical according to societal or individual moral standards. Immoral deception might involve lying, cheating, or other actions that intentionally harm others or violate their rights.
  4. Criminal: This refers to deception that is not only unethical but also illegal. Criminal deception involves actions that are against the law, such as fraud, theft, or other forms of dishonesty that are punishable by law.
  5. Seditious (scale inside the group): This level of deception involves actions that incite or promote rebellion against the authority, government, or established order within a group or society. Seditious deception is a serious offense as it threatens the stability and harmony of the group from within.
  6. Treasonous (scale outside the group): This is the most severe form of deception in this sequence. Treason involves betraying one’s country or group by aiding its enemies or attempting to overthrow its government. Treasonous deception is one of the most serious crimes, as it involves a betrayal of trust and can lead to significant harm to the group or society.

Where Motive for the Spectrum of Deceptions can be categorized as:

  1. White Lies: Preservation or construction of an emotional (status, relationship) debt or credit.
  2. Grey Lies: Protecting interests from liability due to accidental harm to others’ interests.
  3. Black Lies: Gaining an interest by intentional destruction or transfer of another’s interests.
  4. Red Lies: Causing harm to others’ interest for the purpose of causing harm rather than gaining interest for one’s self
AND;
Techniques OF DECEIT

I. Failure of Due Diligence (Carelessness)

Purpose 

The purpose of due-diligence is to maintain reciprocal insurance of self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity, by deliberate defense against one’s own ignorance, error, bias, and wishful thinking, where failure of due diligence violates the requirement for reciprocal insurance, and therefore one’s reciprocal insurance by othres.

Methods

  1. Ignorance and Willful Ignorance;
  2. Mistake (Oversight) and Error (Understanding, Reasoning);
  3. Bias and Wishful Thinking;

II. Logical – Breach of Logic: (How)

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of logic is to deny, obscure, interfere with,  substitute or exaggerate causal relationships, using suggestion, to replace logical inference and deduction with non-logical inference and deduction.

Methods

  1. Denial (denying): Denying Causality
  2. Inquality(lying): Creating a False Causality (additive)
  3. Redirection and Deflection (Evading): Evading Causality
  4. Reversal(Reflecting): Inverting Causality (Substituting)
  5. Omission (Withholding): Obscuring Causality (Removing)
  6. Conflation(Confusing): Conflating Causality (Mixing)
  7. Inflation(Overloading): Overloading of Causality (Diluting)

Techniques

  1. Contradiction
    1. Falsehood: False assertion (?)
    2. Denial: Contradiction of a true assertion
  2. Abuse of Category (Categorical Conflation):
    1. Reductive(-): Implies properties of members of a subcategory are properties of the whole category.
    2. Expansive(+): Implies shared properties of members of a category are an exhaustive list of shared properties of a subcategory.
    3. Conflationary(!=): Implies two categories are equivalent when properties of their members differ.
  3. Abuse of Vocabulary (Term Conflation)
    1. Dissociative(-): Use two words with the same meaning as if they have a different one
    2. Associative(!=): Uses two words with a different meaning as if they have the same one.
    3. Substitutive(+): Replaces a meaning of a commonly used (typically ambiguous) word with a different meaning to transfer connotations.
  4. Abuse of Context (Sets, Facts):
    1. Loading (emotions): Biasing emotional valence. Using phrases or words that evoke strong emotions that bias the audience.
    2. Framing (facts), Re-Framing (isn’t it all framing?)
    3. Anchoring (premises): introducing a context and then interpreting all subsequent information in relation to it. In other words, treating a concept or context as a premise rather than just another fact, weight, or concern like any other. Especially to divert priority from the original question to the anchor.
    4. Obscurantism: Withholding information Preventing correct inference.
    5. Conflating: creating ambiguity by merging or blending two or more different terms, concepts, or arguments into one, causing confusion or misunderstanding, by obscuring distinctions between them.
    6. Suggestion: Suggesting properties. Causing inference by the audience. Gesturing or stating only part of the phrase, sentence, narrative, or argument, leaving the cause or consequence to be assumed by the audience. Especially when seeking agreement without providing sufficient detail to bring to attention disagreements that would be understood otherwise.
    7. Cherry-picking: Emphasizing some properties, deemphasizing or ignoring others.
    8. Half-Truth: Emphasizing some properties and obscuring others. Where a portion of the narrative is correct but another is not. Framing by stating some properties, subtracting some properties, and adding false properties.
    9. False n-chotomy: Obscuring possible contexts. Frames the situation as if it has n solutions when it has more than n.
    10. Default option: Presents an option as the default one though it otherwise wouldn’t have been.
    11. Strawmanning: Portraying competing options as different and thus less desirable than they actually are.
  5. Abuse of Standards (Measurments):
    1. False Equivalency (claiming unequal properties) comparing two thing based on superficial similarities or shared characteristics, without taking into account their important differences. Or when two things are compared based on irrelevant factors, or when the comparison is made without considering the broader context or underlying assumptions.
    2. Double Standards: Applying different standards while claiming to use the same one.
    3. Conflating Standards: Mixing or Reversing standards as if they are one.
    4. Hypocrisy: Holding other people(s) up to a standard that one or one’s own group doesn’t demonstrate.
    5. Relativism: Measuring by multiple different subjective standards where a single objective one applies.
    6. Absolutism: Applying the same standard where it isn’t applicable.
  6. Abuse of Distributions:
    1. NAXALT: Appeals to individual outliers or exceptions in an argument about a distribution, general rule, average or median.
    2. AXALT: Appeals to distributions, general rules or subsets as if they were absolute in an argument concerning particular individuals.
    3. Optimisms or Pessimisms as Medians (outliers) (an attempt to claim an optimistic or pessimistic outlier liklihoods, probabilities or possibilities of a distribution are more common than they are.)
    4. Hyperbole (scale), Exaggeration(facts), and Dramatization(emotions) 

III. Testifiable – Breach of Testifiability

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of testifiability is to deny, evade, obscure, substitute or exaggerate one or more of the eleven dimensions necessary to test for consistency and coherence in order to demonstrate by testimony a non-false truth claim.

Techniques

  1. Realism(Empiricism): claiming any form of existence that cannot be demonstrated by observation of persistence.
  2. Naturalism: claiming any form of causeality that cannot be demonstrated by observation of change by natural observable causes.
  3. Identity: Failing to disambiguate references whether existental (noun) or performrative (verb) or indifferent (agreememt)
  4. Logical Consistency: failing to demonstrate commonality of properties between two or more dependencies.
  5. Possibility: Failing to demonstrate operational possibility – causality between states..
  6. External Correspondence: Failing to demonstrate observable existence.
  7. Rationality: Failing to demonstrate rational incentives within the limits of bounded rationality: Disconnecting actions from self-interest.
  8. Reciprocity: Failing to demonstrate reciprocal bounded rationality as a consequence of any display word or deed.
  9. Limits: failing to state the boundary condition within which any claim is demonstrable.
  10. Full Accounting: failing to account for all conditions within the boundary conditions where the claim is demonstrable.
  11. Liability: failing to account for the demand for resititution if one’s claims are false and especially if they lead to harm to others’ demonstrated intersts.

IV. Rational – Breach of Rationality

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of Rationality is to overload one or more of the human faculties necessary to for tests of  identity, consistency correspondence, rationality, morality, and coherence, using justification, evasion pretense, or in order to force a bias in reasoning.

Faculties

  1. Physical Breach (display, deprive you of information)
  2. Intuitional Breach – all deceit (vs coercion) is an attempt to overload intuition which then impedes reason, choice, and action.
    1. Perceptual 
    2. Auto Associative (suggestion, loading, framing, obscuring, confusing, overloading) (objects, spaces, places, borders, locations)
    3. Predictive (episodes)
    4. Valuative (emotional, (personal, social))
      1. Measure: acquisition, preservation, exchange, consumption
        1. Demonstrated interests
      2. Costs (greatest return in the shortest time with the least effor at the greatest certainty at the lowest risk)
    5. Attentional
  3. Rational Breach (Wayfinding) (cognitive)
    1. Overloading by introduction of appeals to Authority, Morality, Pretense of knowledge, misinformation, or disinformation to prevent rational judgement based upon the facts and the incentives.

Methods

Methods used are:

  • Justification (!=)
  • Evasion (-)
  • Pretense of Knowledge (+)

Techniques

  1. Justification 
    (in context of discussing truth, rationality, reciprocity, probability and possibility):
    1. To Authority: Claiming that the authority of a particular individual, credentials or consensus/dogma, rather than the substance of the argument has bearing on the truth. A form of substitution and distraction where the individual cannot demonstrate his claims, but claims he understands those of some authority.
    2. To Nature: claiming because something emergedn in nature it is a relevant, a constraint, applicable, or even desirable in the circumstance, and as such bearing on the truth. (Naturalistic Fallacy)
    3. To Reasonableness (limiting to interpersonal): (an attempt to appeal to reasonableness between individuals in order to ignore externalities and scale effects: evading full accounting.)
    4. To Approval or Disapproval: claiming that approval of one’s self, particular individuals or group, have bearing on truth.
    5. To Trust instead of Truth: A claim of knowledge, neutrality, advocacy and trustworthiness, credibility, or likability rather than providing evidence. 
    6. To Emotion: Appealing to empathy in time in the form of feelings, values, desires, fears, or sympathies of the audience, independent of the over-time cause, consequences, and externalities explained by the logic and evidence.
    7. To Face (Status, Reputation, Honor) A violation of reciprocity that requires truth-before-face regardless of cost to status, reputation, hiearchy, or honor, by lying to preserve status, reputation, hierarchy, or honor).
    8. To Morals, ethics or norms. Claiming morals ethics or norms have bearing on the truth, or when the question is more precise than general moral and ethical norms measure.
    9. To Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. the use of negative, vague, or false information to create feelings of fear, uncertainty, and doubt, thereby asymmetrically attributing risk to some choice or decision.
    10. To Personal effects: in context of incentives or effects on a larger group. Appealing to personal experience or empathy with others’ experience, despite the negative consequences to the broader group or society. (failure of systematizing)
    11. To Group effects: in the context of discussing actions limited to an individual or small group, claiming consequences or behavior will scale to a larger group. (Misapplication of the Kantian imperative)
  2. Evasion 
    1. Evasion of full or exhaustive accounting:
      1. Denying or obscuring costs to demonstrated interests.
      2. Denying or obscuring benefits to demonstrated interests.
      3. Denying or obscuring limits: Pretense that a short-term trend could continue while ignoring outside factors.
    2. Evading Parsimony
      1. Imparsimony: Using unnecessarily convoluted explanation where a simpler one is available.
      2. Overloading: Uses unnecessary volume, complexity and ambiguity in an argument to prevent target from modeling the proposition and testing the outcome in their minds.
    3. Evasion of Consistency
      1. Moving the Goalpost (changing requirements): changing the criteria or requirements of an argument after the initial criteria has been met or the original point has been addressed by shifting the standards or expectations.
      2. Motte and Bailey: (changing defensibility) presenting an easily defensible, but often weaker or less tenable position (the bailey), and when challenged, retreating to a more defensible, but less intuitive position (the motte).
      3. Special Pleading (victim, privilege, claiming exception to requirements.) A form of double standard, by claiming an exception for one’s position while not granting the same exception for others or opposing positions.
    4. Delay and Decieve (Wasting Time):
      1. Reversal of Responsibility: (Demanding Support) (evidence, redirection) Deception by Redirection, transferring the burden to to proof instead of falsification: asking for sources with no intention of accepting them if delivered, and most commonly without demonstrating the knowledge or competency of the subject sufficient to hold an objection.
      2. Feigning Ignorance: (Playing a Hatchling) (Denial, Evasion): Deception by feigning ignorance of widely accepted facts to force the other side of the argument to explain in detail.
      3. Sedation (by Faith Healing): delaying into hazard. Faith Healing consists of providing temporary psychological relief while allowing the cause to persist, grow, and evolve.
  3. Pretense
    1. Pretense of Knowledge (Camouflage): (knowledge). Pretending one possess knowledge, skill, experience, that one cannot demonstrate.
    2. Pretense of Character (Costuming): pretending character virtue, morality, class, or status one does not demonstrate.
    3. Pretense of Authority (Impersonation): (Credibility) Appeal to Self as Authority: Pretending one possesses achievement, credibility, mastery, license, credential, responsibiilty, insurance or liability one cannot demonstrate.

V. Moral – Breach of Responsibility

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of Responsibility is to redirect responsibility, blame, and liability to another party.

Methods

Methods used are:

  • Deflection (!=)
  • Redirection (!=)
  • Invalidation (!=)
  • Undermining (-)
  • Subversion (-)
  • Accusation (+)
  • Reputation Destruction (+)

Techniques

  1. Redirection of Responsbility: (redirection, of responsibility?):
    1. Deflection: Attempt to cause accuser and audience to think and/or talk about something irrelevant.
    2. Reflection: A form of accusation by attempting to cause the accuser to appear as the offending party in the situation in the minds of the audience.
    3. Reversal: (Reversing Responsibility): A form of accusation or jusitification, Claiming victimhood instead of accepting blame.
    4. Projection: A form of justification or accusation by attempting to claim one’s thoughts, feelings, motives, beliefs or other characteristics are or were thought by, felt by, or motivated others.
  2. Undermining (credibility, interpersonal)
    1. Ridiculing (dismissal, evasion, responsibility) redirecting the argument from the subject at hand to the individual’s character, thoughts, argument, actions or motivations, in an attempt to undermine the individual’s credibility rather than address his argument. 
    2. Shaming (accusation, social, morality) redirecting the argument from the subject at hand to the individual’s character, by accusing the individual of violating ethical or moral norms, to undermine the individuals credibility.
    3. Insulting (accusation, personal, emotional): undermining an individual’s self-esteem, dignity, reputation, or status – often with the intent to provoke anger, humiliation, or emotional distress – by offense, belittling, or disrespect usingwords, gestures, or actions. 
      AND;
    4. Psychologizing (psychological): underming by attributing one’s behavior to psychological or emotional motives rather than rational incentives given the evidence available (rational choice)
    5. Gaslighting (rational): (inequality, overloading) undermine one’s perception of reality, memory, or sanity, as accusation of irrationality.
    6. Oppression or Conspiracy Accusation (loyalty): Undermine one’s perception of reality by claiming one’s complaint about the behavior of a group or organization that’s attributable to rational incentives is intentional oppression or conspiracy instead – a misattribution by an accusation of irrationality.
      OR
      Reversal (Denying): Denying intentional oppression or conspiracy by denying the existence of rational incentives to conspire or oppress.
      BY
      Definitions: Oppression narratives tend to personalize and attribute  rational incentives to emotional or psychological motives, while Conspiracy narratives tend to politicize and attribute intention to rational practical incentives regardless of intent.
      AND;
    7. Moralizing: accusation of defection by imposing one’s own moral values, beliefs, or standards onto others as if a universal standard of measurment rather than a pragmatic bias.
    8. Outraging (emotional overloading): distraction by hyperbolic emotion as an accusation of defection by demonstrating a strong emotional reaction using anger, personal indignation, or moral indignation in response to a perceived injustice, wrongdoing, or offensive action. 
    9. Catastrophizing (consequential overloading): distraction by hyperbolic argument as a dramatic exaggeration of consequences of a behavior claiming outcomes will be worse than rationally predicted given historical evidence.
    10. Shrilling, Shrewing, Scolding (ill temper, personal, overloading discourse or argument): distraction by hyperbolic emotional disapproval and complaint (a) shrill or shrilling can be used to describe a way of arguing or criticizing that seems too forceful, passionate, agitated, loud, and outrageous (b) shrilling was a term used in anglo saxon and early english common law to refer to “gossips and shrills and shrews”, which was a crime, usually attributed to women, whose repeated behavior created social discord and ‘broke the kings peace’. (Contemporary vernacular uses the term “Karen”, disparaging a fine Danish name.) (c) Shrew or Shrewing and Scold or Scolding can be used to describe a way of undermining by ill tempered quarreling, nagging, criticizing, scolding by negative emotional loading.
    11. Shouting Down: interrupting, over-talking, or loudly disagreeing with an opponent to the point where they cannot make their point heard, or to deter them from speaking at all.
  3. Subversion (And Pretense) (personal):
    False Accusation of Disloyalty or Defection, or False Lionizing and Inclusion.
    1. Status-seeking:
      1. False admiration: Portraying a behavior as high status by portraying people who demonstrate it as admired when in reality, they aren’t.
      2. False shame: Portraying a behavior as low status by portraying people who demonstrate it as shamed when in reality, they aren’t.
    2. Morality:
      1. False virtue: Portraying an action as moral by portraying outcomes of it as good for self and ingroup when in reality, they aren’t.
      2. False vice: Portraying an action as immoral by portraying outcomes of it as bad for self and ingroup when in reality, they aren’t.
      3. Inversion: Combination of the above, portrays vices as virtues and any institutional, social and normative limits on them as unnecessary and immoral oppression.
      4. False martyrdom: Portrays suffering or dying of an individual or a group as due to some moral cause or acting against oppression while omitting bad behavior of the individual or group that merited retaliation.
    3. Loyalty:
      1. False ingroup: Portrays members of a different group as being part of the ingroup by falsely portraying it having shared values and interests rather than distinct, competing or outright hostile ones that they actually do.
      2. False outgroup: Portrays some members of an ingroup as having values and interests competing or hostile to the rest of the group which they actually don’t have.
      3. False enemy: Portrays an outgroup as having competing or hostile values and interests when in reality, it is neutral or may even be open to cooperation.
  4. Accusation
    1. Credibility Accusation (Ad Hominem): attacking the opponent’s character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their credibility.
    2. False Accusation: A combination of ad hominem where on attacks the opponent’s character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument, and Straw Manning where one intentionally misrepresents their opponent’s argument by exaggerating, misquoting, or completely fabricating their opponent’s argument. 
    3. Rolling False Accusation (change accusation, (Scott Adams’) ): continuously making new accusations or allegations without adequately addressing or substantiating the previous ones especially as each previous accusation is determined as false.
  5. Reputation Destruction (Social and Economic Scale)
    1. Interpersonal Gossiping (small scale, interpersonal): spreading private or sensitive information or rumors about someone or some group in order to influence others’ opinions or perceptions by undermining the their credibility or authority, or to shift the focus of the argument away from the main issues being discussed.
    2. Social Rallying (medium scale, social): compensating for one’s inability to win a debate or argument by calling otehrs to participate, thereby creating an appeal to popularity at best, and to overwhelm or shout down one’s ability to respond, or to threaten or produce violence.
    3. Social Undermining (large scale, social): activist interference in reputation in familial, social, economic, and political orders, causing harm to one’s opportunities for cooperation.
    4. Economic Cancelling (large scale social and economic): activist intererence that is organized to produce ostracization or boycott by organizations and institutions, particularly employment, banking and finance, and other necessary services, causing economic harm to the individual or group.

VI. Breach of Agreement/Disagreement (Consentually)

Purpose

The purpose of breaching an agreement, promise, or contract, is to gain Benefit or Advantage: at the other, or another party’s expense. Sometimes, a party might breach an agreement if they believe that doing so will provide them with a greater benefit or advantage than fulfilling the agreement would. This could involve pursuing a more lucrative opportunity, avoiding an earned loss, or capturing a unearned gain.

  1. Personal Gain: Breaching an agreement to pursue a more lucrative opportunity or to gain some form of personal advantage. 
  2. Harm or Sabotage: Breaching an agreement with the specific intent of causing harm to the other party. 
  3. Manipulation or Coercion: Breaching an agreement as a way to manipulate or coerce the other party into doing something. 
  4. Fraud: Entering into an agreement with no intention of fulfilling their obligations, but rather with the intent to defraud the other party. 

Method

Attacking the implied reciprocity of the terms of the agreement, promise, or contract – without compensating the other party for the losses encurred.

Techniques

  1. Denial: The party might deny that a breach occurred, or they might deny that the agreement was valid to begin with.
  2. Misrepresentation: The party might misrepresent the facts or circumstances surrounding the agreement or the breach. 
  3. Loopholes: Trying to exploit loopholes in the agreement or in the law to justify their breach. 
  4. Deflection: Shifting the blame onto the other party, or they might try to distract from the breach by bringing up unrelated issues. 
  5. Necessity: Necessity due to circumstances beyond their control. 
  6. Superior Opportunity: Arguing that they had a superior opportunity that they couldn’t forgo.

VII. Criminal – Breach of Demonstrated Interests

Purpose

The purpose of breaches of Demonstrated Interests is to obtain, transfer or harm the demonstrated interests of others either for direct gain by the obtaining interests, or for indirect gain by the imposition of harms and losses on the others’ interests.

Methods

  1. Material or Criminal breach (Personal)
  2. Moral or Ethical breach (Social)
  3. Loyalty, Sedition or Treason Breach (Political)
  4. Seduction
    1. False Promise
    2. Baiting Into Hazard
    3. Forgery and Fraud 
  5. Coercion

VIII. Social Sedition (Undermining, Soft Sedition)- Scaling Ingroup (political scale, institutional)

Purpose

The purpose of sedition againsts the Demonstrated Interests of others is to gain an indirect relative interest by imposting a cost on the informal or formal demonstrated interests of others: meaning informational, social and in particular, political commons. (Hayekian capital)

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Methods

Warfare gainst informal and formal capital consists of undermining the trust in those institutions whether informational, social, or political, necessary by undermining the metaphysical presumptions that those institutions depende upon, thereby destroying the generations centuries and milennia that it has taken to develop that trust in those institutions – whenever those institutions are consistent with and correspond to the natural law of self determination by self determined means and consequent requiresments of insurance of sovereignty and reciprocity. 

In those cases where one undermines those institutions that are not consistent with and correspondent to that natural law, then sedition only occurs when it is not directed toward the production of a condition of natural law. When it is directed toward any solution other than natural law consists of sedition.

Those methods include:

  • Undermining Knowledge, Norms, Traditions,  Rules, Institutions by:
    • Overloading reason by disinformation
    • Loading and overloading biases moral and otherwise
    • Loading and overloading probability of risk-reward
    • Loading and overloading judgement by baiting into hazard
    • Underloading trust by pretense of innocence and plausible deniability

Techniques

  1. Disinformation (Assymmetry of knowledge systems beyond experience)
    1. Factual Disinformation (facts) Wholly or partially false content to overload decision making.
    2. Systemic Disinformation (context, systemic) pseudoscience, ideology, philosophy, religion, fictions to use a narrative to overload decision making.
    3. Social Construction (Large scale, Intertemporal, normative): repetition and promotion of a normative preference, bias, belief, whether factual, narrative, or argumentative to use environmental exposure to overload understanding, choice, and decision making.
    4. False Propaganda (large scale, temoral, political): systematic and deliberate dissemination of information, ideas, rumors, or other content, utilizing emotional appeals, loaded language, manipulation of facts or context, by biased or misleading means, by private but especially public actors, to promote a particular political cause or point of view, overloading facts and narratives, by both environmental saturation and pretesnse of knowledge, virtue, and authority.
    5. Institutional Construction (Indoctrination): formal institutional indoctrination into a specific set of beliefs or ideologies, instilled in an individual through repetitive exposure, teaching, and demand for repetition and demonstration.
  2. Overwhelming (Combinations, Complexity, Scale) (Asymmetry of evidence beyond perception)
    1. Fictioning (outright making it up)
      1. Fictions (a false narrative, explanation, or account that is deliberately created and presented as if it were true)
    2. Overloading (Volume Confusion) (adding properties) (volume, episodal confusion): the use of too many arguments, points, or evidedence in an attempt to overwhelm and confuse an opponent, render the opponent incapable of responding to all the open questions or criticisms, or to divert attention away from the central issue. 
      NOTE: Whenever the liar him or her self cannot handle the logic of his or her bias, he or she resorts to intuitionistic biases because he/she needs to? 
  3. Overwhelming Sex Differences In Cognitive Bias (Asymmetry of priority  of decidability within perception)

1. (Masculine) Fictionalisms: The Spectrum of Fictionalism:

BY:
a. Appeal to the External and physical (Idealism is a claim to physicality that’s false.)
b. Criteria of Decidability: True/False, then agreement or not on that basis.
c. Method of Decidability: Systematizing: Logical intuition confusion, overload decidability.
d. Authority of Decidability: Claiming speaker is or source or argument is the provides authoritative decidability.
e. Use In Civilization: In European, Indian, Chinese

BY:
1. The physical: Magic -> Pseudoscience, and
2. The verbal: Sophistry > Idealism (Philosophy), and
3. The Imaginary: Occult -> Supernaturalism (Theology);
4. The Calculative: Innumeracy -> Mathiness  (Quantitative Sophistry)

2. (Feminine) Moralisms (Mythicisms)

BY:
a. Appeal to the Internal: and emotional bias, intuitive bias, instinctual bias.
b. Criteria of Decidability: Desirable/Undesirable, Approval/Disapproval, Agreement/Disagreement, Good/Bad, Right/Wrong, regardless of whether true/false, reciprocal, meritocratic/proportional.
c. Method of Decidability: Empathizing : Emotional intuition confusion, overload valence, to overoad empathzing
d. Authority of Decidability: Claiming opponent’s not the authority/decidability, but the consensus or norms or other factors.
e. Use in Civilization: Semitic (MENA), African
BY:
1. (F) Pilpul (truth agreement vs consensus agreement confusion): a form of overloading by evading the truth, and truth before face, disapproval, disagreement, shame, or conflict, by attempting to obtain approval and agreement by appeal to reasonableness or utility independent of the truth: the inversion of true/false with agree/disagree. (Semitic)

2. (F) Critique (Undermining, strawmanning, and lionizing) (“Kitchen Sink” Confusion), by the combination of loading, framing, strawmanning, undermining, lionizing, half truth, and suggestion by evasion of providing an equally criticizable alternative argument causing the audiece to either ignore or substitute alternative solutions. (Semitic)
Critique consists of:

    1. Heaping of Undue Praise on Straw Men (+)
    2. Criticism by Straw Manning (-), and
    3. Evading stating intentions and goals, and
    4. Poisoning the Well (Polluting the Informational Commons) (!=)

IX. Political Sedition (Medium Sedition)

Purpose

The purpose of political sedition is to use lanaguage to challenge or disrupt the established political order or the Demonstrated Interests of a political entity, such as an informal institution, a formal institution, a bureaucracy, a government, or a state.

Political sedition can be seen as a strategy to alter the balance of power, either to benefit a particular group or individual, or to bring about broader social or political change. 

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Method

This is often done with the aim of gaining an indirect relative interest by imposing a cost on the formal demonstrated interests of the political entity. This imposition of costs can take many forms, including destabilization, the spread of dissent, or the undermining of legitimacy, and therefore the authority necessary to influence public behavior to conform to institutional processes, rules, and laws.

Techniques

  1. Propaganda and Disinformation: Used to incite rebellion or discontent against the government, institutions, constitution, laws, traditions, customs..
  2. Subversion: Used to incite to rebellion or attempts to undermine the government, institutions, constitution, las, traditions, customs from within
  3. Promoting Social Division: used to incite violence or social unrest against the government, institutions, constitution, las, traditions, customs.

X. Institutional Sedition: Undermining Political Institutional Processes (Hard Sedition)

Purpose

The purpose of institutional sedition is to organize and concentrate capital, people, efforts, to undermine the legitimacy of individuals, processes, or institutions. 

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Methods

  1. Political Corruption (Underming People): use of public office or power for personal, group, or political gain.
  2. Undermining Political Processes: used to incite rebellion or attempts to undermine the government through procedural abuses.

Techniques

  1. Political Corruption
    1. The misuse of, inspiraction, or coercion of public office or power for personal, group, or political gain, in a way that imposes costs on others’ demonstrated interests without their voluntary consent. Here’s how different forms of political corruption can impose costs on ‘demonstrated interests’:
      1. Bribery: When a public official accepts, solicits, or extorts a bribe, they are essentially selling their decision-making power to the highest bidder. This imposes costs on the public interest, as decisions are made not based on what is best for the community or the nation, but on what benefits the official personally.
      2. Embezzlement and Theft: When public funds are stolen or misused, this directly imposes costs on the public, who have contributed these funds through taxes or other means with the expectation that they will be used for the public good.
      3. Nepotism and Favoritism: When jobs or benefits are given to friends or family members regardless of merit, this imposes costs on those who are more deserving but are overlooked due to their lack of personal connections.
      4. Fraud: When a public official engages in fraudulent activities, such as manipulating public contracts or misrepresenting public expenditures, this imposes costs on the public who are deceived and whose resources are misused.
      5. Abuse of Discretionary Power: When a public official uses their discretionary power to benefit themselves or their associates, this imposes costs on those who are adversely affected by these decisions.

      In each of these cases, the public official is violating the principle of reciprocity by imposing costs on others’ demonstrated interests without their voluntary consent, and often without full disclosure or honesty. This undermines trust in public institutions and can lead to social and economic harm.

  2. Lawfare: If it involves the use of legal systems to achieve objectives that harm the nation or aid its enemies.
    1. Abuse of Jurisdiction (Undermining Sovereignty of the People)
      1. Extraterritorial Application of Laws: Laws can be applied extraterritorially to impose costs on the demonstrated interests of individuals or entities in other jurisdictions.
      2. Use of International Law against an Opponent: International laws and norms can be invoked to constrain an opponent’s actions or to bring international pressure against them. This imposes costs on their demonstrated interests by limiting their options and potentially isolating them internationally.
    2. Abuse of Equal Protection Under The Law (Undermining Standing)
      1. Public Interest Litigation: This is a type of litigation undertaken to protect the public interest. While it can be used for noble causes, it can also be misused to advance a particular agenda or to impose costs on certain groups or individuals.
      2. Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP): This involves filing lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition. This imposes costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are exercising their right to free speech.
      3. Legal Challenges to Legitimacy: Legal actions can be used to challenge the legitimacy of an opponent or their actions. This imposes costs on their demonstrated interests by damaging their reputation and standing.
      4. Legislation to Restrict Activities: Laws can be enacted that restrict the activities of certain groups or individuals, imposing costs on their demonstrated interests by limiting their freedom of action.
      5. Abuse of Regulatory Power: Use of Governments or powerful entities to abuse regulatory power to target certain groups or individuals, imposing costs on their demonstrated interests by creating legal and bureaucratic hurdles that limit their ability to operate effectively.
      6. Selective Enforcement of Laws: Selectively enforcing laws to target  or advantage certain groups or individuals, subjecting them to unequal treatment under the law.
      7. Misuse of Legal Protections: Legal protections, such as those provided by whistleblower laws or human rights laws, can be misused to protect individuals who are engaging in harmful activities. This imposes costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are harmed by these activities.
    3. Abuse of Defensive Laws
      1. Misuse of National Security Laws: Abuse of National security laws targetor advantage political opponents or allies, or suppress dissent.
      2. Weaponizing Intellectual Property Laws: Abuse of Intellectual property laws to aggressively stifle competition or to control information.
      3. Anti-Discrimination Laws: Abuse of anti-discrimination law designed to protect individuals from discrimination, they can also be misused to target or advantage certain groups or individuals.
        Note: The natural law requires we treat people equally in the resolution of disputes under the law but not equally in legislation that causes groups to conform to the law, by preserving the use of public legislation and private discrimination as a means of forcing integration, and preventing undesirable integration. As such anti-discrimination laws are a violation of the natural law.
      4. Misuse of Defamation Laws: Abuse of Defamation laws to silence critics or suppress free speech, imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are targeted.
      5. Misuse of Privacy Laws: abuse of privacy laws to prevent the disclosure of information that is in the public interest, imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of the public.
    4. Abuse of Jurisprudence (Stalling Tactics)
      1. Judicial Activism: Judges or courts may interpret laws in ways that advance a particular political or social agenda, imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are affected by these interpretations. (Circumvention of the Legislature and the sovereignty of the people.)
      2. Abuse of Legal Privilege: Use of the privileges granted to lawyers, prosecutors, such as the ability to file lawsuits or the protection of attorney-client privilege. (Abuse asymmetrical knowledge and privilege, meaning requality under the law under color of law.)
      3. Abuse of the Legal Process: Use of the legal process in ways that are not intended, such as filing frivolous motions or appeals. (Abuse of time and resources under color of law)
      4. Exploiting Legal Loopholes: use of exploitation of Legal loopholes to gain an advantage or to harm an opponent or opponents who are affected by these actions. (Abuse of the word of the against the spirit(intention) of the law.)
    5. Weaponizing the Body of the Court and the Word of Law Against its Spirit (Undermining incentives, time, and resources necessary to truthfullly reciprocally resolve a dispute).
    1. Legal Actions to Tie Up Resources: Use of lawsuits, legal actions or investigations, such that one can force an opponent to spend time, money, and other resources on legal defense, diverting their resources away from their primary objectives.
    2. Frivolous Lawsuits: Use of lawsuits that are initiated despite the fact that the claims have little to no chance of winning. The main purpose of such lawsuits is to drain the resources of the defendant and deter them from certain actions.
    3. Legal Doxxing: Use of legal tactics to reveal the identity of anonymous individuals on the internet, exposing them to potential harm or harassment.
    4. Legal Harassment: Use of legal processes to harass an individual or group, causing them distress or discomfort.
    5. Legal Threats and Intimidation: The threat of legal action can be used to intimidate or silence opponents, creating a climate of fear or uncertainty.

XI. Treason (Betrayal, Sabotage) – Scaling Outgroup (extra-institutional)

Purpose

The purpose of treason againsts the Demonstrated Interests of others is to gain an indirect relative interest by imposting a cost on the informal or formal demonstrated interests of others: meaning informational, social and in particular, political commons with the assistance of, or by furthreing the intersts of a third party – whether that party be imaginary, conceptual, an organization, a state, a people, or a religion; such that the capacity of the people to pursue self determination by self determined means is imposed upon, and worse, harmed by the tansfer or influence to other parties other than the polity.

Europeans, because of european historical context, have traditionally envisioned Treason as conspiracy to advantage a foreign state. Whereas, given the unification of the world by trade during the european age of discovery and tranportation, the influence of population migrations, corporations, finance, trade networks, cultural groups, religions, philosophies, ideologies, international organizations, states and civilizations, espectially the globalists, all can seek to produce vehicles that facilitate undermining of the self determination by self determined means of ethnicities, nations, states, federations, and civilizations.

As such, treason consists of providing assistance to any external informational, coceptual, private,  common, informal, or formal organization of any kind that would seek to undermine the self determination by self determined means of any polity, and in particular any polity seeking to advance to greater correspondence with the natural law. 

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Actors: “The Talking Classes”

All actors in these sectors pursue the same strategies to achieve either sedition in their or their group’s interest, or treason that adds an foreign or hostile interests. (Note: So we are duplicating a bit for clarity)

  • State
  • Public Intellectuals
  • Academy
  • Media
  • Clerisy
  • Activists
  • The Disenfranchised
  • Advertisers
  • Corporations
  • Financial Sector

Methods

The categories of Political Corruption and Undermining Political Processes could potentially fall under either category, depending on the specifics of the actions and their intent and impact.

All of these categories consist of Warfare from within:

  1. Personal Treason
    1. Defection: Abandoning one’s country to join an enemy nation or organization, often taking sensitive information or skills with them.
  2. Political Treason
    1. Infiltration: Placing or being an agent within the government or a key institution with the intent to undermine it from within.
    2. Personnel Sabotage: Political Corruption (Above)
    3. Procdural Sabotage: Undermining Political Processes (Above)
    4. Economic Sabotage: If it involves deliberate damage to the nation’s economy to benefit a foreign power.
    5. Financial Treason: Manipulating or undermining the nation’s financial systems or economy for the benefit of foreign entities.
    6. Physical Sabotage: Damaging, destroying, or disrupting critical infrastructure, such as military installations, communication networks, or public utilities.
    7. Leadership Sabotage: Assassination or Attempted Assassination: Planning or carrying out an attack on a nation’s leaders or key officials.
    8. Judicial Treason: Manipulating the judicial system to undermine the rule of law or to favor foreign interests.
    9. Legislative Treason: Manipulating legislative processes or outcomes to undermine national interests or favor foreign entities.
    10. Executive Treason: Abusing executive powers to undermine national interests or favor foreign entities.
    11. Military Treason: Undermining the nation’s military capabilities, revealing military secrets, or aiding enemy combatants.
    12. Intelligence Treason (Espionage): Revealing classified intelligence information to foreign entities. 
  3. Educational Subversion: Manipulating educational institutions or curricula to indoctrinate students with views or beliefs that undermine national unity or loyalty.
    1. Academic Sabotage: Deliberately undermining the nation’s academic institutions, such as by spreading false information about them, damaging their reputations, or disrupting their operations.
    2. Curriculum Manipulation: Deliberately altering educational curricula to spread misinformation, propaganda, or ideologies that undermine national unity, values, or interests. This could include the promotion of harmful ideologies or the suppression of important historical or cultural information.
    3. Indoctrination: Using the education system to indoctrinate students with beliefs or ideologies that are harmful to the nation or that promote allegiance to foreign entities.
    4. Misuse of Research: This could involve using academic research in a way that harms the home country and benefits a foreign power. For example, an educator or researcher might intentionally direct their research towards areas that could provide a strategic advantage to a foreign power, or they might share sensitive research findings with foreign entities.
    5. Promotion of Harmful Ideologies: This could involve promoting ideologies that are harmful to the stability and security of the home country. For example, an educator might teach or promote extremist ideologies that encourage violence, discrimination, or other harmful behaviors.
    6. Subversion of National Identity: This could involve undermining the national identity or unity of a country. For example, an educator might teach a version of history that emphasizes divisions and conflicts within the country, fostering a sense of disunity and dissatisfaction.
    7. Promotion of Foreign Interests: This could involve promoting the interests of a foreign power over those of the home country. For example, an educator might consistently portray a foreign government or ideology in a positive light while denigrating their own country’s values and systems.
    8. Facilitation of Foreign Influence: This could involve facilitating the influence of a foreign power within the educational system. For example, an educator might allow a foreign government to fund research or programs that promote their interests, or to recruit students for activities that serve their goals.
    9. Propaganda: An educator could use their platform to spread propaganda for a foreign power. This could involve presenting biased or misleading information, suppressing critical viewpoints, or promoting divisive narratives.
    10. Recruitment: An educator could use their position to recruit others to the cause of a foreign power. This could involve identifying potential sympathizers, grooming them with propaganda, and connecting them with foreign agents or organizations.
    11. Espionage: Using educational institutions as a cover for espionage activities, such as recruiting students or faculty as spies, or conducting research for foreign entities that could harm national security.
    12. Censorship: Suppressing academic freedom or censoring educational content to prevent the dissemination of information that could be beneficial to the nation.
    13. Resource Diversion: Diverting educational resources to foreign entities or using them to support activities that undermine the nation.
    14. Sabotage: An educator could intentionally undermine important research or educational programs. This could be done subtly, such as by introducing errors or delays, or more overtly, such as by damaging equipment or resources.
    15. Brain Drain: Facilitating or encouraging the emigration of highly educated individuals to foreign countries, thereby depriving the nation of their skills and knowledge.
  4. Informational Treason
    1. Media Treason: Using media outlets to spread disinformation, propaganda, or to incite violence or rebellion.
    2. Informational Commons Sabotage: Propaganda: Spreading false or misleading information to sow discord, undermine public trust, or incite violence.
    3. Psychological Warfare: (“Demoralization”) Using tactics designed to manipulate, confuse, or demoralize the nation’s citizens or its military forces.
    4. Fomenting Discord: Pitting sexes, classes, regions, and denominations against one another.
    5. Promoting Secession: Advocating for or actively supporting a region’s secession from the nation without legal means.
    6. Populist Sabotage: Insurrection: Inciting or participating in a rebellion or uprising against the government.
  5. Cultural Treason: Actively working to undermine the nation’s cultural identity or unity, often with the goal of creating internal conflict.
    1. Historical Revisionism: Deliberately distorting or falsifying historical facts to undermine national unity or identity.
    2. Religious Treason: Using religious influence or institutions to undermine the government or incite rebellion.
  6. Scientific and Technological Treason
    1. Technological Treason: Stealing or transferring critical technology to foreign entities.
    2. Scientific Treason: Misusing scientific research for harmful purposes, or providing critical scientific knowledge or capabilities to foreign entities.
  7. Demographic Treason
    1. Demographic Treason: Manipulating demographic trends or data to destabilize the nation.
    2. Immigration Treason: Manipulating immigration policies or procedures to destabilize the nation.
  8. Biological Warfare
    1. Biological/Epidemiological Treason: Deliberately spreading harmful biological agents or diseases within the nation’s borders.
    2. Environmental Treason: Deliberately causing significant harm to the nation’s environment, potentially leading to long-term damage or instability.
  9. Diplomatic Treason: Abusing diplomatic powers or roles to undermine the nation’s interests or benefit foreign entities.
  10. Reverse Sabotage: Aiding the Enemy: Providing support to a nation’s enemies, which can include supplying them with weapons, funds, intelligence, or other forms of assistance.

THEREFORE
Rights Obligations and Inalienations whether natural or contractual, are dependent upon membership, and as such insurance of soveriegnty, reciprocity, truth, testimony, decidability, against irreciprocities.

NOTE: ( … ) CONVERT TO TRIFUNCTIONAL
Organization, Incentive, Agreement
Accountability, liability, and insurance (institutions, means, what)
Obligations, rights,  and inalienations (rules, means, how, requiremetns)
Agreements, Resolutions, Adjudications, (decidabilty,how, requirements )
Responsibilty Agency and Soveriengty (individuals, actors, why, input)
Self determination, Self Determined Means (ends, what)

AND
THEREFORE;
Reciprocal Insurance of Self Determination by Self Determined Means, by Sovereignty in demonstrated interest and Reciprocity in display word and deed requires prohibition on authority leaving only competitive (adversarial, market) evaluation, decidability and adjudicated by a jury of peers:

Authority(Discretion, exercise of power independent of responsibility and liability) vs Decidability (Deciability, responsibility for Decision making with liability and rsponsibility.) 

THEREFORE
REQUIRING
I.III.VI – DUE PROCESS (INSTITUTIONS)

What is Due Process?

The Institutionalization of a process that preserves and promotes both sovereignty of the individual and group, and cooperation between individuals and groups, and the returns on cooperation between them, by the prohibition on arbitrary judgement, ending, reducing, or compensating for the incentives for non-cooperation and retaliation that would diminish the returns on cooperation.

What is the (Purpose) of Due Process is Decidability and Legitimacy

The purpose of due process in a group or polity is the production of a means of decidability and resulting decisions in matters of cooperation, difference, or conflict, and legitimacy in those decisions. 

|Due Process|: Acquisition > Returns on Time > Cooperation > Decidability > Decisions > Legitimacy > Continuity > Innovation, Adaptation, Evolution.

What’s Required for Legitimacy of Decision?

Legitimacy requires non-arbitrary, impartial, impersonal, consistency and as a consequence settlement, the restoration of the incentivest to cooperate between parties, benefits of fostering and preserving cooperation under it, and the suppression, reduction, and elimination of further conflict and retaliatory cycles, by preventing illegitimate arbitrary judgement that violates self determination, sovereignty, duty, reciprocity, truth, excellence, and beauty, that  together would produce illegitimacy, non-settlement and foster conflict and retaliatory cycles, further suppressing defection and subsequent costs of the loss of human capital and productivity for the group.

What Is Required For Producing Legitimate Decidability in Due Process?

Producing decidability, legitimacy, and settlement by due process requires the organization of a process of deciding, a set of rules of decision making (system of measurement), and a group of people who decide (jury) that are bound(limited) by those rules of decision making, and by rules and process preserving self determination, sovereignty, duty, reciprocity, truth, excellence, and beauty.

|Requirements for Legitimate Decidability|: Organization > People > Process > Rules. 

(Note: Excellence and Beauty set a criteria for sufficiency that defends the commons from ‘discounting’ for personal savings of time and effort, and produces the hierarchy of competency that favors the production of desirable commons, and the resulting incentive for persistence and improvement of excellence and beauty.)

Positiva and Negativa Legitimacy: Commonality and Concurrency

Groups must make both positiva agreements on wants and negativa agreements on dispute resolutions that produce commons by a process of legitimacy, resuting in settlement, that preserves sovereignty reciprocity, and the benefits of cooperation at scale.

The Positiva: Legitimacy and Settlement by Evidential to Empirical Concurrency

In the positiva, meaning the agreement on the production of commons, by the empirical evidence of the legitimacy of findings of agreement (consent) among the polity, or a representation of the polity in form of: a pater-familia, a group of headmen, a jury, a thang, a council, a parliament, or houses of parliament, a court of last resort (supreme court), a judge last resort (monarchy), or the militia of the people –  by discovery of concurrency of those agreements (consents) across sexes, classes, and regions of the polity.

So democracy attemts to achieve concurrency across people with similar interests, and so democratic decision mating by simple majority rule is exhuasted when the people affected hold dissimilar positiva interests. Conversely, concurrency ensures that no legislation can be imposed on one group by another because a majority of all groups must approve or reject such legislation. This prevents the “tyranny of the majority” under democracy, or the undermining of legitimacy of the institutions, and the cooperation and coherence of the poplity, by empowering factions.. Ergo the west didn’t invent democracy so much as concurrent democracy.

Note: This is the reason for the houses of government (classes and regions) at the regional level and houses of government (population(parliament, lower house), classes(senate upper house) at the federal legislative level, and electoral college (population, region, nobility) at the federal presidential level. Ergo democracy doesn’t scale, only concurrency – because it is the only means of ensuring consent.

Note: The successful enumeration of a subset of necessary natural rights as a defense against the usurpation by the elites and the states, was insufficient and unsuccessful because ( …. )

Legitimacy by Due Process in the Positiva of Agreement on Commons

This is the via positiva democratic process of concurency, or the ‘democratic process’ of empirical evolution of consent of the entirety of the polity into contractual agreements that are legitimate in production because it preserves sovereignty, prohibits irreciprocity, is free of authority, even the advancement of intersts of some group over others, and creates cooperative simplicity by providing a means by which ever larger numbers can contribute capital to the production of commons with the most common returns for all.

The Negativa: Legitimacy and Settlement by Evidential to Epirical Commonality

In the negativa, meaning the resolutions of disputes, by findings of the court, we produce empirical evidence of the legitimacy of findings, by the discovery of commonality of those findings within, between, and across polities. These individual findings (evidence) can be accumulated and generalized into specific rules common to all. The result being the decrease in the risk and friction of cooperation at ever increasing scales.

Legitimacy by Due Process In the Negativa of Dispute Rsolution.

This is the via-negativa aversarial process of commonality, or the ‘common law‘ process of empirical evoluton of bodies of rules of decidability (‘law’) into ‘code‘ that is legitimate in production because it preserves soverignty, is free of authority, and prohibits irreciprocity, and creates cooperative simplicity by recursive reduction of complex rules of cooperation into simple rules in each domain of cooperation – therefore legitimacy is maintained despite complexity, ensuring the people can conform to those laws by knowing a few general principles discovered through the adversarial (competitive) process of dispute resolutions at ever increasing scales.

Summary

So adversarial negativa commonality and aversarial via positiva concurrency together allow facilitate cooperation across sexes, classes, groups, regions, and polities, by the production of due process, legitimacy and settlement, by the difficulty to impossibility of violating self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity without subverting the institutions of cooperation we call the court and legislature.

I.III.VII Conditional Due Process

Purpose (What is Conditional Due Process)

Populations seek regularity and certainty at all times because it allows them to maximize the certainy of prediction for opportunity and consumption and minimize discipline, savings, and risk, satisfying the instinct to seek the greateatest return in the shortest time with the least effort with the greatest certainty at the lowest risk. Therefore populations attempt whenever possible to organize as a ‘going concern’ that seeks to satisfy the majority of individuals, families, and groups maintaining a pareto distribution of competency in the pursuit of acuisition, and a nash equlibriuim of returns from doing so. Although the truth is that there always exists a disequilibrium favoring some classes more so than others and visa versa. This effect is just the equilibrium of persistence in physics and the homeostasis of life, expressed in social, economic, and political terms.

Demand For Variation From Equilibrium as a Going Concern and Supply of Adaptability to do so.

There are at least three categories that define a spectrum of a polity’s demand for adaptation to internal and external opportunities, presures, shifts, events, and shocks that create demand for variation in present state.

  • Stress: Conflict (-): Conquest, War, Collapse, Catastrophe, Disease , overextension(political military), overexpansion(population, economic, financial) overinclusion(immigration), (Scarcity, Concentration)
  • Peace: Cooperation(=): Peace ( Stability, Going Concern, Productivity, Exploration)
  • Windfall: Capitalization(+): Windfall (redistribution(disbursement), Capitalization and Redistribution.

So polities must develop a means of shifting between the three categorical states of due process given the needs to maintain persisteence under the three different conditions 

|Due Process Environment|: Conflict and Conquest < Cooperation > Capitalization and Redistribution

Each of these states cause demand for a shift in:

  • Decision Making (where, when)
  • Organization and Process (how)
  • Capital Allocation and Production (what)
  • Priority of Responsibility, Rights, Obligations, and Inalienations (who)

Resulting in:

  • Shifts in reseponsibility given the shift in the locus of decidability between classes who hold responsibility for that category responsibilities (military and political, economic and technological, and social and familial, and constraining the agency of those classes whose responsibilities are outside that category of responsibilities. Meaning more of decision making is moved up the class hierarchy of rsponsibilities, and down it according to external conditions. Thus, effectively describing a scale that reflects class differences in ability, knowledge, experience, expertise, relationships, alliances, resources, and responsibilties.
  • Reorganizing capital that is currently allocated to the capture of opportunity and satisfication of demand in one environment to the capture of opportunity and satisfaction of demand in the new environment – Including reorganizing human capital in all its forms and both informal and formal institutional capital in all its forms, as well as all forms of material capital.

|Shift In Responsibilty and Capital|: Military and Political <-> Financial Commercial <-> Labor and Family and Individual Consumers.

Note:
|Political Models|: Military(Fascism, Order, Friedrich List) <> Economic(Classical Liberalism, Adaptation, Adam Smith) <> Classical Liberalism with Redistribution of Windfalls(Capitalization, Consumption, Roman Republic)

Rates of Adaptation ( Incremental Change(subtle) vs Great Leaps(obvious) )

( … ) (why are people freaking out today?)

Failure of Adaptation 

The polity can succeed or fail at adaptation sufficient to meet demand for responses to external and internal pressures. Failure to adapt to and from any state causes stress: (internal effect vs long term effect):

  • Stress: failure to adapt to stress or failure to adapt from stress
  • Peace: failure to adapt to peace, vs failure to adapt from peace
  • Windfall : failure to adapt to windfall vs failure to adapt from windfall

Failure of Adaptation Can Result In these failures :

  • Failure of Cooperation: resulting in Internal conflict, rebellion, or civil war
    • Inability of the political system to perform causing illegitimacy
    • Capture by a class causing disproportionality of rewards
    • Disproportionality of cost and returns
  • Failure of Capital
    • Hyperconsumption, decapitalization, and degeneration
    • Loss of comparative advantage (most)
    • Capital collapse (all: physical, institutional, human)
    • Productive collapse (economy, idustry, tech, education)
  • Failure of Persistence by evolutionary computation
    • Decline until conflict and reform
    • Unrecoverable incremental decline
    • Collapse
    • Genocide

Resulting in:

  • Deconstruction: collapse of self determination by self determined means, by reciprocal insurance of soveriegnty, reciprocity, and duty. Under the natural law we work to increase agency across scope and scale which requires stewarding sd/sm which in turn requires a foundation of soveriegnty, reciprocity, recirpocal insurance, duty, withough which SD/SM is impossible.  If we imagine the political triangle as a model, then under peace, people are free to move to the points of their preferences (extremes). Under stress collapse people collpase toward the middle in order to achieve the collective condition under which they can return to the pursuit of those preferences and biases, without disruupting the pareto/nash equilibrium that permits them to do so.

Prevention: Maintaining Adaptive Capital Biases Transitions.

Risks:

  • Stress: War Conflict Disaster Crisis: (Risk of Tyranny) Concentration of power (the ability to alter the probabiity of outcomes by the exercise of force), in the military political financial, and military-industrial classes risks creating a permanent rent seeking class that seeks to deprive the population of return to a market for voluntary cooperation in the discovery of the satisfaction of individual, familial, and group wants. The result is dictatorship and tyranny, and the end of rule of law by the natural law.
  • Peace: Going Concern: (Risk of Oligarchy) Concentration of influence (the ability to alter the probability of outcomes by remunerative reward) in the financial, economic, and consumer sectors such that they are so captured by preservation of private consumption and capitalization, that they fail to invest in, and pay the costs of, the preservation of the formal and informal institutions that make their consumption and capitalizion possible.
  • Windfalls: (Risk of Democracy) Concentration of influence (the ability to alter the probability of outcomes by social and democratic demand, undermining, and threat) in the family and consumer sectors such that they demand consumption, hyperconsumption, and evasion of responsibilty habituating that irresponsibility and generating risk, rather than celebrating and capitalizing windfalls – and creating the most disasterous condition were the polity is organized and habituated such that they are unable to pull themselves out of dependency on windfalls that no longer exist – people will easily gain status, but do everything possible to preserve it, even when it’s not possible. And especially not possible without violating the rule of law by the natural law. So the solution is to direct windfalls to those who sacrificed (invested) in the creation of the windfalls whether as military and services in conflict, or labor in the workplace. (and looting for soldiers).

What is that Process (how)

Anticipating Crisis (Insurance, Anti-Fragility)

Via Negativa Governance – planning for crisis and eliminating bads as a means of indirectly producing goods using obvious incentivves, rather than trying to directly produce goods without the obvious or possible incentives to do so. 

  1. Stress: War, Conflict, Disaster, Crisis: As industrialization and wealth increased, so did the ability to maitain standing militaries, produce stores of arms, and employ them quickly – to the point where we have weapons of mass destruction ready at all times. As such the swich from going concern to condition of war can no longer tolerate the debate over a declaration of war. Where a declaration of war is the means by which we alter the responsibilities of the government, the economy and the population such that they bias in favor of the needs of the conflict (the commons) over their own wants and needs (the private). This change to large standing militaries at the ready has lead to the ability to conduct limited warfare without altering the political order out of the state of a ‘going concern’. But likewise this condition has created the opportunity to incrementally drag a polity into a war and war economy (or crisis of any kind) without such a declaration. And so we must distinquish between war and a state of war, as the difference between not altering the responsibilities of the polity to enage in a conflict, then altering the responsibilities of the polity to enagage in a full scale war.  This same challenge can occur in response to a disaster or to a plague: there are resources at the ready and then the mobilization of resources that are not at the ready, but otherwise engaged in the economy of a going concern.
    Requirements:
    As such a ‘declaration contract’ is required for any action that requires mobilization: alteration of the political, economic, social, and familial rights and obligations.
    • Note: The covid crisis did not follow this obligation, eve though it was the equivalent of a military mobilization that drastically imposed costs of the population – and for questionable purposes using questionable knowledge.
  2. Peace: Going Concern: As industrialzation expanded, and people were increasingly moved off subsistence farming and the self-determination available to them as subsistence farmers, They were increasingly distanced from the self determination of subsitence farmers, and they became increasingly interdependent, meaning dependent on increasingly abstract (distant) influences and forces, with less and less of a net beneath them in case of failure. Instead, exchanging the risk of bad harvest for the risk of economic volatility. This created uncertainty against nature over which they had no control, for uncertainty against others and the state that under participatory government they bore the illusion of some sense of control – and that the state had more control than it did. During times of peace there is an opportunity for self fulfillment by the direction of all one’s proceeds to consumption or capitalization of one’s choice – and a tendency to treat the opportunity for consumption and capitaliztaion during peace as ‘deserved’ or normal, rather than a temporary respite from a world in evolutionary conflict as normal.
    Requirements:
    1. Clear rights obligations and inalienations under each condition.
    2. A general staff of crisis planning
    3. War (crisis) Plans
    4. War (crisis) organizations (the civil society)
    5. “War (crisis) Games” – “test to failure”
  3. Windfalls: 

response to anticipation of responses to the environment….

general staff: war games, neutral games, windfall games.

  1. response to anticipation of responses to the environment…. general staff: war games, neutral games, windfall games.

What Does That Change Consist of?

ROIs

Responsibiilty:
Government
Finance 
Industry
Business

Education
Community orgs
Family
Children (women)

Individual

Mitigation of Risk

  1. Limiting privatization at all three scales, while enforcing continuous capitalization by preservation of universal juridical defense of the commons by all from all.
  2. Maintaining enough capital (institutional, physical, knowledge, behavioral, war games etc) to respond to changes in pressure and opportunity by suppressing rents and privileges when they interfere with that capital reserve. 
  3. Providing an institutional means of transformation between states using evidential criteria in and impersonal process, which consists of a contract of the commons (legislation) that determines testable predictable criteria for entry an exit of the changed state

And what is the due process for changing between the three states of scarcity, cooperation, and consumption?

Withdrawing from Crisis or Winfall

Relieve War Debts, Relieve Going concern Debts, hold a celebration

Strategic Consequences

Why do we demand due process, commonality and concurrency => responsibility => rapid adaptivity (maneurver) => European group strategy is manuever warfare (OODA).

But responsibility is dependent upon ability, training, incentives, and will -> so the class hierarchy (Patriachy -> Parentiarchy) may be necessary for the production of different economies (just as in the military) that provides direction at the bottom and independence at the top.

The maximization of evolutionary velocity by the evolutionary computation of innovation, adeaptation, and evolution by discovery and preservation of opportunities, means, and returns on cooperation, by any body of people, by exchange of responsibility for the reciprocal insurance, by force of arms, of individual Self determination by Self Determined Means, By tests of Sovereignty in demonstrated interests, demonstrated by suppression of and prohibition on the imposition of costs on the demonstrated intersts of others by the test of Recprocity in display word and deed, insured by impersonal due process, producing Legitimacy of decidability, thereby suppressing retaliation, retaliation cycles, and malincintives not to cooperate, which together insure preservation of cooperation, the private and common returns of it, fostering incentives to cooperate at ever greater complexity, and the benefits of that cooperative velocity, volume, and complexity for all.

POSITIVA

( … )

NEGATIVA

Causes of Conflict by Violations of Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Duty…

Even within group there exists imperfect cooperation, violations by accident, violations by impluse and passions, violations by unethical and immoral advantage, violations by direct action and intention for the purpose of gains, and violations for the purpose of intentional harms, and even the purpose of evil, seditious and treasonous harms.

|Conflict|: Imperfect cooperation > accident > impulse and passion > unethical and immoral informational asymmetry > material crimes of property > material crimes of bodily harm > evil, seditious, and treasonous crimes.

Grievances Against Sovereignty and Reciprocity

Conflict leads to retaliation. Retaliation leads to retaliation cycles. Retaliation cycles lead to externalities. Externalities lead to increases in risk, declines in trust, velocity of cooperation, discounts on time, and resulting individual and group prosperty, and group comparative advantage, and group reduction of evolutionary velocity and potential. In other words, harms cause contagion unless reversed and repetition suppressed.

|Grievances|: Violation > Conflict > Retaliation > Retaliation Cycles > Contagion( External Consequences) > Decline.

Insurance of Sovereignty and Reciprocity

All social animals practice the instinct for altruistic punishment. The instinct, intuition, and universal norm of Altruistic punishment is violated when and individual incurs a cost to themselves to punish another individual, even at a personal cost, for a perceived violation of social norms or cooperative behavior, even when the punisher is not directly harmed by the violation for the purpose of the enforcement of social norms, cooperative behavior, discouraging future violations, and promote overall group welfare. This is because the individual’s condition as a social animal is dependent upon the cooperative condition of the group, more so than even his or her own actions.

As such the polity produces institutions that insure one another against such contagion. This insurance is both informal in the case of norms, traditions, values, and formal in the case of individuals pater familia, headmen, chieftains, and kings, and groups thangs, juries, judges, lawyers, legislatures, laws, and constitutions.

Courts for the Redress of Grievances

Under the Natural, Common(and concurrent) law, we produce the institution of Courts of dispute resolution for the redress of grievances with the goals of such courts being determination, restitution, and prevention, and public insurance against retaliation – and as such retaliation cycles and the consequences for the individuals and for the polity as a whole.

In other words, the courts and the people insure against violations of their sovereignty, restitution if violated, and prevention of imitation and retaliation cycles, as a means of producing the commons of cooperation at scale, and velocity and the gains that result from that commons.

Insurance of Juridical Defense

Those insured by the polity require insurance of their self determination, sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, truth, excellence and beauty, both by others and from others (and in particular from those with responsibiity for authority) by a warranty of decidability under the natural, common (concurrent), body of law by independence from arbitrary judgement using the due process necessary to do so.

This process of insurance by the court is called Juridical Defense. This means no individual may be subject to restitution, punishment, or prevention of repetition without insurance by Juridical Defense.

Requirements for Legitimacy of Juridical Defense

( … ) Creates Settlement,  creates settled law. legitimacy is produced by settlement, (acceptance, and public insurance, maintaining cohesion and trust).

Requirements for Juridical Defense
What does juridical defense require under natural law? Juridical defense requires independence from the arbitrary judgement of any individual or group, by tests of variations from natural, constitutional, common, and legislative laws, using an adversarial competition between parties to determine what are the most likely, or least unlikely facts, that together produce a narrative sufficent for rendering a decision (judgement) independent of those opposing narratives stated by the parties.

a process for the discovery of the facts – adversarial competition, referee
a set of rules to determine the variation from the law – adversarial competition, referee.
a process for determining sufficiency of decidability – jury
a process of decision making – the jury.
a process for provision of restitution, punishment, and prevention – judge, jury
a process for settling the matter and demanding insurance of its settlement by the polity – judge, polity, sheriff, militia

Requirements for a Court

What is a court? A group of people, organized for the purpose of resolving a conflict by juridical defense, fulfilling their obligation to insure the sovereigty in demonstated interests of the insured, by the use of due process of judgement, to ensure against arbitrary judgement, and the obligation by the polity to ensure the settlement of and resolution of that conflict by their judgement.

|Court|: Criteria for Legitimacy > Charter > Rules > Processes > People > Envorcement.

The Evolution of the Court

The Indo-European societies were characterized by a warrior aristocracy, where status and power were often tied to martial prowess. In such a society, where each warrior, his family and clan provided his equipment and was expected to fight for the tribe or clan, it was impossible for a central authority to exert control. This led to a social and political order that emphasized individual sovereignty and collective decision-making where decisions were made collectively by the warriors, a form of proto-democracy. 

The importance of the family and clan reinforced this system. With land and resources often controlled by extended families or clans, power was distributed among many different groups, necessitating a system of governance facilitated the interests and opinions of these various groups – preserving their alliances, loyalty and trust of one another.

This tradition continued as the indo european steppe raiders combined horse bronze and wheel, and then moved into and conquered europe. THese people formed different major groups the balto-slavic, germanic, italo-celtic, hellenic, and anatolian that remain today in their many variations.

As such the early germanics persisted these traditions, with the spartans, athenians practicing similar traditions, but differing in who had opinions, as they spread southward, conquered and often enslaves local people, then engaged in sea trade.  

|Evolutionary Sequence|: (of below) 
… Proto European (West Indo European) 
… … Proto-BaltoSlavic, Proto-Germanic, Proto-Celtic, Proto Italic, Hellenic, Anatolian.
… … … ( … )

|Participatory Spectrum|: West Indo European > Germanic (maximum participation) > Athenian (wide participation) > Roman Class Based Governance > Spartan Elite Governance

  1. Proto European (West Indo European) societies spanned a wide geographical area and included diverse cultures such as the ancient Greeks, Romans, Celts, Germanic tribes, and Vedic societies in India. Common legal concepts and practices include:
    1. Oral Tradition: Many Indo-European societies relied on oral tradition rather than written codes for their laws. This is in contrast to the common law tradition, which places a strong emphasis on written case law and legal documentation.
      Why? (a) Until a polity is settled and produces trade, contract, debt-credit, and taxation, there is little need for writing, and there is status available for those who memorize laws. (b) Traditional law contains legitimacy that assists in the prservation of sovereignty….
    2. Trial by Ordeal or Combat (public) or Duel (private): Some Indo-European societies used trial by ordeal or combat to determine guilt or innocence. This is a significant departure from the common law tradition, which uses evidence and legal argument in a court setting.
      Why? (So nonsense-conflicts are not brought to the courts. Maintains the seriousness and and competency of the people in ‘court’. Demonstrates the conviction and therefore honesty of the participants. Insulates the jury and judge from retaliation. Is the final form of demonstration of sovereignty.
    3. Restitution Rather Than Punishment: Indo-European legal systems emphasized restitution to the victim rather than punishment of the offender. This differs from the common law tradition, which includes both punitive and restorative elements.
      Why? Restitution satisfies both parties, and prevents retaliation cycles, and doesn’t produce distrust, defection, or disloyalty that military organizations cannot tolerate, that later settled agrarian civilizations, and certainly strong state civilizations can tolerate.
    4. Role of Kinship Groups: In many Indo-European societies, kinship groups played a significant role in the legal system, being responsible for ensuring restitution or retribution. In contrast, the common law tradition places the responsibility for law enforcement and justice on the state.
      Why? Migratory people (warrior cattle raiders) lack the apparatus to produce taxation and a state, so they are reliant of the civil society to provide services. 
  2. Spartan: Spartan society was an oligarchy ruled by two kings and a Council of Elders. While there was an assembly of male citizens, real power was concentrated in the hands of the few.
    1. Ephors: The ephors were a group of five officials elected annually by the Spartan citizens. They had broad powers, including judicial powers. They could bring charges against any Spartan, including the kings, and preside over trials. Their decisions could only be appealed to the Gerousia.
    2. Gerousia: The Gerousia was a council of elders that included the two Spartan kings and 28 other men. The members, who had to be over 60 years old, were elected for life by the Spartan citizens. The Gerousia had legislative, executive, and judicial powers. It could try criminal cases, especially those involving homicide and certain other serious crimes. Its decisions could be appealed to the Apella.
    3. Apella: The Apella was an assembly of Spartan citizens. It had the final say in many legal matters, including appeals from the Gerousia. However, its role in the judicial system was less prominent than that of the ephors and the Gerousia.
    4. Kings: The two Spartan kings had some judicial powers, especially in relation to religious matters and during times of war. However, their judicial role was limited compared to the ephors and the Gerousia.
  3. Germanic: Early Germanic societies were tribal and lacked centralized political structures. Decisions were often made collectively in assemblies known as “things,” where free men could voice their opinions and settle disputes. This could be seen as a form of direct democracy, but it was limited to free men (those who held responsibility for self, family, commons, and polity) and excluded women, slaves, and others.
    Why? ( … ) The early Germanic legal system was quite different from the Roman system, reflecting the decentralized and tribal nature of Germanic societies:
    1. Participation: Given the small scale of these polities, and the locality of their reach, participation was open to all men not slaves. Why? Because in these pre-state societies all men form a universal militia as the only means of defense, and as such the necessity of individual sovereignty. 
    2. Things: The primary judicial institution in early Germanic societies was the “thing” (Old Norse: þing, Old English: þing, Old High German: ding), a public assembly of free men. Things were held regularly to settle disputes, make laws, and decide on matters of common interest.
    3. Law Speakers: Laws were primarily oral and were memorized by law speakers – an equivalent of a secular priesthood – who would recite them at the thing. Over time, some Germanic societies began to write down their laws, often after the introduction of Christianity and the Latin alphabet.
    4. Trial by Ordeal: Germanic law made use of trials by ordeal to determine guilt or innocence. This could involve physical tests, with the idea that divine intervention would reveal the truth.
    5. Restitution and Compensation: A key principle in Germanic law was the concept of restitution or compensation. If a person was injured or killed, the offender was required to pay a compensation (wergild) to the victim or the victim’s family.
    6. Blood Feuds: In some cases, if compensation was not paid or was not sufficient, disputes could escalate into blood feuds between families or clans. Some Germanic legal codes included provisions to regulate and limit these feuds.
    7. Local and Decentralized: The Germanic legal system was local and decentralized, with different tribes and regions having their own customs and practices. There was no centralized authority or bureaucracy enforcing the law. Meaning there were common customs and practices but no attempt to synchronhize, synthesize and generalize those customary laws and practices across the germanic civilization.
  4. Athenian: Athenian democracy was a form of direct democracy where citizens (free adult males) had the right to participate in decision-making processes. However, like the Germanic societies, this excluded women, slaves, and foreigners.
    Why? ( … )
    1. Participation: The Athenian court system, with its emphasis on widespread citizen participation, is often considered one of the most democratic in the ancient world. In Athens, ordinary citizens were chosen by lot to serve as jurors in the popular courts (dikasteria), and any citizen could bring a case to court. This level of democratic participation in the judicial process was quite unique.
    2. Popular Courts (Dikasteria): The courts were made up of ordinary citizens, who served as both judges and jury. There were no professional judges or lawyers. Cases were argued by the litigants themselves or by their non-professional representatives. The jurors were chosen by lot and could number from a few hundred to over a thousand, depending on the case.
    3. Public Trials: Trials were public events, held in open-air courts. They were often attended by large crowds. The trial process was relatively quick, often completed in a single day.
    4. Simple Procedures: The legal procedures were relatively simple, to allow ordinary citizens to participate effectively. Each side was given a specific amount of time, measured by a water clock, to present their case.
    5. Majority Rule: Decisions were made by majority vote of the jurors. There were no unanimous verdicts or hung juries. In the case of a tie, the verdict was in favor of the defendant.
    6. Range of Cases: The popular courts dealt with a wide range of cases, including both private disputes (such as property and contract disputes) and public cases (such as prosecutions for public offenses).
    7. Appeals: There was no system of appeals. The decisions of the popular courts were final.
    8. Adversarialism: The athenian courts were adversarial although they differed significantly from the modern concept of an adversarial system. In Athens, litigants presented their own cases before large juries of ordinary citizens. There were no professional lawyers or judges, and the jury had the final say in both determining the facts and interpreting the law. This is similar to an adversarial system in that the parties to the dispute controlled the presentation of evidence and argument, but it is different in that the jury, rather than a judge, had the final say in legal interpretation.
  5. Hittite:
    1. King’s Court: The king was the highest judicial authority in the Hittite kingdom. He would hear important cases, particularly those involving high-ranking officials or serious crimes. The king’s court was the highest court in the land and its decisions were final.
    2. Royal Judges: The king could appoint royal judges to hear cases and administer justice. These judges had the authority to hear cases throughout the kingdom and were responsible for ensuring that local officials were administering justice correctly.
    3. Local Courts: At the local level, disputes were often settled by local officials or assemblies. These local courts would have dealt with a wide range of issues, including property disputes, contracts, and family law matters.
    4. Mixed Discovery: It appears that the Hittite court was both adversarial and inquisitorial but we are not certain.
    5. Written Laws: The Hittites had a well-developed system of written laws, known as the Hittite laws. These laws, inscribed on cuneiform tablets, covered a wide range of civil and criminal matters, and would have been used as the basis for judgments in court cases.
    6. Punishments: Punishments in the Hittite legal system were often restorative rather than punitive. For example, fines and compensation were common. However, physical punishments and the death penalty were also used for serious crimes.
    7. Legal Professionals: The Hittite legal system included various types of legal professionals, including judges, witnesses, and scribes who recorded legal proceedings and decisions.
  6. English Evolution of the Modern State
    ( … )
    Early Medieval (Germanic, Anglo Saxon Era) 5th to the 11th centuries:
    1. Folk Moots: Local assemblies that met to discuss matters of common concern, including disputes between individuals. They were often held at significant geographical landmarks.
    2. Hundred and Shire Courts: Local courts that dealt with civil and criminal matters. The Hundred Court was a local court for a subdivision of a county (a “hundred”), while the Shire Court was for the county as a whole.
    3. King’s Court: The king also had a court, dealt with important cases and disputes involving the king’s own interests. However, the king’s power was not absolute, and he was expected to rule in accordance with the law.
    4. Ecclesiastical Courts: With the spread of Christianity, the Church established its own courts, which dealt with matters of canon law.
    5. Compurgation and Ordeal: In the absence of evidence, guilt or innocence might be determined through compurgation (swearing an oath of innocence, supported by a group of “oath-helpers”) or ordeal (a physical test, such as carrying a hot iron, with the belief that God would protect the innocent).
    6. Wergild: This was a system of compensation for harm done. If a person was injured or killed, the offender was required to pay a compensation (wergild) to the victim or the victim’s family.
    7. Dooms: These were codes of law issued by kings. The most famous is the code issued by King Æthelberht of Kent in the 7th century, which is the earliest written law code in any Germanic language.

    The High Middle Ages in England, (Norman Era) spanning roughly from the 11th to the 13th centuries :

    1. Manorial Courts: These were local courts held by a manorial lord. They had jurisdiction over the tenants of the manor and dealt with minor criminal cases and disputes between tenants.
    2. Hundred and Shire Courts: These were local courts that dealt with a variety of civil and criminal matters. The Hundred Court was a local court for a subdivision of a county (a “hundred”), while the Shire Court was for the county as a whole.
    3. Royal Courts: The Curia Regis, or King’s Court, was the precursor to the later royal courts of King’s Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer. The Curia Regis was a court held by the king and his advisers, and it dealt with a variety of legal matters.
    4. Assizes: These were periodic courts held in each county. They handled serious criminal cases, which were tried by a judge and a jury.
    5. Ecclesiastical Courts: These were courts held by the Church. They dealt with matters of canon law, including marriage, divorce, and probate.
    6. Trial by Ordeal and Combat: These were methods used to determine guilt or innocence in certain cases. Trial by ordeal involved a physical test, such as holding a hot iron, with the idea that God would protect the innocent. Trial by combat involved a fight between the accuser and the accused, with the outcome determining guilt or innocence.
    7. Writ System: The use of writs became increasingly important during this period. A writ was a written order from the king or a royal official that commanded the recipient to do something or to refrain from doing something.

The late medieval period in England, spanning roughly from the 13th to the 15th centuries:

  1. Manorial Courts: These were local courts held by a manorial lord. They had jurisdiction over the tenants of the manor and dealt with minor criminal cases and disputes between tenants.
  2. Hundred and Shire Courts: These were local courts that dealt with a variety of civil and criminal matters. The Hundred Court was a local court for a subdivision of a county (a “hundred”), while the Shire Court was for the county as a whole.
  3. Royal Courts: The three main royal courts were the Court of King’s (or Queen’s) Bench, the Court of Common Pleas, and the Court of Exchequer. The King’s Bench dealt with criminal cases and disputes involving the king, the Common Pleas dealt with civil cases between subjects, and the Exchequer dealt with financial and revenue matters.
  4. Assizes: These were periodic courts held in each county. They handled serious criminal cases, which were tried by a judge and a jury.
  5. Court of Chancery: This court dealt with matters of equity, providing remedies when the strict application of common law would result in an unfair outcome.
  6. Ecclesiastical Courts: These were courts held by the Church. They dealt with matters of canon law, including marriage, divorce, and probate.
  7. Parliament: While not a court in the modern sense, the medieval Parliament (particularly the House of Lords) could hear legal cases. Over time, it developed into a legislative body.
  8. Jury Trials: The use of juries became increasingly common during this period. Juries were used to determine the facts of a case, while the judge would determine the law.

The early modern period of English history, spanning from the late 15th to the late 18th century, saw significant developments in the legal system. Here are some key features of the English court system during this period:

  1. Manorial Courts: These were local courts held by a manorial lord. They had jurisdiction over the tenants of the manor and dealt with minor criminal cases and disputes between tenants.
  2. Quarter Sessions: These were local courts that met four times a year. They were presided over by justices of the peace and handled a wide range of criminal cases, as well as administrative matters.
  3. Assizes: These were periodic courts held in each county. They handled the most serious criminal cases, which were tried by a judge and a jury.
  4. Court of King’s (or Queen’s) Bench: This was one of the superior courts of common law. It had jurisdiction over criminal cases and also heard civil cases involving trespass and other wrongs.
  5. Court of Common Pleas: This was another superior court of common law. It heard civil cases involving disputes over land, debts, and contracts.
  6. Court of Exchequer: This court was originally responsible for matters of revenue and finance. However, over time, it also developed a jurisdiction similar to that of the King’s Bench and Common Pleas.
  7. Court of Chancery: This court dealt with matters of equity, as opposed to the common law courts which dealt with matters of law. The Court of Chancery could provide remedies when the strict application of common law would result in an unfair outcome.
  8. Star Chamber: This was a court of law which evolved from the King’s Council in the 15th century. It was known for its arbitrary methods and severe punishments. The Star Chamber was abolished in 1641 during the English Civil War.
  9. Ecclesiastical Courts: These were courts held by the Church of England. They dealt with matters of canon law, including marriage, divorce, and probate.

The British legal system is rooted in the common law tradition, which emphasizes case law and judicial precedent. Here are some key features of the British court system prior to the World Wars:

  1. Magistrates’ Courts: These local courts handled most minor criminal cases and some civil cases. They were presided over by justices of the peace, who were local dignitaries appointed by the Crown.
  2. Quarter Sessions: These were local courts that met four times a year. They handled more serious criminal cases that were beyond the jurisdiction of the magistrates’ courts but did not warrant a trial by jury.
  3. Assizes: These were periodic courts held in each county of England and Wales. They handled the most serious criminal cases, which were tried by a judge and a jury.
  4. High Court of Justice: Established by the Judicature Acts of the 1870s, the High Court was divided into three divisions: the Queen’s (or King’s) Bench Division, which handled serious criminal cases and civil cases involving contract and tort law; the Chancery Division, which dealt with equity cases, including disputes over wills, trusts, and property; and the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division, which handled probate and matrimonial cases, and maritime disputes.
  5. Court of Appeal: Also established by the Judicature Acts, the Court of Appeal heard appeals from the High Court and the county courts.
  6. House of Lords: Prior to the creation of the Supreme Court in 2009, the House of Lords served as the highest court of appeal in the UK. However, only Law Lords (members of the House who were senior judges) participated in judicial decisions.
  7. Jury Trials: In serious criminal cases and some civil cases, disputes were decided by a jury of the defendant’s peers.
  8. Barristers and Solicitors: The legal profession in Britain was (and still is) divided into barristers, who represent clients in court, and solicitors, who handle legal paperwork, give advice, and may also represent clients in certain courts.

6. American Experiment:

The American court system is a complex, multi-tiered system that includes both federal and state courts. Here are some key features:

Federal Courts:

  1. U.S. District Courts: These are the trial courts of the federal system. There are 94 district courts across the U.S. and its territories. They handle a wide range of civil and criminal cases under federal law.
  2. U.S. Courts of Appeals: These are the intermediate appellate courts of the federal system. There are 13 Courts of Appeals, each covering a specific geographic circuit. They review decisions of the district courts and administrative agencies.
  3. U.S. Supreme Court: This is the highest court in the U.S. It has the final say on issues of federal law, including constitutional law. The Supreme Court hears appeals from the Courts of Appeals and, in some cases, directly from the district courts or state supreme courts.

State Courts:

  1. Trial Courts: These are the primary courts in each state, often organized by county. They handle a wide range of civil and criminal cases under state law. The names of these courts vary by state (e.g., Superior Court, District Court, Circuit Court).
  2. Intermediate Appellate Courts: Many states have an intermediate appellate court that reviews decisions of the trial courts. These are often called Courts of Appeals.
  3. State Supreme Courts: Each state has a supreme court, which is the highest court in the state. It has the final say on issues of state law.
  4. Specialized Courts: In addition to these general courts, there are also specialized courts at both the federal and state levels that handle specific types of cases, such as bankruptcy, tax, family law, probate, and juvenile cases.
  5. Jury Trials: In both federal and state courts, cases may be decided by a jury, which is a group of citizens who are called to evaluate the evidence and determine the facts of the case.
  6. Adversarial System: The U.S. legal system is an adversarial system, which means that the parties to a case present their arguments and evidence to a neutral judge (and sometimes a jury), who then makes a decision.

7. Roman: The Roman Republic had a mixed constitution with democratic elements, but political power was largely in the hands of the aristocracy. The Roman assemblies were open to all male citizens, but voting was organized by wealth classes, and the aristocratic Senate held significant power.

During the Roman Republic (509–27 BCE):

  1. Praetor’s Court: The praetor, a high-ranking official, was responsible for the administration of justice. The praetor would issue an edict at the beginning of his term outlining his interpretation of the law and how he intended to administer it.
  2. Centumviral Court: This was a court of civil jurisdiction, composed of 105 members (hence the name). It dealt with matters of inheritance and property rights.
  3. Quaestiones Perpetuae: These were standing criminal courts established to hear specific types of cases, such as murder or theft. Each court was presided over by a praetor or a quaestor (another type of elected official).
  4. Public Trials: Criminal trials were public affairs, often held in the Forum. The prosecution and defense were usually conducted by orators, who were not professional lawyers but were often politicians.
  5. Juries: Juries were composed of citizens, and their composition changed over time. Initially, they were made up of senators, but later reforms opened up jury service to equestrians (a lower social class) and eventually to all citizens.

During the Roman Empire (27 BCE–476 CE):

  1. Imperial Courts: The Emperor held supreme judicial authority and could hear cases personally. However, most cases were heard by appointed judges.
  2. Provincial Courts: In the provinces, governors acted as judges and could hear both civil and criminal cases.
  3. Municipal Courts: In the cities and towns of the Empire, local magistrates would hear minor cases. These courts dealt with everyday disputes and minor crimes.
  4. Private Courts: For certain types of disputes, particularly those involving commercial transactions, parties could agree to have their case heard by a private arbitrator.
  5. Professional Lawyers: The legal profession became more established during the Empire, and there were lawyers who provided legal advice and represented clients in court.
  6. Codification of Law: The laws of the Empire were codified in several major legal codes, most notably the Codex Justinianus (Code of Justinian) in the 6th century CE.

So The legal and court systems of the proto-europeans, the Hittites, early Germanic tribes, Spartans, Athenians, Romans, Germanics, English, French, and Americans and the rest of the anglosphere reflect the distinct political, social, and cultural contexts of these societies:

Similarities:

  1. Geographic Limits: As a steppe, plain, and forest people, 
  2. Technological Dependence: (horse, bronze, wheel, manuever)
  3. Voluntary Organization: Contract, pirate polity, necessitates rule of law.
  4. Participation: ( … )
  5. Traditional Law: (legitimacy)Persistence of Group Advantage: Preservation of group coherence and loyalty, by preservation of the loyalty of the warriors and their families and clans, by Preservation of their Self Determination, by the neutrality of decision making in matters of conflict, by reliance on duty testimony and ‘skin in the game’,
    Why? This is the ‘why’ of european civilization.
  6. Restitution: Emphasis on restitution vs punishmente in these legal systems, with offenders often required to compensate their victims.
    Why? The preservation of group (inter-clan) coherence, loyalty, and administrative legitimacy, suppression of retaliation cycles, preservation of human capital, as well as the tolerance for error.
  7. Role of Elite: In all these societies, the elite (whether they were kings, elders, or high-ranking officials) played a significant role in the administration of justice.
    Why? Responsibility of the Aristocracy for the condition of the people by demonstrated competency, the legitimacy that results, and the coherence that results from that legitimacy.
    Q: What occurs with the division of labor between the aristocracy and the professionals (what is the difference in knowledge between the judges and the aristocracy?) ( … )
  8. Hierarchy of Courts: All these societies had some form of hierarchy in their court systems, with local courts for minor disputes and higher courts for more serious or complex cases.
    Why? Responsibility for Seriousness of the conflict, and attention of the hiearachy to one’s claims, assists in the legitimacy of the courts, the elite, and the polity, and it’s laws – by the suppression of the potential for arbitrary rule.

Differences:

  1. Variance in scale: And therefore variation in the subtlety of judgements as local and specific decisions by aristocracy that are replaced by common and general decisions of professional bureaucracies.
  2. Variance in Complexity of Economy and Society:  (knowledge)
  3. Variation in Interests: Aristocracy obtains its legitimacy and wealth from a broader platform of responsibilities and has a tendency to make decisions from a position of honor taking into account local considerations and long term consequence – but may bias for political reasons. Whereas professional bureaucracies obtain legitimacy and income from their occupations, and so they may bias for personal income and political reasons, and are more open to corruption. As such legitimacy and settlement are less likely. This problem is referred to as the conflict between personal sensitivity to fully account for individual causes and consequences and professional bureaucarcy that produces greater consistency of cooperation along with greater consistence of decisions as population’s scale, producing higher cooperative velocity.
  4. Variation in those Insured and Responsbility for them: ( … )
  5. Variation in Political Particpation and Security of the Aristocracy: Security in their station because of the support of the people for them in their station, where that station is self determination under sovereignty and reciprocity. In other words more secure the station of the aristocracy by their demonstrated responsiblity the more open the participation.
  6. Variation in Juridical Participation: The Athenian court system was unique in its level of democratic participation. Jurors were ordinary citizens chosen by lot, and any citizen could bring a case to court.
    ( … )
  7. Variation in the contingency of participation: ( … )
  8. Variation in the Spectrum of Public Prosecution: The Athenian concept of “public prosecution,” where it was the responsibility of citizens to enforce the laws, was unique among these societies.
    Why? (…)
  9. Variation by Correspondence between military, government court and economy: ( … )
  10. Variation in Religious Influence (variations on trifunctionalism): The Spartan and Hittite legal systems were heavily influenced by religious beliefs and practices. In Sparta, the two kings had judicial powers in religious matters, while in the Hittite kingdom, the king was seen as the chief priest and had the final say in religious disputes.
    Why? Religious RItual was a responsibility of the elites, and indifferent from responsibilty for law and war.

Summary ( … )  (similarities are that given the territorial impossibiity of concentrating production and military defense and justic, necessitating small polities, and a universal militia and everyone is armed, the similarities consists of preservation of legitimacy and settlement in that condition, and differences are just scale and complexity. World differences in government, court, and law are due to these factors.)

Inputs to the Resolution of Conflicts in Court

Solving The Hard Problem of Decidability. (explain) ( … )

The Natural Law

The Constitution of Natural Law

The body of surviving Findings of the Court of natural Common concurrent Law

The body of surviving legislation under the natural common concurrent law.

The Conflicting Parties

Plaintiff

Defendant

Jury of Peers (citizens)

Judge(s) (referees)

The Venue

Definitions:

Responsibility (capacity for responsibility,not everyone is capable, and some aren’t willing)

Authority (Responsibilty for the Burden of Decidability Under The Law)

There is no authority but the natural law, we are all sovereign, but call upon others to take responsibility for decidability in matters of conflict, and we label this as authority.

The legitimate purpose of authority consists of: to provide a means of decidability, given the insurance of sovereignty and reciprocity, for those who 

Imperfection (knowledge, bias, crime), capacity of different members of the polity to demonstrate agency and rsponsibility, and capacity of those responsible on their behalf for providing decidability under the law and only the law. 

What are the responsibilities of any authority?

|Decidability|: Causality > Responsibility > Blame(Accountability, Liability) > Restitution > Punishment > Prevention > *Legitimacy* by education (explanation).

  • The Problem of Aristocracy-Nobilty vs Reward(middle class)
  • Inalienable:
    • Responsibility for education (explanation) of the decision. In other words, a fully informed decision should meet the terms of truth and reciprocity.
    • Authority (permission, in service to the law)
    • Legitimacy ()

|Hierarchy of Decidability|: Self > Family > Clan > Courts > Parliament > King (Decider of Last Resort) > Militia (Insurer of last resort)

|Authority|: Insurer(polity,court,state) > Referee(judge) > Decider(jury) > Advocates(lawyers) > Insured (parties) > demonstrated interstes of parties.

|Legitimate Decidability|: Authority (Not accountable) vs Responsibility (accountability)

Table of Legitimacy of Responsbility for Authority.
. . . . . . . . . Authority
illegitimate ………. Legitimate
Irreciprocity …….. Reciprocity
Irresponsible …… Responsible
Discretionary …… Non Discretionary
Rule (Command)..Rule of Law (rules based)

Dtermination of facts: Causality, Responsibility, Liability(civil), Criminality 
Determination of Consequences: Guilt, Restitution, Punishment and Prevention

COMMONALITY
(define)
Determination of COMMONALITY (Negativa) (Court, Dispute)

CONSEQUENCES OF COMMONALITY
Evolutionary Computation of Incremental Suppression

??? CONCURRENCY (Positiva) (Legislation, Contract)

Summary

|Recursive Cycle of Sovereignty|: Self Determination of Warriors > Insurance of Self Determination > Sovereignty > Legitimacy(process, verb) > Settlement(result, noun) > Group Coherence > Loyalty > Self interest in Self Determination under the benefits of High Trust Cooperation.

Necessity of Positive and Negative Due Process

Problem

( … ) (requirements without training to require)

|Ternary Logic|: Inclusion, Seduction, Pedagogy (-) < —- (=) —–> (+) Discipline, Force, Decidability

–“Given these responsibilities of self determination and individual sovereignty (a) Some people do not have the ability, agency, competency for successful self determination (b) so it’s logical so many prefer serfdom, (c) it’s cruel not to offer it to them, (d) western civilization is organized to maximize individual responsibiity as a means of defense of the commons from free riding or privatization. (e) given the development of humans from infants to adults, and the window of each developmental stage, as the complexity of cooperation, the division of labor, and trade increase, the cost of investing training necessary for the production of agency of individuals increases. (f) and the convergence of that training with the laws of nature (the four sciences) produces the greaest possible human agency.  (n) therefore agency is a form of personal and common capital and any inhibition of the production of that ability, agency, competency, is a crime, to be outlawed – the result being a prohibition on falsehood and false promise and a constraint of political participation to those of demonstrated agency and competency.” — Brandon and Martin

–“The more  abstract view of due process is that we require not only due process in the resolution of disputes but due process in the production of the agency necessary to avoid them while cooperating at large scale” — Brandon

–“The state has the duty to make itself as unnecessary as possible in the production of self determination by self determined means by giving parents or the high trust community the maximum ability to provide that training, but to require that they do provide that training, or outsource it to those who will – because human capital is the most important capital with the greatest influence on the present and future condition of man and training of generations required for the persistence of the capital one inherited. This can only be accomplished in tandem with the prohibition on speaking, spreadding, teaching falsehoods and false promises.”– Martin 

–“The speed of change unleashed by the sequence of industrial revolutions overwhelmed our institutions of the production of ability, agency, and  responsibility creating opportunity for the invention, distribution and sale of non-agentic or anti-agentic incentives narratives and justifications: the industrialization of lying to compensate for uncertainty and alienation by the Cathedral complex of Academy, State, Media, and Entertainment.”– Moritiz

–“The absence of class structure and the stated expecations of each class structure while preserving mobility of class structure, instead of maximizing the potential of individuals within the ability to fill the obligations of a class structure, is cruel as it sets up each generation to fail by the false promise of a middle classe, upper middle class, or in worst case, an aristocracy of everyone. So our purpose is to produce legitimacy of the polity, society, and economy, by maximizing individual potential without the false promise that anything is possible for everyone, and therefore equality of opportunity or outcome is possible for everyone.”– CurtD

–“Necessity and utility of training in the natural law for the production of (SDSDMSdiRdwdDTEB). This may require traditional mythos, ritual and holiday, and formal education from the very beginning, effectively creating a religoin of natural law”–CD

 THEREBY REQUIRING;
I.III.VII – THE ENUMERATED POSITIVE RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS AND INALIENATIONS
( … )

I.IV – AFTER INCLUSION (ON EXIT, ALIENATION FROM THE POLITY)
( … )

THEREFORE SOLUTIONS HERE

( … )

4.2 – Immutability of Fundamental, Natural, Rights

4.X – Disambiguate Negative and Natural from Positive and Contractual

( … )

4.X – Disambiguate Rights by Enumerating Differences Between The Spectrum Necessary to Arbitrary Rights: Given that a) Natural, Necessary, Negativa, Fundamental Rights ingroup b) Contractual Constructed, Positiva, Conditional Rights ingroup c) Pragmatic Contactual Rights Outgroup d) Potential Rights Outgroup, e) Opportunistic Rights Outgroup, this provision disambiguates these rights so that none can be falsely claimed or denied. 

4.X – Variation from Negativa Natural Rights by Positiva Contractual and Legislative

(possible, truthful, declarative by commonality/concurrency, cost, externality)

Informal Institutions (hygiene, dress, decoration, language, manners, ethics, morals, norms, traditions, associations literature, history, mythology)

Natural Interests(necessary), Normative interests(informal), Contactural Interests (constructed), and  Institutional (Formal)

The problem of ‘costly preferences’? it is an exchange as long as it’s not an externality?

So that’s the problem of islam, communism, chinese communism, french colonialism, russian imperialism – is that they can’t produce their preference without imposing external costs – even if that external cost is a long term risk (when they fail).

Can a group legislate Islam, communism, woke etc, if it’s stated truthfully, the costs are stated, and the rules are agreed to by commonality and concurrency? these groups have … is woke criminal? is islam criminal? is communism criminal? Is Judaism Criminal? Was christianity criminal? …. they’r not only criminal but evil.

So as long as it’s non-false ‘nationalism’ for the benefit of the group and the group is willing to pay the costs, then it’s fine? (Material vs Unfalsifiable) Nationalism comes with responsibiity to the nation rathr than externalizing responsibility by excuses onto others.

The whole world has bought into ‘capitalism’ to to speak, but not into progressivism and woke? (Ran a test. Falsified the Test. Abrahamic-Marxist)

Aren’t all these religions and cults seditious against the natural law? Yes, they all are (other than xianity w/o the false promise).

Deprive them of influence (in what?) Church vs State and State vs N-Law – limited to norms. … the problem ends up that they teach lying.

Christianity attempted to account for POTENTIAL that people can be seduced into reciprocity (saved). “Imagine if you are the victim” Turns out to be relatively true.  (we are least hostile to outiers by a large margin)

Christianity … exhaustive justification… (extension of female for offspring)

This is why festivals vs institutional scriptural religions….

OR ELSE? (impose costs on others creates demand for war)

IMMATERIAL: Unfalsifiable false promises are permissible if they produce prosocial behavior, tnat is not irreciprocal, and not in conflict with laws of nature and natural law, but falsifiable false promises are impermissible regardless. (Intertemporal metaphors). But it is inadmissable in court and impermissible in political speech.  (This would be a means of reforming islam into something viable, as well as christianity – but not judaism, communism, etc, feminism, etc.).

4.3 – Variation in Rights By Conditions: All rights are conditional given the three states of a polity: War (sacrifice), Peace (Going Concern), and Windfall (redistribution). This provision limits the government and the people from abuses by expressly stating rights and obligations under each condition.

4.4 – Duty to the Priority of Obligations, Rights, and Inalienations:
(Q: trifunctional problem: priority of State/Military vs Constitution/Law vs Religion/Faith???? Each one seeks a monopoly at the others expense, However they are domains of competency, and we can state the priority in each domain. In other words, if it is a matter of state (survival/defense/order), constitution( reciprocity, testimony), or faith (interpersonal, personal) we know the domain of each. The state’s priority is rare, but universal, the law’s priority is common and universal, the faith’s priority is common and particular to the circumstance.) WHY: if there is a conflict between state, law, and faith which one is false? Because they should be the same if none are false.

GOALS

4.6 – Restore Truth In Public Discourse: Among those laws is the demand for truthful, non-defamatory speech, in public, to the public, in matters public, meaning all academic, political, economic, etc. speech by politicians, media, etc., is equivalent to court testimony and prosecutable by perjury. This will destroy the industrialization of lying – and yes, it will work. We treat information as a product like any other and that information distribution can do harm if it’s speculative or not true. So we extend the warranty of fitness and due diligence from products and services to information. Most of the technical part of P-Law was necessary to make this evolution of our law necessary. You won’t understand this part. And you don’t need to.

4.7 – We include a process (a checklist) for testing Testifiable (Truthful) speech, that is usable in court, usable in public speech, and usable by anyone willing to do the work to learn it – like a more sophisticated form of diagramming sets of sentences. This methodology is the foundation of, and principle innovation of, our work – and is the reason for the success of our project, and ability to articulate European civilization’s strategy in scientific terms. With this method, the philosophical debate over the definition of truth is settled (solved) and while we can never know, outside of the trivial, the most parsimonious truth possible, we can determine if one possesses the knowledge to claim one speaks truthfully, and whether one has done so, and whether such a claim meets demand for infallibility given the question at hand.

4.x – Disambiguate and Categorize Spectrum of Violations of ROIs. Given the incremental discovery and subsequent incremental suppression of categories irreciprocity by legislative, regulatory, juridical, ethical, and moral rules – each requiring increasing precision of decidability, or increasing scale of organization of suppression, that these categories are incomplete in that that these categories consist of a spectrum, and that ‘like the number line’ as human invention of new means of irreciprocity evolve with knowledge and technology,  such that increases in each category of irreciprocity will continue, just as new categories may evolve over time, as human organizations’ scale, and grow in complexity and informational asymmetry. This provision provides the court, legislators, and the people the ability to prevent novel increases in irreciprocity.

4.x – Disambiuate and Enumerate the properties of rights. Given the lack of precision in standards of weights and measures in rights to demonstrated intersets both private and public, and in particular those rights in the commons, we enumerate the specific rights and obligations to use of all demonstrated interests thereby eliminating confusion because of bias assumption habit or tradition, and establishing limits on our use of demonstrated interests whether private or common. (Usus, Fructus, Abusus)

Positive Norms

4.8 – Correcting the Oversight in our Law …. incremental suppression of crimes of false promises, baiting into hazard.

5.4 – The end of trial by public gossip, the end of suppression of truthful speech, and

5.5 – the conversion of political affiliation as protected class, and political speech to protected speech.

5.6 – The liability for truthful display, word and deed in public, to the public, in matters public, and especially so for commercial gain.

5.7 – The liability for seditious display, word and deed

5.8 – universal standing in commons.

POLICY

6. Regarding Strategic Policy

Problem:

  1. long term planning, candidates commit in response to it.
  2. Measurement, measurement of capital in toto
  3. Personal Liability for declines in capital (prevent san franciscos, detroits etc)

7. Regarding Taxes and Financial Easing

We have a complex set of objectives here, including redistribution from the financial sector and the bureaucracy to the middle; de-financializing life for the majority middle and restoring their prosperity; changing how the money supply is increased to facilitate that restoration; and eliminating complexity in the tax system so that there are fewer frictions in the economy, and fewer incentives for the government to interfere in the economy. Given that rather shortly almost all taxes will go to fund redistributive benefits, in a perfect world we would have only income taxes or sales taxes and the entire economy would be frictionless otherwise. It hasn’t been possible to do so technologically. Now it is. Furthermore, the participation of the treasury and the insurer of last resort in strategic investments now captured by the financial sector at the expense of the people, will provide the government with incentive to produce returns to fund initiatives, not increase taxes, ending the threat that the endless job justification and self-promotion within the State or any organization- poses to the People.

1 – The entire tax system shall be vacated, and replaced with a flat and invariable tax of 18%, and a flat sales tax, variable and revised annually, with all prices to include that sales tax. This is the most frictionless tax system possible, but it is regressive to the bottom. However, we shall subsidize the bottom, at the time and point of purchase, using each citizen’s treasury account debit cards. This is the most frictionless method of using the simplicity of administration, simplicity of flat taxation with the simplicity of progressive redistribution that’s technologically available. For clarity this includes eliminating all other taxes, including those on payroll, redistributions, social security, dividends, capital gains, inheritances and transfers within the direct family line.

(Note: This technological work will be done by IBM and only IBM, exclusively within the USA, exclusively on IBM equipment and exclusively by natural-born US Citizens, and physical data services redundant and distributed in the central region of the country, regardless of cost. All strategic dependencies in the supply chain shall be repatriated to the USA regardless of cost. (Yes, we are fully aware of the consequences of demand and we fully intend those consequences.) All roles, rules, and regulations are vacated, and the simplest most effective, most reliable, technological solutions shall be implemented and all organizations shall adapt to the solution regardless of impact – not the other way around. There will be no more catastrophic technological failures, to repeat the IRS and Obamacare catastrophes. )

2 – Forgive all back taxes, all debt over back taxes. Restore juridical defense in tax defense, at the district level, close IRS court and terminate its employees and prohibit their government employment for conspiracy against the people. Terminate all IRS collection personnel. Limit IRS to investigatory work and submission of cases to the court. Fold IRS into Justice.

3 – Given that physical laborers in the Trades and only in the Trades (craftsmen) accumulate physical and cellular damage, are subject to greater risk and infirmary, and have unpredictable and shorter work lives, all income taxes on independent tradesmen including long haul drivers shall be eliminated up to two and a half times the median income. Our primary concern is altering the social and economic status of the craftsmen class, which physically transforms physical materials into finished goods, by insuring their health, stress and retirement, and relieving them from the extraordinary burden of record-keeping, reporting and compliance. Conversely, abusing this privilege shall demand extraordinarily punishment and restitution.

4 – In order to lighten the debilitating burden on small and medium businesses, for all those organizations owner-funded (no external investors or access to financial markets), all payroll and receivables shall be floated by the treasury, for 180 days. The costs of the current system “costing thousands so we don’t lose a dime” causes extraordinary distortions and stresses in businesses, particularly to employees, when the durability of sustainable networks of specialization and trade have decreased from intergenerational to generational, to decades, to mere economic cycles within the past century. If we combine floating payroll and receivables, and elimination of payroll taxes with sales taxes immediately deducted on each transaction, then the problem of cash management for organizations simplifies dramatically. (We won’t go into further detail here).

3. In the event of bank failure, Treasury protects the borrower, not the lender. And the FDIC limit will be raised to 100 times the median income. The Obama era seizure of banks that exceeded their capital limits, selling their assets to another bank, then guaranteeing the loans, so that the bank’s interest was in bankrupting the debtor will not be repeated. If banks go under, the borrower is protected, and lenders and investors beware.

8. Regarding The Economy

6) Comprehensive economic, financial, unemployment, health, retirement  reforms that restore the laboring, working, and middle classes, to the primacy of policy, while gutting the world financial elites, Washington politicians, and media. This will make single income families possible again. And will end the genetic destruction of our people through abuse of tax, finance and credit. It will eliminate interests on consumer goods. For working people, it will all but eliminate federal taxes. It includes regular distributions of liquidity (money) direct to consumers bank accounts to regulate the economy cutting out the banking system. You will pay for a house in 12 years or so. Your retirement, medical, and unemployment accounts will be yours, and untaxable, untouchable, and under your control.

Economic Structure

Capitalism vs socialism false dichotomy and false monopoly. Four economies, not one. Independent, market, sub-market, and ex-market. Move vast labor pool into production and maintenance of aesthetic commons – make the country a European park again.

The Civilizational Division of Risk an Trust

The British – American model requires aggressive integration.

The Demographic Realit of Human Capital

( … )

All Economies are Mixed Economies That Must Adapt To Needs

Consumption economies favor the financial sector at the expense of the people an they are ‘over’.

Population is no longer valuable, only quality population is valuable. (Japan)

The commons can absorb labor that automation replaces.

9. Regarding Money Supply, Finance, Banking, Consumer Credit, and Interest

(…explain…)

separate consumer and commercial credit

1. End Profit From Harms

2. End Baiting Into Hazard

3. End rent-seeking. 

4. End involuntary intergenerational transfer of liability

5. Maintain Going Concern

1 – The Federal Reserve is Nationalized and all assets contributed to the treasury without compensation, as punishment for crimes against our people. Any attempt at evasion will result in letters of marque against the entire chain of those involved, their families, and two generations of relations in all directions.

2 – Blackrock is Nationalized, investors shall maintain their investments, so long as the organization, its employees, equipment, processes, and procedures are integrated into the Federal Reserve and Treasury. Any attempt at evasion will result in letters of marque against the entire chain of those involved.

3 – The Visa and Mastercard Networks are Nationalized, converted to nonprofit status, and shall administer all consumer relations with the treasury and its accounts.

4 – American Express shall take a substantial investment from the State, and operate tax-free in exchange for the administration of the expansion of commercial credit, and that credit shall be issued by and protected by the Treasury. (Amex is capable of complex interaction with business and industry.)

5 – All consumer credit card debt shall be nationalized by the treasury ($1T+).

6 – All owner resident home mortgages shall be nationalized by the treasury without compensation, halved, and set to zero interest or written down. All those who have paid off their mortgages in the past 15 years without selling (paid down, not just paid off), and fully own their property shall receive immediate contribution to their treasury retirement accounts of one half of the payments made during that period.

Treasury Employee Regulation
(Prevention of Rent Seeking, Attraction of Talent)

10. Regarding Benefits: Income, Unemployment, Health and Retirement

Our interpretation of the Singapore model issues all citizens the equivalent of a debit card and credit line for (a) general funds (b) groceries (food), (c) unemployment, (d) health care, (e) retirement. Yearly distributions into these accounts are too difficult to manage for ordinary people, so they will be made monthly or quarterly. These accounts are inviolable and cannot be attached for debt collection nor used as collateral. They insure the public against each citizen’s incapacity and therefore insure the people against moral hazard. They cut out all the ‘middle man’ administrative costs that have so dramatically driven up prices. All these accounts accumulate interest.

1 – In times of crisis the treasury, as we recently experienced, can immediately distribute funds directly to citizens without delay. These funds can be delivered to a general account and used for any purpose.

2 – Redistribution: In times of windfall profits for the state, those profits can be distributed directly to the people in any combination of those accounts, whether to pay down the credit line for home, vehicles, or increase spending, or increase retirement savings.

3 – Unemployment funds can accumulate redistributions, can accumulate voluntary contributions, and be drawn down upon, and subsidized if necessary, but they are, at the very least, manageable.

4 – The demand for healthcare has been stalled because the right wants to preserve market competition for service, so that people who can afford to can continue to fund innovations, and the left wants to end market competition for service, and drag down overall quality in pursuit of equality (out of envy) at the cost of ‘death panels’.

As such the solution to the problem is centralizing purchasing and credit, issuing health insurance accounts in the Singapore model, and re-privatizing the healthcare industry into non-profits, with financing provided by the treasury, so it is no longer friendly to investors, finance, and administration, while hostile to care professionals, care providers, and patients.

This involves health accounts at the treasury for all citizens; nationalization of a set of insurance companies through majority ownership to serve as mixed private-public services, and an emphasis on care, not investments – since all insurance companies are investment houses with ‘fronts’ providing insurance. These accounts will function just like savings accounts. Some copay is necessary to preserve incentives not to abuse the system. Everyone will have majority subsidy of care costs and full insurance against catastrophes, thereby ending medical bankruptcy, but requiring cautious use of resources.

So we will get universal health care, we will remove the profit motive, but we will not follow the Europeans into abandoning the extraordinary value of markets. (People with money have no time – that’s why they have money. People with time have no money. We have to satisfy both ends of the spectrum and everyone in between.) (Note that elsewhere we also repatriate all strategic medical manufacturing across the spectrum across the entire supply chain.)

5 -The demand for retirement funds increases and is all but unsustainable. So we want to put this back under control of the individual on one hand, and make sure those who lack ‘judgement and foresight’ are protected from their own impulses on the other.

As such these accounts will be contributed to monthly or quarterly. They cannot be attached nor used as collateral. These funds are savings, not promises to money that don’t exist as today. All contributions to these accounts are tax-free both on input and output. You can for example, sell your home, deposit the entire value tax free, up to one hundred times the median income, at which point the account is ‘full’ (to prevent abuses by the very wealthy). You cannot draw on this for any reason other than retirement.

As such your retirement savings are under your control and you are no longer dependent on politics for your retirement income. Also note: these retirement funds are inheritable.

Regarding Manufacturing

Strategy:

Limit exposure to economic warfare; end disposability and planned obsolescence, and continuous feature bloat; reduce the number of competitors in the market to the best producers; exchange zero interest on consumer goods for higher prices and longer product lifetimes; force American companies into the high quality and durability market; drive Americans into the American market; drive world competitors out of the American (Anglo, European) market.

Consumer Protections for Products

1. Right to repair.
2. Right to upgrade.
3. Full replacement warranty (upgrade, repair, replace) of 25 years.
4. Loss of patent protection upon end of production/designs, software must be given to open source (consumers) upon the end of production.
5. Entire chain must carry insurance of warranty of right to repair and durability of goods.

Repatriation of Strategic Industries

Repatriate the entire military design supply and manufacturing chain.
Repatriate all advanced materials design supply and manufacturing chain.
Repatriate the entire electronic component design, supply, and manufacturing chain.
Repatriate the entire robotics component design, supply, and manufacturing chain.
Repatriate the entire battery design, supply, and manufacturing chain.
Repatriate the entire medical pharmaceutical and design, supply, and manufacture chain.
Repatriate the entire heavy equipment design, supply, and manufacturing chain.
Repatriate the entire automotive design, supply, and manufacturing chain
Repatriate all customer service and call center labor.

Financing Repatriation and Automation
( … )

11. Regarding Consumer Protections

Consumer Protection

(…explain…)

Restore responsibility (no more warnings on ladders)

End of Evasion of Responsibility.
Natural Born Service personnel with native language facility
The person taking the call must have the authority to solve the problem.
Liability in the complete chain of responsibility

3. Prohibition on punishment fees.
4. Full information of vendor for every charge to card.
5. Ability to comment on any card payment.
6. Prohibition on churning.
7. The creation of terms under which consumer goods are considered a part of the national infrastructure.
8. Independent contract for YouTube, Facebook, and Google as infrastructure free from advertising.
9. Maximum wait times for all government services.
10. All government and financial services open from 8 am to 10 pm.
11. Prohibition on interruption advertising. Prohibition on environmental advertising. Limit to destination advertising.

Liability Reform

( … )

12. Regarding The Family, and the Restoration of Intergenerational Lending

9) Restore the Commons Society and Socialization – the cure for alienation.

( … )

11) Restore Marriage, the Family, and End The War on Men – By ending our integration of people into nuclear families, combined with the increases in taxation and interest, and the devaluing of a high school diploma making a college education and its debt necessary, we demanded two incomes, and redistributed middle class reproduction to the bottom of our population. The experiment has failed. We end community property, restore fault in divorce, restore liability for interference in marriage. The child support and alimony program has failed with only something over half of payments made, and men’s lives destroyed, because they cannot trade their income for participation in a household. We end alimony and make child support a state benefit rather than entrapping men in poverty so that they end their suicides in late middle age. This will rapidly restore the incentive to make better marital choices, and make interference in a marriage and stop the ‘divorce rape’ of men that has made marriage and children undesirable. We restore the ability to form men’s fraternal organizations and fund them so that as marriage continues on current paths, men can work together for mutual gain.

Produce incentives for good families. Produce disincentives for bad families. ( … )

13. Regarding Norms

Given that our technological advantages have been eliminated through worldwide distribution and adoption of European thought, finance, economics, law, science, farming, technology, medicine, our people’s only remaining competitive advantage is our high trust Northern European traditions, norms, and institutions, and the demographic distribution of Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Chinese over the rest of the world.

1 – Restoration of the obligations to conform to high trust northern European norms in manners, ethics and morals in display, word and deed, by the explicit clarification of one’s limited ‘rights’ in public (the commons), and the obligation of every individual to police the commons for conformity to high trust norms in display, word, and deed, and the obligation to submit to censure for violation of those norms, manners, ethics, and morals, or be subject to prosecution. This restores the requirement for respectful, mindful, using self-control, and situational awareness, to impose no cost to attention, to passage, to interaction in public, giving preference to families, and yielding to parents, elders, managers, owners, security, and police – including the restoration of ‘face control’ (personal discretion) – so that the power to ostracize from commons, public ways, commercial spaces in order to restore our civility of the commons and to ostracize from private, public, ways, the territory, the locality, the region, the States, and the State, those who fail to integrate.

2 – The restoration of the right of voluntary dissociation in all aspects of life, and the right to refuse attention, interaction, or service. This is the most controversial subject since it means a return to voluntary segregation, however, it will produce the desired results of pressuring people into high trust conformity, or forcing them to move to live with like-minded people in order to avoid conflict. (The increases in quality of life are unimaginable since it drastically increases the individuals cost in self-discipline in order to take advantage of public, commons, and private resources. It will rapidly reverse the decline in civic virtues so evident in daily life. Because one no longer has imaginary ‘rights’ to anything. One must earn access to the good. )

14. Regarding The Commons

( introduction)

( … )

(exchange interest for costs of construction)
(abandonment provisions for unmaintained buildings)
(reward for territorial preservation by parks, farming, forests etc)
Zoning
Standardize Housing (rooms).
Design styles 
Construction methods
Office and Industrial Construction
Capital to people not people to capital

15. Regarding Primary Education

EXPLANATION OF THE REASONS FOR REFORMING EDUCATION

The failure of our educational system cannot be understood without first understanding the reasons for the disproportionate success of Western civilization at dragging mankind out of tyranny, superstition, ignorance, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child morality, early death and victimization of nature.

European civilization, for circumstantial reasons discovered and adapted to and institutionalized the closest approximation of the physical, natural, and evolutionary rules of the universe. And we have managed to use those laws, and use them to our advantage. But this knowledge came at the cost of recognition that the universe, the universe’s gods, were not for the benefit of man, but instead, that in a brief period of geological, solar and galactic peace, we managed to temporarily achieve limited mastery of them – at the cost of a religion, culture, institution of heroism and tragedy to defeat the universe, by evolving faster than all other civilizations, that despite being older, stagnated or failed because they could not discover, adapt to and institutionalize those laws, by uniting the people as an army wherein together we each do our duty, in a continuous competition against nature, beast, and man, the consequences of which are prosperity unequaled in mankind.

To educate our people into this Adversarialism in Everything, Markets In Everything, Truth before Face Regardless of Cost, Reciprocity before Self Regardless of Cost, And Duty before self regardless of cost: the value of Everyone, regardless of Rank, to the Team (army) – the Result of which is a soft version of Stoicism (mindfulness). And that heroism (for all) defeats the Tragedy of reality in the continuous race against the red queen of nature and her dark forces of time and ignorance. Everyone else failed because they sought what the universe cannot deliver, and evolution punishes – conflict and stability, rather than harmony in defeat of the tragedy of reality. In Western civilization the aristocracy provided heroism for the powerful, and the church provided sedation for the powerless, producing a rapidly evolving polity in which the common people were emotionally insulated. When the church failed to reform its inexpensive means of mindfulness during the scientific revolution, and to adopt the Greek and Roman method of mindfulness we call Stoicism and Epicureanism, the people were left desperate for solution and the leftists delivered to them another a false promise. Not of life after death. but of freedom from physical scarcity, the nature of man’s rational self interest, and the selection pressure of evolution that constantly works to drag us back to the bottom.

This great achievement is easiest in a homogeneous polity and harder in a heterogeneous polity. However it is also most important in a heterogeneous polity with naturally higher inter group frictions over differences in sexual, social, economic, and political market value to one another.

THE ROLE OF EDUCATION IN OUR FAILURE

Education is a victim of The Parable of Seventeen Lies: “For every lie you tell, you must tell seventeen more to cover it, and seventeen more for each of those, and seventeen more of each of those. Eventually you lose track of the original lie and live in a world of senseless lying.”

Our education system is founded upon a number of lies. And the consequences of the subsequent network of lies has made it a catastrophic failure – the greatest institutional failure other than immigration. No matter how much money we throw at it, it doesn’t help. These lies are the great lies of the twentieth century – to ignore the laws rather than to teach each other how to help one another accommodate them.

THOSE LIES OF FALSE PROMISE:

i) The false promise of endless growth (economic expansion) and therefore endless advancement, under the lie that humans were oppressed rather than incrementally domesticated; and the false promise that everyone could join the middle and upper middle class – especially when technology continually shifts the minimum ability necessary to participate in an advanced economy. The industrial revolution liberated most human capital, but the technological revolution has left most of it behind and the present revolution will only accelerate that dispossession and alienation. It is not possible for all of us to join the lower middle (home asset ownership), middle (small business ownership), upper middle (professional), and lower upper (asset holding and managing) or upper (industrial and financial asset organization and production) classes. The best we can do is create commons that compensate, by providing quality of life from shared commons rather than individual need to pay for the private replication of those commons.

ii) The false promise of equality (genetic indifference) despite the wide variation in human beings their abilities and their potential, rather than diverse peoples evolved under diverse conditions and demonstrating local adaptations to those conditions – the most influential of which are degree of neotony or its reversal, and the consequences; the widely varying rates of maturity that result and therefore the educational needs; and the relative size of the lower classes; and the effect on culture, traditions, norms, habits, and behavior of groups – because in-group conformity is more effective than out-group adaptation. For these reasons all efforts at integration have failed without exception. All we have managed to do is raise a portion of our underclasses into middle class life style (home ownership) through economic expansion, and not via education.

iii) The false promise of the malleability of human beings (blank slate), under the illusion that it is possible, no matter how many resources and how much time we spend, to shift the adaptive rate of individuals so that they can participate in an advanced economy. They can’t. Period. Therefore a single economy (competitive market economy) is impossible. So multiple economies are necessary, and will remain so.

RESULTS OF THOSE LIES

The cumulative result of these lies has been the failure of the education system to organize and deliver the necessary services in a fashion optimal for individuals and groups with vastly different abilities and potential, that mature and learn at different rates; and this includes a failure to normalize the inevitability of our differences and the need for them in a division of knowledge and labor; failed to deliver fitness, mindfulness, socialization, preparation for adulthood, civil participation, parenting, household, or workforce, in order to maintain the system of lies of false promise within the education system – the only possible status vastly unequal people can obtain is fulfillment of *duty* to self, family, friends, customers, employers, and society at large. This is one of the secrets to Western civilization’s harmony, high trust, despite continuous market competition that provides us with our disproportionate prosperity: duty crates reciprocity and reciprocity creates trust and respect – despite market forces.

So the primary problem is the three lies of false promise deconstruct harmony and society by producing selfishness rather than duty, and demand for economic, social, and political results that are impossible. If you wanted to destroy a civilization from within by the social construction of denial of reality using false promise that will lead to lifetime agitation and depression ,you couldn’t do a better job than the American education system.

The natural instinct of mothers is to produce these false promises at home, in order to minimize effort of maintaining children’s willingness to participate. The natural instinct of fathers is to produce this duty in individuals and in society in order to produce the long term success of their offspring and the society throughout life. The preference for ‘talking more’ rather than moving more, the elimination of physical fitness, the mixture of boys and girls, the instinctual prejudice of women against boys, and the retreat of men from the profession given its loss of prestige have all contributed to the institutionalization of the female instinct to infantilize which has produced the most infantilized two generations in history – totally having abandoned civic duty, and totally unable to compete in the market, and totally unable to produce subsequent generations, and filled with rage over it.

Worse, education is conducted as daycare; to facilitate workforce participation at the expense of intellectually, physically, emotionally, and socially healthy individuals.

Worse, teaching is a talent, and and art, not a discipline. Everything one needs know to teach successfully (curriculum choice, lesson planning, and student progress measurement can be learned in one year of study, and one year of apprenticeship, and there is no evidence whatsoever that teachers improve over the course of their careers. Yet there is a vast certification edifice

Worse there is no civilization wide competitive platform for teachers, or for content, and the rate of innovation is insignificant given then rate of social, economic, technological and strategic change.

Physical Fitness (mindfulness), Ritual (mindfulness), Socialization (mindfulness), and high investment parenting in investment in and enjoyment of, the returns on the commons (“If it’s not mine, it’s sacred”). Once this mindfulness is produced, we have the agency to constructively (not destructively) explore our intuitions. But until we have physical fitness, emotional fitness (mindfulness in the stoic sense), socialization fitness (manners, etiquette, ethics, morals), and mental fitness (production of conscientiousness by physical, verbal, and written drills), students will even fail at discovering those combinations of interest and ability that they can contribute to the community and provide status and reward for themselves.

We forced boys to sit as if they were girls and caused unrecoverable developmental damage and subsequent abandonment of the commons.

We removed adversarialism from the classroom to accommodate girls, suppressed the rather obvious biological differences, and destroyed our cultural advantage in Tragedy, Heroism, and Competitive Adversarialism.

Worse, we’ve filled the curriculum with social pseudoscience, made a high school diploma meaningless, grades meaningless, the relative position of a student in his or her class meaningless. And as a result generated demand for a college education,

Worse, compared to the Germans and Finns who do the opposite – prepare people for life, and Indians whose competition in math and science is as good as was the Russian, and east Asians who learn by socialized repetition, and heavy workload so that they achieve in schools what Westerners achieve in military service: understanding that what you can do is far beyond what you intuit you can do. Children aren’t unique or special unless they are so obviously so that it’s undeniable, and they are rare events from families with histories of extraordinary ability. The fallacy of talent, uniqueness, or differences, is just an excuse not to educate. These are false promises.

This set of lies led to producing a population inadequate at the bottom because it was impossible to shift them; insufficient investment in the middle and top so that our people can compete internationally; rapid loss of our competitive educational advantage.

Worse, our education system evolved for the preparation of upper and upper middle-class families who could learn by reading for civic functions,. We added basic craftsman and clerical functions and taught by writing, then basic scientific functions taught as general scientific rules. We did not prepare people with basic knowledge of marriage, family and household skills, basic project and task management skills, and basic contracts, basic money, banking, credit, household, business accounting, microeconomics, and simple macroeconomics. We have turned our schools into systemic tests for submission to and obedience to teachers lacking any experience in business, technology, or industry, who are from the bottom 15% of their graduating classes – who by their nature, due to their social standing, professional self-interest, and economic ignorance, indoctrinate the students into political positions that reinforce the false promises. We removed sport, adversarial competition, dominance play and status-seeking within the limits of duty, and in doing so made generations psychologically infantilized and functionally disabled for participation in the civilizational and global economy. But we’ve vastly increased the size of the classes that cannot learn by reading, immigrated vast numbers with no ancestral experience of the nuclear family, common law manners ethics and morals, and destroyed the nuclear family and the intergenerational transfer of knowledge. Combined with environmental saturation in what amounts to largely lying about nearly everything from advertising to economics, to politics, to global strategy, we’ve created a sequence of increasingly lost, frustrated, easily exasperated generations that have no confidence in themselves, business and industry, the society or the government, and have all but abandoned the uniqueness of our civilization: our institutionalization of the behavior that produces high trust, high return commons. High trust commons are the most costly commons that can be created and only northern Europeans, Japanese and Koreans have succeeded in producing them at scale.

When combined with perhaps the worst choice of all – immigration of vast numbers of lower classes in order to replace industrial competitive advantage (productivity) with consumption (debt), we set the entire civilization into Roman collapse – while politicians, media, and financial sector profited from the managed decline (destruction) of our civilization, and the genetic extermination and replacement of our people by indebtedness – indebtedness that reversed our history of soft eugenics, and redistributed reproduction downward into low investment parents and children; and worse, investment into immigrants to replace us – immigrants demonstrably unfit for market survival in an advanced technological civilization under rule of law, that increasingly puts pressure on the limited rate of learning (adaptability) of the lower classes, and will continue to do so – or we cannot afford them. Education has been a catastrophic failure. The greatest institutional failure in our civilization. Because of the lies by false promise.

THE APPRENTICESHIP, TRADE SCHOOL, JUNIOR COLLEGE, COLLEGE, AND UNIVERSITY FAILURE

( … )

When combined with the University system’s incentive to attract foreigners so that they could have cheap graduate and research assistance without paying market prices for American citizens, this collapsed our higher education system.

( … university reforms …. )

How Then To Reform Education

CHANGE THE MANDATE

“Prepare generations for market competition with fitness, mindfulness, knowledge, agency, success, status, in a continuously adapting competitive world, by training each for success in one’s role in familial, social, economic markets, according to ones familial, social, and economic, market contribution – not by false promises of equality”.

TEACH THE WHOLE PERSON

This Reformation will require a transformative investment in our education system – perhaps not a Manhattan in technology but certainly in effort – from ‘talking’ by individual teachers to ‘doing’ by students in networks of students across the civilization.

We are not trying to produce factory or clerical workers – we have to produce whole people. And our society has broken down (by design, by intent, and with malice of forethought) such that historical institutions no longer provide Physical, Mental, Emotional, Social, and Intellectual Fitness. But we can understand this problem and what to do about it.

Success in life is determined by two biological factors more so than any other: (a) mindfulness (mental and emotional self regulation and control), and (b) the rate of learning and the tolerance for abstractions in learning (the distance between stepping stones, and therefore the number of stepping stones). These personality traits are referred to as conscientiousness and intelligence.

Success is determined by conscientiousness. Intelligence determines the complexity of the subject matter (continuous adaptation to change, and identification of novel opportunities, errors and risks) one works with. This is why wealth is distributed fairly evenly across the intelligence spectrum and progressively across the conscientiousness spectrum. And why increases in intelligence produce increases in income (a) very little, very slowly and (b) it levels off. In other words, it is more influential for lifetime fulfillment to have inherited trait conscientiousness than trait intelligence. And the primary function of trait intelligence appears to be error detection. And creativity the combination of both put to focus on nearly any subject more so than others are interested and willing to (Time).

Demonstrated intelligence (evidence in life) differs from biological intelligence. Demonstrated Intelligence consists of a set of properties: (a) the degree of friction in communication between the cells of the brain (IQ), (b) short term or working memory capacity (c) general knowledge, (d) general rules (science), and (e) “Not believing false things and not wanting to believe false things”. Of these, we can teach general rules (principles), increase general knowledge (examples), and use repetition to compensate for natural ability. Unfortunately, the world is full of falsehoods that preserve ‘false things’ – a problem we choose to fix.

Conscientiousness is dependent upon the prefrontal cortex – the last part of the brain to develop. The brain matures from back (senses) to front (self-control). And it grows unevenly in all of us. And it’s affected by the rate of maturity. But through exercise and repetition, we can train it through repetition over months and years. And a failed pseudo-scientific effort to expose ‘natural talents of the uniqueness of individuals’, we have committed the cruelest abuse of generations by removing the traditional and social means of producing mindfulness and failing to replace them in education. The method of doing so is not complicated, it’s the military method of ritualizing habitual behaviors, the stoic method of self-authoring by ritual daily planning, analyzing, and self-evaluation.

(Note: This mindfulness, secular piety, preservation of the provincialism of their localities, the primacy of the family, and gradual introduction to the workforce, by integration of work and stat, while prohibiting false promise to students, is the secret to German excellence in every aspect of social, economic, and political life, and was one of the harder questions of social science to solve. Asian societies have mastered the habituation technique and this alone has contributed more than anything else to their relative success at integrating new generations, while Americans have fallen farthest behind. Finnish attempts at maintaining the same teacher throughout the educational experience effectively extends the family into the school system.)

1 – Add training in mindfulness using Stoic method, Epicurean values.

2 – Restore competitive physical activity as a daily requirement, preferably twice per day.

3 – Restore the combination of physical and verbal recitation in groups as technique during the grammar years.

4 – Restore integration into Testimonial Speech.

5 -Restore integration into European Civilization’s History and Mission.

Restore Adversarialism

Restore Adversarialism and Socialization through “Gamification” and Simulation (Context) Within and Across Schools, States, Countries (the world).

  1. Teach Everything Possible at Home.
    (Note: For all intents and purposes, the necessity of school infrastructure for other than physical interaction in sport, is only useful or necessary for the socio-economic underclasses that cannot feed, manage, or provide sufficient discipline for their children. Or for those upper classes that can afford to send their children to boarding schools.)
  2. Teach Everything as Synesthetically as possible.
    (Note: synesthetic: “relating to or experiencing synesthesia; involving more than one sense; combining movement, reciting, chanting or singing, together in social groups. This is the most effective means of teaching everything.”)
  3. Teach Everything Possible by Gamification.
  4. Teach Everything Possible by Simulation of Occupations (Connecticut Method)

Therefore;

  1. Create A Standard for and Competitive Marketplace for Curriculum and Delivery of curriculum. (online store)
  2. Create a Software platform for that curriculum delivery. (done)
  3. Equip Students or Homes, classrooms, and infrastructure for this form of curriculum delivery.

(Note: In preparation for this reformation we have already invested over $1.4m in producing this software platform. It is deep, rich, fully integrated set of features eliminating the ‘operating system and many applications’ and problem. This platform would produce the equivalent depth of data about all aspects of education even far beyond what social media platforms produce today – for the same reason: continuous capture of interactions producing a continuously evolving profile of the user. However, instead of providing that information to advertisers, this platform provides information to the student, teacher, employees, the organization, and any combination thereof. This software produces the necessary statistical basis for the measurement of everyone in our civilization. This software runs in a browser, provides every necessary personal, social, organizational, and business functionality; curriculum can be built within it, added as a plugin, embedded in a frame, or connect through the application program interface. This will drastically cut teacher effort and drastically increase empirical measurement. And the incentive to create a curriculum exists because creators can earn from the use of the product, even at a trivial cost per student because of the scale of the ‘customer’ base. This scale of the initiative hasn’t been possible in education for a set of economic and bureaucratic reasons. As elsewhere we would require IBM and only IBM to take ownership of this infrastructure, and create a non-profit organization of social scientists and cognitive scientists to operate it.)

REFORM THE CURRICULUM
  1. Fitness, Strength, Sport.
  2. Mindfulness (Stoic Virtues, Epicurean Values, Lifetime self authoring)
  3. Psychology, Friendship, Sociology, Marriage, Education, Children
  4. Add Ethics (truth, ethics, morality), Reciprocity, Natural law. (Solve morality question and make it homogeneous)
  1. Restore Grammar (imitating), Logic (understanding), Rhetoric (Speaking) – as well as the table of grammars and the recognition of the techniques of ‘lying’. Grammar imitation, logic by practice, and rhetoric by demonstration.
  2. Restore: Reading, writing, oratory, research, presentation, essay, paper, story, script, book.
  3. Restore: Fairy Tales, Myths, Heroic Novels, Historical Novels, Biography, History and Geography
  4. Restore the Epic Cycle (the Indo-European expansion, the matter of Greece and Rome, the matter of France, Germany, Scandinavia, England, and Russia), Add the Evolution of our Religions. The Aristocracy’s Wisdom literature was the epic cycle and Aristotle and our Laws, teaching excellence, heroism, and tragedy for success by leaving a mark on history. The middle class’ wisdom literature was technology and philosophy and the virtue of work and achievement for joy in the present life. The Poor’s Wisdom literature was the Bible teaching forgiveness, suffering, and heroism as a consequence in exchange for solace in the afterlife. Of these literatures, the Aristocratic and the Christian have been intentionally undermined in order to justify hubris – the three great lies.
  5. Restore Art History – Add to scientific, Technological and Economic History (repeating). (Man’s history of war is terrifying. Man’s history as politics is depressing. Man’s history as economics is empowering. Man’s history as art is Inspiring.)
  6. For Boys: Restore Political Military History, Technology, Strategy, Economics, Logistics, Tactics, Leadership. (This will solve most socialization issues)
  7. For Girls: Restore “Social Military”. (Just as we suppress and direct male physical aggression by harm to discipline by, direct female social aggression by undermining and criticism to discipline. This comes from sport, dance, and drilling in etiquette. Both direct dominance and competition to the production of high trust commons)
  1. Convert the teaching of math from symbolic and sets to operational, computational, and geometric so that far more people are able to grasp it. Restore high repetition workloads in mathematics (Asian method). Arithmetic, Basic Math (ratios), Add Accounting, Algebra, Geometry, Logic of Statistics, Calculus, Analysis
  2. Programming: Programming like reason, logic, mathematics, and geometry is an evolutionary and revolutionary increase in our understanding – and it completes the bridge between actions and language.
  3. Add money, accounting, banking, interest, and investing, micro and macroeconomics as early as possible. Personal Finance, Family business, small business, medium business, enterprise, industry. As predicted by social scientists in the 1800’s “Everything in future life will be reduced to one kind of calculation or another”)
  4. Physics, chemistry, biochemistry, biology – ecology, and sentience (Using artificial neural networks for examples and operational model of brain circuitry as narratives. This information more than anything will dissipate sophistry, pseudoscience and myth from our civilization. We now know how the brain works. And we can end many of the lies by normalizing that knowledge)
RESTORE SOCIALIZATION AND PREPARATION FOR WORKFORCE
  1. Restore the German method of apprenticeship in cooperation with business and industry throughout.
  2. Seek to start workforce participation by age twelve.
  3. Seek to reduce school hours, especially morning hours, beginning at age 14, and split between working (apprenticeship) and schooling.
RESTORE THE ENVIRONMENT
  1. Restore Separate education for boys and girls. Require men teach boys after age seven. (Female bias against boys is universal and inescapable in education. Males respond better to male authority.)
  2. Restore adversarial competition to teaching of boys
  3. Remove disruptive children from functional classrooms and provide alternate education.
  4. Restore overlapping age groups so students are subject to repetition. (One room schoolhouse method. Between starting children when reading (boys usually later), separating children by ability, overlapping classes, older responsible for younger, all responsible for group)
  5. Restore divisions of classes into students of similar abilities learning at similar rates. (Note, it is more important to separate the top third from the rest than segment the rest.)
  6. Add teachers following students through the years (Finnish method).
  7. Limit teachers to 15 students per classroom (Russian method).
  8. Restore military discipline through age fourteen. (You can fail to teach mindfulness, you cannot contain creativity. So restore predictability, imitation, mindfulness, and agency)
  9. Restore responsibility of grade (groups) above for grades (groups) below.
  10. Restore corporal punishment (zero tolerance).
  11. Reform the dietary recommendations to limit carbohydrates and sugars to the absolute minimum.
  12. Deliver meals and snacks directly to classrooms, rather than force students to suffer staggered meals.
  13. Deliver something to eat no more than every three hours.
  14. Provide (submarine) bunks around study halls for rest or sleep.
RESTORE THE VALUE OF GRADUATION AND RANK, REGARDLESS OF AGE
  1. Develop standardized tests that measure progress in the above curriculum, including fitness, personality traits, intelligence, and current state of knowledge.
  2. High School Graduation Degree like College Degree will include (a) an emphasis on vocation, administration, business and finance, healthcare and medicine, engineering and technology, or sciences, (b) the student’s class, school, regional, state, national, and international statistical position, (c) ratings on manners, etiquette, ethics, morals, fitness, mindfulness, trait conscientiousness and trait intelligence. The fear of truth in education casting a burden on the individual and society has to end. And schools must return to preparing children for surviving in the competitive world we live in, when the windfalls of the industrial revolution have been dissipated around the world. Students can then continue education, and be retested as often as they would like – why? Because we all mature at different rates, girls faster, boys slower, men worldly, girls socially, and we can only improve on what we know – not what has been obscured from us.
REFORM THE ORGANIZATIONS

… The cycle of state concentration of capital and privatization

… all organizations and bureaucratic organizations

… over head with no return

… Bureaucratic reformation of the education system

… conduct war games

REFORM, UPGRADE, OR OR REPLACE TEACHERS

1 – Require only a Two Year program consisting of one-year training and one-year apprenticeship. Require physical and mental fitness to teach. (Intelligence, Emotional, and Mental Stability). Require two or more of own children. Require a successful career of 10 or more years in private sector business or industry in order to teach above age 11. Minimum 18 years between student and teacher age. (Mature the profession. Require demonstrated success in adversarial world to teach.)

(Note: Education degrees are the most common pseudo-academic program in our civilization, and the profession, starting with the academy on down, has created a vast barrier to entry, barrier to quality, barrier to reform, and a bureaucracy of rent-seeking that has failed to reform, been responsible for propagating the Great Lies, in what has amounted to creating a profitable industry for hostiles to the civilization by the indoctrination of generations in those great lies, the subsequent infantilization of generations, and the destruction of civil society, faith in society government, and civilization.)

2 – Retrain existing teachers on the new model. Given the change in curriculum and the use of technology, many teachers will be unable to transition. Replace them.

3 – Pay for Demonstrated Ability, Not Retention. Teaching is an exhausting time-consuming profession. Part of the reason for the automation of curriculum and management is to reduce professional burden. There is an extraordinary overhead because of wasted effort adapting to every new fad, each of which subsequently fails, because the environment, structure of delivery, the content, and the false promises prevent success. Professionals should handle this work without continuous overhead of internal bureaucracy and politics by a demographic that is at present unfit for the duties. The only solution is professionalization and compensation.

RESTORE THE MARKET AND PARENT CHOICE

(explain)

1 – vouchers. (Education Accounts)

4 – Professionalize Teaching. Education Degrees are meaningless. All evidence is that teaching is a talent and the skills required minimal and learned in the first year of the career. What is meaningful is the ability to endure the workload, maintain a set of parents and children as customers – and having the flexibility to refuse service to parents and children as customers.

RESTORE LOCAL GOVERNANCE
  1. State and Local Communities may maintain facilities, but all teaching shall be done by, and managed by, professionals (teachers, professors)
  2. In addition to Secular Schools, Restore Catholic and Protestant schools (only) – Prohibit funding of separatist schools. (full integration required, non-accommodation mandated.).
  3. Reform State Departments of Education to the market for talent to deliver excellence. This shall drive the budget for talent and overhead limit the talent.
  4. Terminate and do not replace the Department of Education and local Boards of Education and prohibit all those personnel at all levels from further participation in education – as punishment for their failure.
  5. Vacate the Teachers Unions and Prohibit them (as all government roles). Create insurance for teachers against wrongful termination which provides teachers with protection from abuse, but doesn’t prohibit the rapid removal of those unfit for the work.
    (Note: There is a political, catty and shallow element in education which we wish to eliminate from the profession.)
  6. Nationalize all Education pension debt, and terminate all pension programs, and merge with universal retirement coverage. (State employee pensions are one of the primary sources of state debt.)
  7. Repeal all educational legislation at all levels.
  8. Create a criminal investigation organization for the policing of teachers (and professors) engaging in social construction, political advocacy or other indoctrination against the interests of the people.

16. Regarding Reforming Higher Education: The Higher Education Bubble

1 – Explanation: The Cause of Western Decline

Reversing The Cause of Western Decline: The false primises of The Nature of Man, The Malleability of Man, The false promise of infinite growth, and the institutionalization of “The Embedded Growth Obligation”.

In order to deny the false promises of man under the presumption of unlimited growth, the education system at all levels, converted into a pseudoscientific religion, as all religions do, required demonstrated belief in falsehood regardless of consequences, and they denied the findings of genetics, cognitive science, psychology, sociology, demographics, behavioral and social and political economics, with the false promise of blank slate, equality of ability, equality of potential, the myth of oppression, and blaming Western European man’s truth, reciprocity, markets and eugenic suppression of the underclass through limiting the income necessary to reproduce, as his oppression of others, rather than the discovery and adaptation to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws; the conversion of the tragedy of those laws to heroism and tolerance for those laws; a the invention of adversarialism in all walks of life to continuously calculate how to exploit those laws for man’s benefit; the mastery of competition to apply those exploitations of those laws; the disproportionately rapid evolution of Western man, his civilization, and hist technology relative to other peoples, and the application of those laws that allowed Western man to drag mankind out of tyranny, stagnation, decay, superstition, ignorance, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, child mortality, early death and victimization by man, beast, nature, the Solar system and the galaxy – in a few hundred years of the Indo-European expansion, a few hundred years in the Mediterranean, and a few hundred years in the modern world, using our domestication of the horse, its combination with bronze and wheel, our adaptation to consumption of dairy, our subsequent laws, and our rational, mathematical, legal, political, mathematical, empirical, agrarian, financial, transportation, industrial, scientific, technological, and informational revolutions. And the explanation for that evolution and success in the Darwinian revolution.

The result was the deliberate formation of a pseudo-intellectual intellectual class and a pseudo-education system that from top to bottom, sought to use Darwin’s discovery and explanation of evolution to seize power from the church and its role in social formation as the government had from the aristocracy previously in commercial formation, by prosecuting the Church’s allegorical mythology; that did not deny the necessity of the consequences of evolution while creating a pseudo-scientific religion to replace the church’s mythology that DID deny the consequences of evolution. While the church may have limited the progress of human knowledge, it did not crate behaviors or institutions that denied physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. The intellectual, academy, and schooling system did, however, create a pseudoscience that denied those laws, and behaviors that were incompatible with those laws – and the result of that pseudoscience, religion, intellectual propaganda, academic and educational falsehood is the broken civilization we live in today – blaming Western civilization as a proxy for God. When it is European civilization that discovered the laws of the universe and the universe’s God: by the means of producing testimonial truth before our law, and the application of that testimony tall public speech, and by extension into those extensions of our law we call the sciences.

As such, as has happened many times before, the present fall of our civilization is due to the hubris of mankind, the blaming of the European peoples for the laws of Nature and Nature’s God. And rebelling against European civilization rather than face the tragedy of those laws incompatible with man’s fantasies, man’s heroism in transcending that tragedy by discovering, adapting to, applying, and transcending man out of victimization of those laws at the cost of suppression of the reproduction of those unfit for those laws of the universe and universe’s God.

To make matters worse, female intuition, the Jewish civilization in religious philosophical and pseudoscientific disciplines, the Muslim religion in religious, military, and social discipline and organization, are all little more than rebellions of false promise against those laws at the expense of mankind – and it is Western civilization alone that tolerates that war against mankind – despite being the only people who have discovered and implemented the salvation of mankind from those laws. That is why everywhere those religions go, the world reverses, stagnates, and eventually declines. With women under the yoke of their men who built civilization, the Jews cast out from civilizations over a hundred times, and the Muslims Resisted, barred from entry into civilizations, or eventually cast out. The greatest destruction in human history is plague and disease. But Islam is the second at over a billion dead, and five dead civilizations, reduced to dust, and Judaism the third with the undermining of Rome, a hundred million dead by Communism by the same technique, and now the Neo-Marxism, postmodernism, anti-male feminism, political correctness, and intentional undermining of our borders and an as yet unknown number of dead. The European expansion into the Americas trivial by comparison, and less damaging than the second wave of Siberians who all but killed off the first wave of Siberians into the Americas. And the loss of the Aztecs one of the great contributions to world history – for they were the most evil peoples we have been discovered in all of human history.

The Group Strategy of European Man is the application of what he learned from the domestication of stone, wood, clay, metal, plant, animal, and himself – was the primacy of man was possible – that we would no longer be a victim of Nature or Nature’s God, if we applied the lessons of Nature or Nature’s God, and domesticated ALL MANKIND as we had domesticated all and ourselves before. Domestication requires nothing more than the production of a militia of owners of the polity, rule of law, judge and jury, markets in aspects of life, and to limit the reproduction of the unproductive, and to hang or worse those who violate those laws and the markets that result from nature; and over time to produce a purely middle-class polity that is ALSO able to discover, adapt to and apply the laws of Nature or Nature’s God at the cost of the suppression of the reproduction of the unfit for those laws, and the culling of the socially unfit from the polity.

2 – The Mission of Western Civilization

This was, and remains, the mission of European civilization: To avoid the failures of all other civilizations to discover and adapt to those laws, to fail by stagnation and decline, to ensure neither we nor others limit man to “The Great Filter” of our own extinction, to maintain the primacy of man, and to drag ourselves, and mankind through a condition of continuous prosperity; to bring about, and to ensure the transcendence of man into the gods we imagine, in this brief period of natural, geological, astrological, and galactic peace. To seize our one opportunity to turn this Earth, this system this universe into heavens. And to brook not tolerance, and deliver just punishments, to all that would impede, frustrate or end it. If there is a devil among mankind, it is the false promise of freedom from physical, natural and evolutionary laws. So for those who say European man has no identity, no culture, no civilization, and no mission – it is those who seek to repeat the dark ages, and once again destroy mankind, to turn civilizations to dust, to run down the sands of the hourglass of our opportunity for transcendence, to return man to poverty and hardship, by false promise of freedom from the laws of Nature or Nature’s God that only European people have discovered, adapted to, applied, and with them dragged mankind with them into godhood.

This is the mission for which education must prepare our people – or it is a conspiracy against our people, our laws, our nation, our civilization, and mankind. And we will treat it as the crime that it is. No More Lies. And no more lies will go unpunished.

(relocate this paragraph above) – The consequence of those lies was the “Social Construction” of a new pseudoscientific religion with which to undermine the modern world as they had done in the ancient world – repeating the destruction of Western civilization as they had the Levantine, Mesopotamian, Egyptian, North African, Anatolian, Byzantine Greek, European Roman, European Continental, Persian, and northwest Indo-Iranian.

3 – Defining a Science: Science is Testimony. Teach Testimony

A science must satisfy the demands of Testimony because that is the demarcation between science and non-science. And must result in descriptions in formal mathematical or computational models for measurement and simulation by falsification. To satisfy testability that one does not engage in ignorance, error, or deceit, it must conform to realism, naturalism, operational possibility, empiricism, identity, internal consistency, rational choice by rational incentives, reciprocity if in cooperation or transfer, and full accounting within stated limits, and warrantied by due diligence and liability for restitution or punishment if one errs by failing to perform due diligence sufficient to satisfy the demand for infallibility in the context of subsequent causality.

Our Work in Natural Law has produced formal and computational logic of language, psychology, and social science. One of our objectives is to end the production, distribution, and sale of pseudoscience, sophistry, occult, false promise that seeks (again) the destruction of civilization, European scientific sense-making, European normative testimony, and the gains therefrom.

If a physical science cannot be constructed from mathematics or computation, if a cognitive science not from mathematics and computation, and if a statement of language, psychology, or sociology cannot be stated in the formal logic of Natural Law, and survive falsification by testimonial due diligence, then it is not a science. As such it is not testifiable. As such it is unwarrantable, as such it is not amoral and must be either criminal, unethical, or immoral. As such it is a violation of the natural law of reciprocity to distribute such information by display, word or deed, in public, to the public, in matters public, without harming the informational commons upon which all people depend for decision making within the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws.

Restore Criteria for Educational Institutions:

1 – As in the present conditions in the USA, the criteria for opening a college shall be insurance of warranty of the training and degree issued. “Let a thousand Colleges Bloom.” (In other words, if you can find an insurer willing to cover it.)

2 – The purpose of an educational institution is public service institution to serve the domestic population and only to serve the population. As such (a) foreign students are prohibited for other than one year visiting scholarship and must pay full rate; (b) may not constitute more than one percent of the student body; (c) students shall be accepted by merit and potential to succeed in obtaining a degree at the standards of the institution, and no other criteria; (d) and we have constructed those incentives herein.

3 – A Degree Constitutes a Warranty of Fitness for Service. A degree represents insurance that the holder can perform the work in the discipline. If the teachers, professors, or institution will not warranty and be liable for the performance of the individual, then they may not issue a degree.

4 – All colleges that issue a degree (certification of completion) must succeed in the placement of the individual in a related position of apprenticeship or residency for not less than one year before its issue, and before recognition of revenue.

5 – A College shall Consist of Specialization in At Least One of The STEM+EL Disciplines, and Shall Complete All Courses in Three or Four Years, and May or May Not Offer Masters and PhD Programs.

6 – A Researcher researches (Dr.), a Professor teaches (Dr. Professor). The purpose of a professor is teaching and certifying students for fitness for service. All Professors in All Residential Colleges Must Be Full Time. A Research professor shall teach no more than two courses, and a teaching professor no less than three and no more than five. Research professors and members of research institutes shall be paid, and their services compensated, by teaching, for their teaching and only their teaching. This diminishes the overhead of research professors and insures against the continued decline of teaching professors.

7 – All Professors Must use English as their first language, master and survive judgment in presentation. And the success at teaching, their success at producing individuals fit for career, the only criteria. (No more throwing third rate research staff at students for high cost.)

8 – Tenure is ended and vacated everywhere in all education without exception. A chair may be endowed to fund the Researcher, or Professor, on the condition of his retention. Why? Under the law, it is illegal to suppress, discipline, or fire a professor for statements of, or research into, any truth or reciprocity, nor engaged in constructions to force him or her out for such. This right and obligation is inalienable so it may not be contractually forgone either.

9 – To Hold the Title “University” the Organization Must Grant One, Two or Three Masters, and PhD Degrees in more than one College in more than one discipline. The university may federate more than one college for teaching the same domain. But not to circumvent the requirement for more than one college in more than one discipline. The reward of Masters and PhD shall Depend upon The German Testimonial Method (prosecutorial and no other). And All Professors Must Be Full Time.

10 – The Administration shall be limited to the maintenance and aesthetics of the physical plant, and Non-Profit Renting of The Facilities to Colleges of Professors. Universities and Colleges may create or maintain endowments for use in improvements in physical plants, or

11 – Professors shall Administer and Operate all Colleges as a non-profit limited liability partnership, as was the British tradition, and Charge Rates by Course, Professor, and College as They See Fit. In the case of repeated failure to achieve statistical peerage with other colleges, the board has the choice of creating or allowing a competing college or not renewing a lease to a college. Colleges within a university issue degrees, not the university, and the professors agreeing to grant the degree, sign the degree, and warrant the student’s performance in the field because of it. Student success in the fields by degree shall be measured and accounted by the granting professors.

12 – The process of accepting large first-year classes and churning them for revenue shall be prohibited and colleges and universities shall write off and refund drop-outs until they improve their admissions policies.

13 – The only classes that may be required are those directly related to the degree. The process of requiring electives or unrelated study is prohibited with bias against inclusion. Student course load should be mastery of a subject with three or four courses per semester.

14 – Military, Preparation, Recruiting, and Participation shall return to all colleges and universities or such institutions shall be shuttered.

15 – Provide Tax-Free, Interest-Free, Loans To Institutions to Loan to Students, that are natural-born citizens of whom parents are citizens, with the stipulation that those loans will be paid by payroll deductions for no more than seven years, with universities absorbing all losses (end incentive for churning), and the university shall carry responsibility for defaults. Any drop out debts are forgiven and losses born by the institution.

16 – Prohibit the Use of Undergraduate Income to Finance Graduate and PhD Programs. Permit Use of Sports Income to Finance Graduate and PhD Incomes. (Prohibit the crime of “Pooling and Laundering”.)

17 – All State Financing of Research Shall Be Limited to The STEM+EL fields.

18 – All research staff and all those tangentially involved shall be natural-born citizens of at least third generation and shall pass security clearances under the same constraints as military research, development, and production.

19 – The results of all research funded directly or indirectly by the state shall be free and public unless state secret and strategic (no gating or charging for it).

20 – The State Shall Obtain a Non-Voting Interest exclusive of Sale (transfer), in Any an All Research that Results from State Funding, and Be Given Equal Standing to The Best Standing of Any Dividend or Sale.

21 – The State Shall at All Times Seek to Invest in Private-Public Production of Goods, Services, and Information Resulting from That Research, that Are Revolutionary (additional), Not Just Evolutionary (competitive), as A Means of Increasing the Returns to The Citizenry.

22 – All Colleges shall be rated individually and by output success over trailing forty years and no other means. The practice of rating by input criteria and assets shall be terminated.

Duration and Funding of Educational Institutions

Research Institutes –
1. Scientific Research Institute – Endowment, Investment, Donation, and Grant Funded, For Profit
( … )

Scientific College – Non Profit
2. Scientific Three+ Years – 80% State Paid at cost +20%, PhD,M 10% state paid at cost +20%

STEM+EL refers to Physical Sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Sentience, Consciousness), Applied Sciences: Technologies, Engineering; Formal Sciences: Mathematics, Computer Science, Mechanical Intelligence; Social Sciences: Natural Law (explanation) and Mathematical Economics (measurement).

Medical College – Non Profit
Physician’s, Nurse’s, and Medical Technicians
3. Medicine by Year – 80% State Paid at Cost + 20%

Cognitive Science (Replaces Psychology), Natural Law (Replaces Sociology), Genetics, Bio Chemistry, Biology, Mathematics.
Medicine is the most scientifically organized profession, with the most reliable results, effectively granting a new title and responsibility for each year of education, from Nursing through Physician. There is no evidence that an undergraduate degree is required for physicians, and it unnecessarily increases the costs of education (despite its returns) and lost income, and culls people from the field unnecessarily. The evidence of the nursing to physician sequence has falsified the alternate expense. So the filed must find an alternate method of ‘filtering’ students other than an unrelated undergraduate education.

Behavioral College – Non Profit
(Teaching profession transferred here for crossover reasons)
4. Counseling by Year 50% State Paid At Cost +20%, PhD,M 10% State Paid at cost +20%

As above, the Undergraduate Degree Requirement shall be dropped, Psychiatry shall consist of three or four years of education and four years of apprenticeship (residency).
Psychiatry (medicine), Therapy (behavior modification), and Counseling (crisis advice),
Teaching: (education of all ages);
Advising: Friendship, Marriage, Child-rearing, and Family Life;
and Coaching (lifestyle improvement and lifetime fulfillment), are and will continue to be necessary professions while changes continue so rapidly, families are broken by capital concentration, migration, immigration multi-culturalism has destroyed norms of behavior, manners, ethics, and morals; and as long as the current alienation by the civilizational breakdown of feedback systems within the society continue under the consequences of the false promises. However, most of these fields are plagued by pseudosciences and continuous failure. So we are requiring a year-long program in Natural Law (grammars, cognitive science, operationalization of psychological and social prose, the economics of personal and social behavior) in order to reform the field. This will give the industry a post-Freudian, post-false promise, post-pseudoscientific value-neutral language of human thought and behavior, and interaction that will give therapists, patients, and customers a blameless guiltless rational language and logic to work with.

Administrative College – Non Profit
5. Administrative Two Years – 80% State Paid at Cost + 20%
Non-Stem Refers to Accounting, Finance, Economics; Business, Entrepreneurship, and Marketing; Public Service, Public Administration, Political Systems, International Relations;
Degree shall require one additional year of Apprenticeship.

College of The Arts – Non Profit
6. Personal Fulfillment – Self Paid Only, and No Student Loans, and no transfer of funding by art or artifice.
Arts: History, Philosophy, Theology, Languages, Literature, Arts, Music, Theater, Film; Degree shall require one additional year of Apprenticeship.

Vocational College – For Profit
7. Licensed Trades – One year, Two Year – 90% State Paid
8. Vocational Trades – One Year – 90% State Paid
A Vocational College shall Consist of Those Fields that Teach the Trades that Transform the Physical World Through the Use of Tools. Degree shall require one additional year of Apprenticeship.
9. Administrative Trades (Junior College) shall Consist of Those Offering Vocational Training Outside of The STEM+EL Fields, but In the Clerical and Support Fields, and Shall Complete All Courses in one or two years.

Prohibited
10. Pseudoscience, Sophistry, False Promise – Prohibited, no loans for any reason, and 
Fitness, Diet, Nutrition, “psychology”, “sociology”, Any-“studies”, Any Pseudoscience, Sophistry, and Occult, Any-“Marxism”, any-“Postmodern”, “Political Science” (Premise: “There is no political science other than rule of law, the distribution of decision making, and economics. All else is theology or philosophy, or ideology – not science”

Was this page helpful?
Yes No

Leave a Reply

. . .