The Natural Law Institute

Regarding Legitimacy

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) concurrent 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

Was this page helpful?
Yes No

Leave a Reply

. . .