Patriots Day 3 – Examining Consent -Murph Unleashed – Opinions byEli Stone

“Among the NATURAL RIGHTS of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.” Samuel Adams

“In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous.” Tacitus
23) Did Americans of the revolutionary period surrender liberties for advantages during a time of ‘profound peace?’ Or, do the Nationalist societies of today surrender liberties for safety during times of irrational fears? These questions serve, both, as the challenge to federalist doctrine, and the life’s blood of enduring bad ideas and misguided beliefs; either to be incorporated by existing, or remodeled by contemporary views and opinions. These archaic ideas and unexamined beliefs, premised upon advantage and adopted for unacknowledged reasons, serve to legitimize the misdirection of blame necessary to maintain the status quo. This is the foundation of the ideas and beliefs of a Nation in service to all-powerful Government. These are the ideologies and, ‘though they are distinguished by greater or lesser measures of dependence, the government bargains and trades with a common currency, surrender.
(24) It is a mistake to conclude that the powers exercised by government are the powers surrendered by society. A second look at the Federalist Papers LI makes clear that societal powers are to be divided and subdivided, again and again, until effectively destroyed, much like a drop of ink in a gallon water. As societal powers deteriorate, the powers of government are made all powers by default; and, consequently, all Nationalist governments are made all powerful by its continuing claims to powers necessary for whatever operations they may choose to undertake. Society surrenders, not her powers, but her will, her powers are lost to conquest. No man has the power, no matter his position, to surrender the rights of others.

(25) Much in the way that a Federal Head has no legitimate claim to authority in acting upon the individual citizen, the individual has neither a legitimate claim of authority to vote for the surrender of society’s will, the rights of posterity, nor the capacity to consent to a will independent of society on a global scale, be it Federalist or Nationalist. Representative government depends upon the consent of the governed.

(26) The individual possesses a limited capacity for consent, or, in other words, the individual may consent to anything, but only to the extent that an individual may carry his influence is his consent legitimate. I might consent to the car dealers offer to trade the mustang I’m driving for the Honda he’s selling, but if the mustang I’m driving is not mine to trade, then my consent is illegitimate. The jury mandate system, as established in America from 1776 to 1789, had proven itself to be more effective in expressing the will of society then the national vote ever has.
(Even that has been bastardized today by the judge who states “If you find that the person committed the act, you must find him guilty”, no matter how repugnant the law that made the act guilty.)

(27) For an individual citizen to vote in support of an all-powerful Government, at the expense of not just his Federal System, and not just his rights, but at the expense of everyone’s rights and the rights of posterity for generations, is unjust. The paradox of a nationalist system is that; although the consent of the governed is said to be required, as a core principal of legitimacy, the individual’s lack of capacity to consent in the name of others renders his vote illegitimate. That the individual has no vote in a national election in no way diminishes his rights or influence. On the contrary, it is the violation of these principles that is destructive to the rights of man.

(28) Because one man’s right idea is able to shatter eleven men’s wrong idea, and because the demands of jury duty call each person on multiple occasions, the individual soon learns that he must be prepared to present his positions. This in turn challenges the individual to sharpen his arguments, examine his beliefs, and to understand the dispositions of his fellow citizens within his community. The best-selling books in America at the time of the revolution were law books.

(29) In a trial by jury system, the distinction between what is lawful and what is just defines the unwinnable case. The common need for justice compels a common sense of good and right. Trial by jury serves both, as a people’s defense against ideological oppression, and the individual’s defense against legal oppression.

(30) “The jury contributes powerfully to form the judgement, and to increase the national intelligence of a people. It may be regarded as a gratuitous public school always open.” Democracy and America, Tocqueville

(31) The means and ends of social engineering indicated by both Madison and Hamilton in the federalist LI and XXIII respectively is not possible in a jury mandate system. A sustained Patriot Act is not possible in a jury mandate system. The individual mandates of our current “mandatory” health system are not possible in a jury mandate system.

(32) Jury mandates are responsible for ending the sedition laws of the 1780s and 90s. Slavery was on track to be ended many decades before any rational doubts about the civil war in America. Women’s right to property, ownership, and inheritance were being secured. Because of property ownership requirements to vote, in the early period of America, this makes fair to say that the women’s right to vote would also be secured in the jury mandate system many decades before the women’s suffrage movement. It appears that the loss of our jury mandate system is the cause of these nationalist movements. The movements are very much less effective than the system established in America.

(33) In a jury mandate system all issues are being addressed at the same time. In a nationalist campaign system under the influence of a statist monopoly on fact, usurped by the Privy Council judiciary, issues are taken one at a time, providing no remedies for many generations. Women under the nationalist campaign system may win in suffrage for their grandchildren, but their grandchildren will work for 30% less pay for those born as women. Slavery is believed to have ended, under the Nationalist Campaign system following the civil war, but slavery is more prevalent today in America, and around the world, than in the days of Lincoln. (Not only did the 13th Amendment not outlaw slavery, it made slavery exclusively legal for the Nationalist.)

(34) With the courtroom as the equal playing field, unjust laws could be eliminated, breaking the battlefields of the costly wars into a million juries, wars that could be fought one by one by twelve jurors with one of their own standing before them accused of a crime yet to be defined.

(35) If Americans did fight the revolutionary war to end universal empire, then it was in 1783 that they obtained a great victory; at the cost of blood, the blood of their brothers in arms, the blood of family members, woman and children; the blood of young and old alike, made equally murdered in the name of nationalism. If old order oligarchs, debt merchants, and new order aristocracies conspired to saddle America with a nascent fascist constitution, as an act of desperation in response to an existential threat, then they too obtained a great victory, in 1789, at the cost of ink, parchment, and quill. (More to follow.)

“He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard for his country. There is seldom an instance of a man guilty of betraying his country, who had not before lost the feeling of moral obligations in his private connections.” Samuel Adams