WE DON’T NEED NO POLITICIANS (or judges)!

We don’t really need any politicians OR judges! (Or even cops)!

Politics has been best described as “power-trading” yet the Rule of Law is simple, immutable, and so should never be traded away.

Morality and Law are pretty simple, as Mark Levin notes: “negative” rights based on the Golden Rule of Law (most simply defined as: Do Not Attack First)!

It means, in principle, that everything is disallowed except that which is specifically allowed – between two or more people, this means I don’t have any right or responsibility to do anything either to, or ‘for,’ you, without your express permission! So this ‘social contract’ means that our only real right is to not be attacked first, and our only real responsibility is to not attack (thereby innocent) others, first!

After all, when one chooses to attack first, one’s own choice defines one as the predatory criminal aggressor, and they as one’s innocent victims; there’s no two ways about it!

So all sub-sequent laws are only elaborations on and embellishments on this one Rule:

“if you choose to attack first in this or these ways, then this or those counter-attacking punishments will be rendered unto you.”

Bear in mind that all threats (aka intimidations, bullyings, coercions, duress, activist agitations, extortions and ‘terrorisms’) ARE (psychological) attacks, so responding with violence to a believable threat is valid.

And we have a perfect right, if not a duty, to counter-attack criminals (and in fact, this is exactly what the courts do, even years later, when the criminals are no longer engaged in directly attacking anyone; for, as the falsely-sundered criminal and civil law branches agree: you must pay for what you take!); in this way, revenge IS Justice!

From agreeing to the social contract of obeying this Rule, we in the West have gained trust, progress, and civilization.

From deciding to be criminal negligents who hold to the opposite claim – that it’s their false right to remain irresponsibly wrong, in stead of having a responsibility to become right, as in factually correct – that it’s their holy right and duty to always attack others first, should circumstances (like drought) arise which encourage it, us-verus-them and group-might-makes-right oriented criminal extortionists like muslims and liberals inflict distrust, stagnation, and barbarism on them selves and on everyone else, too.

And all such bad (“positivist,” “defensively pre-emptive”) laws are crimes because they attack first, by slandering individual citizens as criminals, and so also insisting that they have no inherent right to self-defense. Criminals insist all is allowed (for them) except that which is specifically disallowed (“What?! You mean to say murder is illegal on a Tuesday, from between 11 AM and 4PM, too?! I. Did. Not. Know. That! Whee!”)…!

For instance, all any of these so-called “gun control laws” can ever do, is to slander the whole population as guilty until never proven innocent; i.e: “SINCE you have guns, therefore you WILL use them to commit crimes, and NOT to defend yourselves and innocent others, SO we have to take them all away from you first, you criminals!”

Since these slanderous laws accuse everyone without proof, they are by definition also prejudicial frauds, and as such, are illegal crimes in themselves, not valid laws at all.

Guns exist. They will never again not-exist. More laws do not equal order. In general, no force or police or laws are necessary among free citizens who can and will govern themselves, while the opposite is: no amount of force or police or laws are enough for a people who CANNOT – or will not – govern themselves.

Bad laws slander people without proof or evidence, by reversing the onus of proof to Guilty Until Never Proven Innocent.

Statist liberal governments assert we have to disprove THEIR claim, which is illegal and almost impossible to do, because that involves something almost impossible called “proving a negative” which goes something like this:

Say I assert that you owe me $100. and I don’t have to prove it (I don’t have to show any contract you signed, call any witnesses, or even say when or how you owe me the money) the onus is on you to find some way/s to somehow prove you don’t owe me the money; in this scenario, you are pre-judged as guilty until never proven innocent.

And we can all see how that works out.

;-(

Unfortunately, there’s only so many symptoms of The Golden Rule of Law (again: which simply defines all situational morality as “Do Not Attack First!”) one can address with lesser, circumstantial “laws” of morality, only so many right answers, before one must veer off into exploiting the almost infinite number of sorta almost right,(but really wrong) answers, in order to keep up the pretense that the legislators are actually doing something responsible to earn their pay and to continue to enjoy the right to govern others – a point which, after whence reached, societies decline into criminality and empires fall into ruin.

And this process of creeping, criminally-negligent might-makes-right control – what sane people call “the slippery slope” – is what libertine criminals (“liberals”) call “progress!”

Right now, most politicians borrow money (run up their credit-card debts) in our names, then sell off our stuff, (assets) also in our names! Some public “representatives” they are!

These parasitic self-salesmen have entitled them selves, at our direct expense, to have rights (like all criminals) to our stuff, without any responsibilities, (like, for paying for it or otherwise earning it) and their criminal negligence is fueled in an almost equal measure by our own complicit, monkey-see, monkey-do infantile delinquency – by our own desires to defer our own rights and responsibilities to think for our selves, onto them! Infantile masochists love slavery and being able to gripe about master, rather than having to think about fending for them selves – after all: “With No Power, Comes No Responsibility! Whee!” But being criminally negligent, even in our name, is NOT the purpose of any real kind of valid representation! America’s Founders were right – the government should have NO right to borrow (buy) money, ever, not even in our name, nor even for our own good!

Nobody – at any level of human society – should have either a right or a responsibility to do anything either to OR FOR any of us, ever, without first getting our express consent!

Obviously, deferring our right and responsibility to think for our selves onto ‘expert’ leaders negates that!

;-(

It’s the idolatrous political “party” system itself which permits our otherwise public SERVANTS to indulge them selves in interest-conflicted divided loyalties, and so to metaphorically slip from the tethers of oversite we should be keeping them on.

Unless we eliminate political parties, the salesmen in government will destroy the country.

Politicians don’t represent the people – they only represent their parties. And their parties only represent those who pay them – who happen to be the exact same people for each party.

So ALL politicians are only treasonous sales-puppets, foisted on us by their corporazi sales-masters. Their real job is to sell us all out by selling off our country to the highest bidders – usually by buying our enemies’ money to fund their own pet projects. The faster the turnover (more sales per minute) the more quick profits, even at low-low fire-sales prices. It’s a race to the bottom.

So, let’s just FIX DEMOCRACY! And here’s how: If we just hold 2 quick, back-to-back elections each time (the first, as usual, to hire the worker’s pool of our Public SERVANTS from our districts, and the second where WE ALL appoint them DIRECTLY to their cabinet portfolio positions) then we eliminate their self-interested conflicts of loyalty-dividing political “parties,” (which always only “party” at our direct expense, anyway,) forever!

😉

GEORGE WASHINGTON WARNED ABOUT THESE PARASITES:

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/07/the-founding-fathers-tried-to-warn-us-about-the-threat-from-a-two-party-system.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2068315/posts

http://politicalpartypooper.wordpress.com/2009/03/16/washington-warned-against-political-parties/

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/history-purpose/2012/mar/9/george-washington-warns-against-political-parties/

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/zr05z/til_george_washington_warned_that_forming

Advertisements

About unclevladdi

Vojvoda
This entry was posted in Crime, Education, gun control, human rights, Legal, Policy, politics, proglodyte, progressive, progressives, propaganda, Regulation, Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to WE DON’T NEED NO POLITICIANS (or judges)!

  1. We have laws because no one is inherently “good” if we all were not “bad” there would be no use for laws. So thus is the reason for all laws. I like the old methods for dealing with law breakers…..stoning. People like Obama would not stand a chance! I am reminded of an old but very true saying that goe’s like this…..When the wicked (criminals) bear rule the people mourn, when the righteous rule the people rejoice!

    • unclevladdi says:

      The One Law is a social contract of self-interest, protecting us from the other crazy-monkey humans. Even the falsely sundered ‘civil’ and ‘criminal’ laws both agree, that one must pay for what one takes.

      Government can not and does not prevent crime; not even in punishing the initiation of force, by the memory of past punishment. Crime is caused by those criminally inclined, and they will commit their crimes regardless of any stated warnings of punishment, because they already consider the entire objective world (aka ‘God’) to be out to get them.

      In fact, as can be seen from the Qur’an’s own chapter headers, that was Muhammad’s official, slanderous and idolatrous justification for creating islam: to defend us all from “god:” because if he didn’t get the rest of us ‘for god,’ then god would get him, (and the rest of his ‘muslim’ followers) too!

      They believe in the backwards ends justifying the means: since the world always has, still does and so always will attack them first, they posit, it doesn’t matter what warnings they are given: they already consider it their right to ‘defend’ them selves, to get back for them selves, anything and everything they can take by trickery and/or force.

      There are really still only these two “ideological” approaches to life: the civilized, law-abiding notion that the best offense is a good defense; or the paranoid, predatory, victim-blaming fraudulent criminals’ slanderous notion, that the best defense is a good offense (i.e: “Since you COULD attack first, so you WILL attack first, so I MUST pre-emptively defend myself from you by attacking you first! Whee!”) All alibis are predeterministic excuses.

      And even “psychopaths” are indeed quite capable of feeling guilt – as fear, which they immediately turn into victim-blaming anger, rather than admit to it; this is why they are literally stupid as well: fear is a natural, basic part of the reasoning process; without it, we’d be unable to fix the mistakes and solve the problems which cause the pains we fear. In ignoring their fear, these people automatically blind them selves to progressive factual problem-solving and so leave them selves with nothing but the critical thinking logical fallacies as a generalized ritualistic pattern of idolatrous ideology; they no longer think at all, in the true sense of the word, but only react against all others’ “threats!”

      But just because one has chosen to be irrational and refuse to admit to cause-and-effect self-reliant responsibility and culpability for criminal guilt, doesn’t mean one’s attempted alibi excuse should get enshrined into law as a valid defense called “insanity;” aka:

      “I didn’t do it – ONLY my BRAIN did it! Whee!”

      😉

  2. herbork says:

    “Do not attack first!” Here, to a student of Unk’s grand thesis, is the uncommon core. 😉 From this seminal formulation evolves the most coherent and plausible postmodern ethic being promulgated currently by any of those thinkers who anticipate and stand against the West’s troubled future.

  3. zraick says:

    Well Uncle Vladdi, I agree with you in almost everything you wrote, but for one. We do not want democracy (mob rule) we want rule of law. Democracy can easily be manipulated into tyranny.

    If by “fix democracy” you mean to limit its tyranny by the application of valid law, then I would agree. I think there is so much confusion about the unwarranted glorification of “democracy” that I am moved to comment and support the concept of republic.

    In any case I enjoyed you writing.

    • unclevladdi says:

      Thanks. My whole article was about identifying exactly what the “Rule of Law” is (it’s not just that we are ruled by written laws that some people subjectively made up) and how it should limit mob-rule democracy.

      😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s