A model that I have share affinity for.

Date:   12/1/2014 5:36:41 AM ( 10 y ago)

This is my first introduction to Jean-Jacques Rousseau (28 June 1712 – 2 July 1778) "... a Genevan philosopher, writer, and composer of the 18th century. His political philosophy influenced the French Revolution as well as the overall development of modern political, sociological, and educational thought."

One thing I can say for certain that I share affinity with is: "The model man is the independent farmer, free of superiors and self-governing.":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau#Effect_on_the_United_States_of_America

This picture of the "model man" is what constituted most of the American people at the start of the United States of America.

"In 1742, Rousseau moved to Paris in order to present the Académie des Sciences with a new system of numbered musical notation he believed would make his fortune. His system, intended to be compatible with typography, is based on a single line, displaying numbers representing intervals between notes and dots and commas indicating rhythmic values.":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau#Adulthood

I have a natural tendency to notate the musical phrases that I'm inspired with by way of the intervals! I may like to pursue this system if it survived.

December 3rd -

Mendocino County has become "the first county in California, and only the second county in the country to pass into law a very powerful local ordinance that declares local self-governing rights in their communities over state and federal jurisdiction. ...":
"California County Passes Historical Law Declaring Right to Self-Governance":

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/11/05/california-county-passes-historical-law-declaing-right-self-governance/

The original idea of "The Independent Farmer" in America included the growing of hemp which was literally woven into a significant portion of early American independence. Today we have an updated version of this original idea with the "independent farmers" in Mendocino County who are now a new model.

The "Waking Times" article linked abouve has a quote from Alexander Hamiltion that inspired me to research. I offer the following:

“In one glowing passage, (Alexander) Hamilton invoked the colonists’ natural rights: ‘The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature (encoded in the DNA) by the hand of the divinity itself and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.’ These lines echo John Dickinson, who had written that the essential rights to happiness are bestowed by God, not man. ‘They are not annexed to us by parchments and seals.’ Hamilton added beauty and rhythm to the expression.”

The "beauty and rhythm" may have been an expression of Hamiltion's Birth Card of the Three of Spades known as "The Artisit Card".

Alexander Hamilton, “The Farmer Refuted,” (1775) in John C. Hamilton, ed., The Works of Alexander Hamilton (1850), vol. 2, p. 80.

“The Sacred Rights of Mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of the Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” Apparently - December 15, 1774.:
http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hamilton-the-revolutionary-writings-of-alexander-hamilton#lfHamilton_head_008

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Farmer_Refuted

December 5th -

Just posted my comment regarding three legal cases heading for the highest court in Wisconsin.:
http://thecompletepatient.com/article/2014/october/15/will-wi-supreme-court-do-its-duty-uphold-us-constitution-food-rights-cases

The article reports that the parties involved think it is a "long shot." I honestly agree and would add that "it is longer than you are currently thinking"! My comment (addressed to "Gayle", author of the article that was originally posted at "The Complete Patient" blog) explains why I think this way.:

I'm convinced that you have presented truly vital, life-learning experiences with these three situations that are dealing with the legal realm in "America's Dairyland". The legal process in the particular cases referenced here remind me of "Alice in Wonderland". However, if one only considers the State of Wisconsin and its legal system as a kind of "Wonderland" then I don't think that this kind of mind-set will provide a full "graduation" from these important learning experiences. In this analogy we might ask "what does Alice bring into the experience"?

"Three Wisconsin farms now have petitions for review before the state’s Supreme Court ... all concerned decided that the underlying Constitutional principles made the cases worth pursuing before the state’s highest court."

I think most all of us at this "forum" would all agree that the key phrase here is "the underlying Constitutional principles". This is precisely the point from which a "full graduation" can be obtained. Such a graduation could finally offer deep "resolution" not only for the private individuals concerned with these three cases but for every other American concerning any legal contest where governmental agencies come against private Americans who are going about their own private business on their own land.

One necessary challenge for every "Alice" who finds herself in a kind of "Wonderland" of nonsensical legal absurdities is for Alice to begin looking in the mirror and consider certain of her long-held cherished beliefs about the true nature of that "underlying" foundation that she believes she is standing on. One of the first things that Alice will need to realize is that what she believes about the "Constitution" (and the like) is what government has taught her since she was a really little girl. She was taught how to look at the "Constitution" - as if it were the source of all her rights and the basis for her protection against whatever may impinge upon those rights. After all (as you say):

“The U.S. Constitution’s Ninth Amendment reads, ‘The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people’."

In believing that then it naturally appears to follow that:
"… These citizens maintain they have a constitutional right to choose what they eat, and to choose where that food comes from. … It bears drawing on the Declaration of Independence, ‘That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…"

I sincerely appreciate that at least two of the four Organic Laws of The United States of America have been mentioned here! I wish to suggest that the problem actually lies in the government's education of "little Alice" and the fact that the government conveniently omitted the other two Organic Laws! But don't just take my word for this. You can get a copy of "United States Code" volume 1 and look at the contents page. You will find: "Organic Laws of the United States" listed and under that all four Organic Laws are listed with page numbers where you can read the full text of all four Organic Laws that stand in front of and before all the Codes!

Although government schools do not teach the full importance of all four Organic Laws (both individually and as a whole) "Alice" will naturally want to know their full importance just as soon as she realizes that in one of the not-so-well-known Organic Laws she will find her true standing as a "free inhabitant"!

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it’. …"

There is another option to altering or abolishing. This other option is my one reason for commenting here. However the option is only available under the Lawful status as a "free inhabitant". Choosing that option simultaneously means no longer claiming the status of "citizen" of that government and thereby no longer governed by such. It is an option that the government does not teach, will not teach, denies it exists and therefore will not acknowledge anyone on. Yet it exists and there are plenty of individual Americans who live as such. I am one of them and again I'm not the only one!

Still one may ask "If the government doesn't recognize it then what good is it?" The good is the very same good that every "Alice" should already know (one way or another) as being "self-evident" ("We hold these truths to be self-evident ...")! This is another thing that government does not teach little Alices (and Alexes or Neos). Why does "Alice" look to any outside "authority" when there is real authority within her and within everyone one of us who has the ability to truly "hold these self-evident truths"? Consequently there is a gap between what government teaches and where we need to be standing and the truth is government will not resolve that for us! And most truthfully - it is none of their business!

I can't expect that this comment box can sufficiently allow for a reeducation of fundamental American Law, the knowledge of which was fully intact within the American psyche up until the fourteenth Amendment when the status of "citizens of the United States" became an option for the former slaves. Although that status appears to be passionately embraced by most Americans it is actually Lawfully foreign to both the "free inhabitants" and the several "State Citizens". Throughout all her school daze - Alice wasn't taught the different lawful natures of status among these three. However, she could do her own due-diligence now and get up to speed on that! If Alice would be willing to do that she could also educate herself about "proprietary jurisdiction".

If Alice only knew that government is Lawfully limited in its jurisdiction according to its "proprietary jurisdiction" as that is exclusively based what government owns then Alice could ask herself: "Am I on government property or am I in any way, shape, or form doing business with government? Alice doesn't ask her self questions like these because she was educated by the government to only think a certain way and to believe everything that government says as if it fully applied to her! Anyone knowing the truth of this could ask: "Does government own Alice?" If I were asked this I'd respond by asking: "Is Alice in the military"? If she is then essentially yes, she is considered to be "government property" now. Do Wisconsin farmers wear "dog tags" around their necks?

I love our American farmers and I am literally in debt to some of the very best of them! I wish only the very best for them and for the rest of us as well however there's essentially a "hidden gap" when these farmers (or others) have entered the court rooms and that gap has not been addressed. Not only can the government not address it the attorneys can not as well!

For more information on the Organic Laws my very best recommendation is The Organic Laws Institute. You can sign up here for an introduction.:
http://organiclaws.org/

December 5th -

“The right of the American people to be free from government regulation is expressly provided for in the provision for personal abstention from political life in Article IV of the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777. … An unadopted Constitution of September 17, 1787, while still binding on the State governments, does not bind the people.”:
http://freeinhabitant.info/2012/11

What is commonly referred to as "the Constitution" is better identified as "the Constitution of September 17, 1787" since the "Articles of Confederation (1777)" were already established and adopted as the original constitution and continued ever since as the Organic Constitution that is acknowledged in "United States Code". Now look at "the Constitution of September 17, 1787" and read "this Constitution (is) for the United States of America" and know that "the United States of America" specifically pertains to the several independent States of the first Union (that began with the original 13 States) - not to individuals. Although this is the fact in written Organic Law it had to be disregarded by federal government in it's mission for ruling America so that the public could be ignorant of the Law. It is precisely this ignorance that is permitting the federal government to rule America. The actual written Organic Laws only permit the federal government to govern its property known as "the United States" as that term is lawfully defined in the "Ordinance of 1787: The Northwest Territorial Government."

"This Constitution .... of September 17, 1787" is exclusively for the Confederacy (that was originally formed in 1777 as per "Articles of Confederation" as stated in Article I: "The Stile of this confederacy shall be "The United States of America"). It is this confederacy that administers the territory (that it owns) and along with the inhabitants who are on that territory. All the rest of the American people who are living on private land in their independent States and not on government property are not included in "this Constitution" however they are referred to in the original Constitution of 1777. If you refer to yourself as a party in "this Constitution" you voluntarily subjugate yourself under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the federal government and you do so at your own peril!

 

Popularity:   message viewed 1859 times
URL:   http://www.curezone.org/blogs/fm.asp?i=2222416

<< Return to the standard message view