Loading...
Menu

Shades of Slavery v. Self-Determination: Making the Case for Mass Civil Suicide.

Shades of Slavery v. Self-Determination

Making the Case for Mass Civil Suicide.

The Monkey Wrench Papers

4/20/2016

Copyright 2016 e.a.f. & Bree A. Hood

Published by Bree A. Hood at Shakespir

Shakespir Edition License Notes

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your enjoyment only, then please return to Shakespir.com or your favorite retailer and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

Part 1: The Suicide Note 2

Part 2: AUTHORITY 5

PART 3: FINAL WORDS 9

Part 1: The Suicide Note

The information discussed in the Monkey Wrench Papers is not advice. It is knowledge that can help anybody overcome fear and realize their capacity to follow in the footsteps of America’s Founders. That’s right! The American Revolution was the first and last case of mass civil suicide in America. Their suicide note…The Declaration of Independence!

Shades of slavery v. self-determination could be described as the heartbeat that has pumped the blood through every vein of conflict in the history of mankind. It is what led the Founders down the path of civil suicide. The debate rests on the basic premise that there are two ways in which one can be compelled to do anything. One way is by force, such as penalties, violence, or some other form of coercion. The other way is by individual consent (a.k.a. self-determination). The slightest consequence for saying, “NO,” is the lightest shade of slavery.

Though, very few of us think of The Revolution as an act of civil suicide, most people don’t honestly know the EXACT cause and effect. The picture painted in the minds of most people is that the colonists were angry about high taxes on tea, declared war on England, and created a new nation (civil agreement). Finally, as a result of this new agreement called America, certain people now have the authority to tell all the inhabitants of a particular area of land, what they can and cannot do.

Not exactly…

In reality, the colonists spent several years painstakingly trying to address many, many grievances, using all the prudent legal methods. The nature of these grievances was that certain agents of the English civil agreement (Government) failed to perform their duties as defined by the wording of the contract (laws). After years of being ignored, the People revolted (severed) their consent from the English civil agreement. Then, in proper legal form, they delivered the suicide note to their former authority.

Of course, this loss of chattel REALLY screwed up England’s balance sheet, prospects, and reputation. Sooo…England used military force to try to compel the colonists to consent to English authority again. Although it’s very difficult for today’s reader to understand at first, the Declaration of Independence specifically lists these unaddressed grievances as evidence to support their legal standing. They also declared that the ancient maxim of self-determination/individual consent (all men were created free and equal) was to be the foundation upon which all their laws shall stand.

The result… was mass “civil death”. In other words, all the People returned to a “state of nature”. Since this case of mass civil death was self-declared, it could very well be described as “civil suicide”. You may have never heard of a “state of nature” or “civil death”, but these are real and IMPORTANT terms that are well known by most tenured jurists (i.e. law professors, judges, etc.). These terms refer to anybody who has NO civil obligations, whatsoever. “Civil” can mean many things depending on the context, but in law, it is used in opposition to the word “natural”. For example, “natural rights” as opposed to “civil rights”; “natural death” as opposed to “civil death”; “natural law” as opposed to “civil law”. In this sense, “civil” essentially means “artificial”.

After the revolution, Sir William Blackstone (a very legendary English jurist) held the position that the action of the colonists, as evidenced by the Declaration of Independence, reduced the individuals who inhabited the colonies to a state of nature. Jurists who don’t know, or are preferential to shades of slavery, will disagree with Blackstone. However, as you will see, he was actually right.

As a result of returning to a state of nature, all the powers of government returned to the People at large. In other words, as a result of the King of England failing to perform his duties, the People severed their obligation, and ALL the powers of the King RETURNED to ALL the People. These are the most important facts of the revolution, which only a handful of tenured law professors are willing to talk about.

So, how does this relate to me and my government today? Simply put, our list of grievances is YUUUUUGE compared to the colonists! And, it would take volumes to list all the ways in which our government has failed to perform their duties.

Well, how do I know I have the same right and authority that the colonists had to revolt? Their right to revolt was based on their natural right of self-determination/individual consent (all men were created free and equal). Everyone has that same right, plain and simple. This is not a debate among American jurists or politicians.

But, won’t this result in war and chaos? No. Think about all the colonizing nations throughout history, who have refused to acknowledge the ancient laws of self-determination. They have all been in a state of war since the beginning of recorded history. This is because their prosperity ALWAYS depends on forced labor; either through direct violence, or taxation and laws enforced with the threat of violence. History has proven beyond a mathematical doubt, that when people are forced to do (or not do) something against their will, they will rebel. The only way to solve this dilemma is…war. John Locke made the point that a state of war and a state of nature are two distinct and independent states, and that there is no evidence that a state of nature must result in a state of war.

Evidence that peace and good social order can occur while individuals exist and act in a state of nature, can be found in the history of the Iroquois. Very few people know it, but the Iroquois Great Law of Peace may have arguably had more influence on our constitution than any other single source of law. People might ask, “What about English law?” English Law is really just a collage of laws borrowed from around Europe. The reason the Founders went to the Iroquois for advice, is because their laws had kept peace among their nations for several hundred years. The problem is that the Framers left out the most important parts. We will discuss this in depth in another edition of the Monkey Wrench Papers.

Revolutions are fraught with questions and uncertainty, but perhaps the most important question is…how is it done? The first step is to talk about “fear” and “words”. Fear is caused by a lack of two things…knowledge and capacity. Think about any scary scenario. Let’s say a freedom thief breaks in, takes all your stuff, and enslaves you. That sounds scary! But, if you had the right knowledge (you knew when they were coming, how many there were, what weapons they had, etc.), and you had the capacity to stop them before they could hurt you…you would have nothing to fear.

When we use the word “man” or “men”, we are using it in the general sense…which is gender neutral…meaning it includes all genders. As you will find out, words don’t always mean what you think they do. For instance, do you really know what a “person” is? You’d be surprised how many lawyers don’t know. After spending years of our free time researching the answer, it turns out, “person” is employed in opposition to the word “man”, when it is used in law (i.e. court). They are NOT synonymous terms. “Person” means status/condition/state, and is a concept purely created by man (i.e. man’s law). Man, however, is created by nature. “Woman” is a civil person/status, which refers to a particular class of property rights created by law…for the benefit of people with external genitalia. You may think this is an old meaning of the word “woman”, but the actual meaning has never changed. The only thing that’s changed is that “women” fought hard to get civil rights, but this DOESN’T change the meaning of the word. There is no evidence that the actual meaning has ever been changed in American jurisprudence; therefore, we prefer to use the terms “sister” and “brother” when speaking about a specific gender.

“A moment’s reflection enables one to see that man and person cannot be synonymous, for there cannot be an artificial man, though there are artificial persons. Thus the conclusion is easily reached that the law itself often creates an entity or a being which is called a person; the law cannot create an artificial man, but it can and frequently does invest him with artificial attributes.”

“While the idea may be difficult for the tyro to grasp, the personality, i.e., this condition or status of a man, is entirely the creation of the law. By nature all men are created free and equal, i.e., of equal rank, equal rights; but the law does not look upon all men as equal, though in the law of the United States all men have equal civil rights.”

~ Andrews’ American Law

In the end, it comes down to this. Fear of authority can be overcome when we know how it works, and knowing what the words mean is the key.

Part 2: AUTHORITY

Since mass civil suicide is actually just multiple cases of individual civil suicide, stay tuned for the next issue of the Monkey Wrench Papers, when we explore the practical, and VERY effective, application of individual civil dissent! We will do this by exploiting the chinks in the armor of legal jargon greedily used by those who claim to have authority over us. To do this, we must know exactly how authority works.

***

Visit: http://www.Shakespir.com/books/view/631875 to purchase this book to continue reading. Show the author you appreciate their work!


Shades of Slavery v. Self-Determination: Making the Case for Mass Civil Suicide.

  • ISBN: 9781310335983
  • Author: Bree A. Hood
  • Published: 2016-04-23 11:35:06
  • Words: 5423
Shades of Slavery v. Self-Determination: Making the Case for Mass Civil Suicide. Shades of Slavery v. Self-Determination: Making the Case for Mass Civil Suicide.