Archive

Posts Tagged ‘law’

Equality

February 12, 2011 Leave a comment

The truth that all people should be equal before the law does not mean that all people should be equal.  One does not mean the other.

That all should be equal before the law is a prime requirement of genuine Human Rights in any sane society.  That all should be equal requires a complete abrogation of those same Human Rights and can only be achieved by a widespread suppression of basic freedoms.

Not only are they not the same thing, they are diametrically opposed.

An understanding of the  conflict between the mutually incompatible propositions of ‘equality before the law’ and ‘equality’ is a necessary requirement for a successful examination of why our society is in such profound moral decay.

Votes for Prisoners?

February 11, 2011 Leave a comment

“Those who commit a crime have broken their contract with society.”  With those words the British parliament rejected the European Court’s directive to give prisoners the vote.

There are some problems that rank in the category of ‘blindingly obvious’ here.  A ‘contract’ is a written or spoken agreement between two or more parties that is enforceable by law.  Both parties must sign or openly state their agreement to the contract for it to be enforceable.  There was no such agreement, either written or verbal, therefore there was no contract.

Nor is there any such entity as ‘society’.  When politicians claim the right to lord it over the rest of us they do so with the justification that yes, individuals will lose out, but society is the winner.  The fact that such irrational nonsense is not instantly dismissed is a testament to the appalling level of education dispensed by The State.

‘Society’ is a word coined by politicians to describe the aggregate of ‘their’ individual citizens…. their milk cows.  ‘Society’ has the same connotation as ‘herd’.

How can someone break a contract that doesn’t exist with an entity that also doesn’t exist?

British politicians are pretending to stand on principles of which by the very nature of their jobs they have proved themselves bereft.  Any vote cast to determine ones master is an acknowledgement that one is a serf.

As one has to be a serf to vote then surely a locked up prisoner has definitely qualified.  However, they should only exercise that option if they wish to confirm the legitimacy of their serf status.

Two Laws

August 28, 2010 2 comments

It is sometimes said that there is ‘one law for the rich and one law for the poor’.

Whilst it is true that there are Two Laws, the whole truth is that we have ‘one law for The State and one law for the people’.  And yes, generally it is those who are on the payroll of The State who are rich, and those who do real work and have to support them who are poor, but it is important to understand the situation precisely.

For The State it is okay to steal other people’s property using overwhelming force whenever necessary.

The only right of the people is the right to respect the authority of the people who parasitically live off them.  The people have no right to use force to defend themselves.

The State can only enjoy this comfortable and self-serving existence with the support of a compliant judiciary which recognises and abides by it.

The State does not even pretend to be impartial.

The president of France, has just proposed that: “Nationality should be stripped from anyone of foreign origin who deliberately endangers the life of a police officer, a soldier or a gendarme or anyone else holding public authority.”

Obviously it is a far less serious crime if it is simply a common serf who has their life endangered.

The State operates its system of Two Laws because it honestly believes that it is above the laws that apply to serfs.

The system of Two Laws will become more obvious to people as the Global Financial Crisis (which is really a Global Monetary Crisis) becomes worse.

All are equal, but some are more equal than others.