The Obeyers 2
The Concept of “Law” and “The Obeyers”
Utter confusion with the subject of “law,” gives opportunity for the powers that be to take full advantage. Law isn’t just a limited area of study for the average person – it’s a completely neglected area of study.
Once it’s recognized that we discover law, not create it, it of course negates the need for most of what we now call our legal system.
With no drug laws, we would treat dealing with addicts as a somewhat welcome challenge, like dealing with children or lunatics. Something to help us grow in our understanding and compassion.
With no speed limit or traffic laws, we could concentrate on things that truly provided safety on the roads.
Misplaced confidence in authority has led us to this: Nothing is done properly or efficiently, everything has become monetized and mercenary, a sneaky tactic by those who want to reap the benefits of other people’s labor.
A New “Law"
What should be the first ask when we hear of a new law? Does this law apply to me?
Not all laws apply to everyone. For example, any executive orders by the U.S. president only apply to the executive branch.
We understand there are physical laws, like the “law of gravity.” The societal laws, are natural or common sense principles to live by to avoid conflict in society.
Even a psychopath, said not to know right from wrong, knows that, say, stealing, is wrong, if only because he wouldn’t want to be stolen from. So he understands the principle of reciprocity, even if he doesn’t honor it.
There’s confusion in the conflation of natural law with man’s spurious law. In the nominally common law countries, like the U.S. and England, it is accepted that there are things that do not fall under the power of the legislature. But legislatures pass laws with abandon. (England is a big offender here, and not a true common law country in practice.)
There’s no end to these manufactured laws to confuse the people.
And where do we start with education, when most people may not even be capable of understanding that simple but crucial fact? Yuri Bezmenov pinpointed one source of the problem when he explained how our culture has become weakened by demoralization, a strategy used to weaken and then gain control of a country (see The Manipulators).
Law and the Justice System
The collapse of the system of “rule of law” is the collapse of a civilization.
We’re told there is no arbitrary lawmaking, but that doesn’t stop government from breaking the law.
Take the banks currently engaged in a massive orgy of theft and fraud on an epic scale, yet courts are finding no fault in their behavior.
Strangely enough, a certain Kamala Harris, as San Francisco D.A., publicly stated that the actions of the banks, across the country, constitute massive fraud. Yet no banker involved in that fraud has been brought to justice.
For the few judges that rule against bankers, in cases of fraud and deception too obvious to sweep under the rug, the banking interests appear to take it as an opportunity to weed out any jurists that oppose them.
Law is nothing if not consistently applied, and we’re buggered there, too. As demonstrated by Vince McMahon, who continues to entertain us, well past retirement age. Which shows that you can take the showman out of the show, but you can’t take the “show” out of the showman. This time, he also assumes the role of educator, demonstrating how there’s a law for the rich, and a law for the not-so-rich.
Real Law vs. Government Doctrine
True “law” is fixed and unchanging, and applied equally.
Speaking of Which
Here’s something that clarifies the idea of law versus edict, decree or legalism. When the mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg (some called him Bloomturd), introduced a “law,” that you couldn’t buy “Big Gulps” – large servings of soda pop from 7-Eleven convenience stores – in the city, it was called a law, but in reality, was a proclamation, edict, or legalism.
It only had “authority” in the sense that he was going to send his goon squad/security forces, called “New York City Police,” to harass stores that sold big cups of pop. Fortunately, this order was absurd to all but the most ardent statists, and the whole thing was overturned.
You can’t “overturn” a real law, so this was not, and could not have been, a law at all.
Confiscation
John Baker told us, “There is no one over the age of 18 in America who can’t be indicted for some federal crime.”
Now, Americans should know better and immediately tell him to remember that the average citizen in the US, isn’t subject to Federal edicts. It is supposed to be the states that administer the law for the people.
But people didn’t seem to grasp that, and suffered from the gold confiscation (theft) set up by the entity Roosevelt in 1933.
The then-president made a proclamation, telling all Americans to turn in their gold.
But the president could not legitimately make such demands of the people. He had no such authority. Well, he obviously did it, but it had no constitutional or moral authority.
Valued at $20.67 per ounce, once the government figured it had most of it, the dollar was devalued, making gold $35/oz. Note that gold was not up-valued, but the dollar’s purchasing power was smashed.
(Even though we’re not on the Gold Standard, gold remains a world standard, no matter the whims of man’s “financial policies” and strategies.)
Issues of Logic
Crazy, that, “Everyone over the age of 18 is guilty of violating some Federal law on a daily basis.” How can we even have a legal system without guidelines for common sense?
Are you really living your best life, in a system where you have to know all the laws, no matter that they change and are added to daily, and often contradict each other, as “ignorance is no excuse,” and you have “freedom of speech,” but you “can’t give legal advice.” Such a conflict is only possible in a psychotic system.
We can look at a general principle of Western law, that, “if you aren’t harming anyone, you’re free to do anything you want,” and see that it’s plain common sense. Which means they can pass all the legislation they want, but it has to be in harmony with the natural laws that are discovered laws. These laws are fair and just, consistent, and logical. They do not contradict other law and do not provide favoritism to any one or any group.
But every new generation has to be taught the laws we have discovered, diligently, or we regress as a culture.
In a way, law is one of the worst subjects for study because there are so many people giving “advice,” who don’t think things through very well.
“Still discovering laws,” doesn’t mean we are just guessing, or “trying our best to muddle through.” We have a long historical record to refer to, and can pull our knowledge from the experience of all countries. Some laws were established in ancient Rome and Greece, some in early England, things we learned through long and painful experience.
So, over the centuries, we have had some real successes in finding natural laws by application of logic.
For example, if all men are, in their rights under law, equal, then no man has the right to rule another man.
Obsessive-Compulsive: Endless New “Laws”
Things don’t have to be declared “legal” or “illegal” by the government, as for example, the victimless activities, or the moral quandaries, like prostitution or drug use. They can simply be decriminalized. The government doesn’t have to be and shouldn’t be, making moral judgments. Drug use is particularly ridiculous, when government and our “medical system” can ply us with poisons, often worse than illicit drugs. By any rational standard, the legal and illegal drugs are same thing, just sometimes processed differently. And of course, the worst offender, booze, is A-OK with these twits.
And there is certainly no reason why these moral issues should be ending up in courtrooms, stealing resources.
It is peculiar that the churches don’t protest the obvious ploy of government, in setting itself up as a god. It would be peculiar, if we didn’t know that church and government collude.
But anywhere government can meddle, it will meddle, and this needs to be addressed before we can have anything we can call effective government.
The Rise of the Shill
Tied in with that banking corruption, the shills rise to the occasion. Comment sections on websites are lousy with them, telling protesters against bank injustices that homeowners, “should have stayed up-to-date on their mortgage,” or that they’re “cheaters” trying to “get away with something.”
This is despite clear-cut cases of homeowners with no mortgage being foreclosed on. Bank of America has faced multiple lawsuits for allegedly foreclosing on homes where the owners had no mortgage or the bank had no legal claim to the property.
There is a fine balance required to maintain the veneer of civilization.
Picture this: You are framed for a murder and arrested. You hire a detective who manages to find the actual killer, and you present this evidence in your court case. The prosecutor goes ballistic and the judge pounds his gavel.
“I am not going to sit here while you drag the noble reputation of this pillar of the community through the dirt!” bellows the judge.
Sadly, that is no exaggeration. For instance, Lord Denning with his “Appalling Vista” argument, where he used faulty logic and bombast to exonerate some criminal cops.
If we are going to have a proper adversarial system, the judge has to be equally at risk for arrest and contempt of court charges as the defendant.
It is senseless to have judges “in power” when they are supposed to be neutral advocates.
The easiest and most sensible thing would be to do away with the concept of “judges” altogether. There have been too many penis-pumping perverts and other crooked freaks holding those offices for the role to retain a shred of credibility.
About PPJ, (Penis-Pumping Judge), Donald Thompson, a former Creek County District Judge in Oklahoma, the judge that was caught masturbating with a penis pump while on the bench during court cases: In case you haven’t heard, he was charged but he got off... budda-boom, budda-bing!
On the other hand, they aren’t above cooking up a phony case of this nature, if there were a good judge that they wanted to get rid of. Something to keep in mind. In this case, though, Thompson was caught in the act in multiple instances, plus there were the many incidents where he exposed himself, and multiple witnesses described the noise from the churning pump!
At certain points of high arousal, the lights in the courtroom dimmed repeatedly (unconfirmed).
Instances like that highlight why it is high time for juries to fully take over judges’ duties. That no one seems to be battling for this (or even mentioning it) shows the Obeyers are overwhelming in number (and influence).
Judges became popular expressly because they are convenient to the cause of injustice. They are a single point of attack: readily bribed, threatened, cajoled and manipulated.
Consider this: a lot of judges are members of “in groups.” And, of course, they’re all card-carrying members of the Bar Association. Why would anyone think that such people are going to rule against their own buddies – fellow members in “the club?”
It’s an egregious zone, a failure to face reality, not seeing that judicial systems – in all lands – are flawed to the point of absurdity.
But then, who is going to administer the law if not for judges? Simple: One of the purposes of education should be to give everyone a solid grounding in law so they are capable of performing the duties currently handled by judges. The person we now call the jury foreman could take on that task.
Don’t forget, all the malum prohibitum laws would have to be trash-canned under this system, to comport with common law. What they use now is a hybrid system where the average person is forced into a system that is outside of common law, usually called “statutory.”
Displacing Common Law
If a new law is passed that changes a “common law” rule (judge-made law), a judge may rule that the court is now bound by the statutory regime rather than previous precedents.
Some Comments on Mindset
Two Types of People
Hammering by authoritarian control, which we experience in school and many social situations, may lead to a couple of results. The trauma may be internalized, creating a new authoritarian. Or, it may be recognized for what it is, leading a person to be disgusted by the manipulation and to tend to avoid authoritarians and controlling situations and organizations.
A Cope or Insouciance?
You may have heard the saying about hard times making strong men, good times making weak men. Even in these not-so-ideal times, a lot of people are coddled. And what happens? It leads to insouciance when we become so spoiled we tune out “bad news” or anything we don’t like if it makes us feel slightly uncomfortable. Making any reforms overly difficult.
Comments