Rights Archive

Iowa Caucuses

Posted January 4, 2012 By Landis V

Some good things and some bad things from the Iowa caucuses. Opening with some humor, one commenter I read noted the misfortune that Santorum didn’t pull it out in the end, providing the amusement of “Comes From Behind” headlines. In all honesty, Rick “If You’re Going To Live Under My Roof When I’m In The White House You’ll Do As I Say” Santorum is the only candidate who’s a marginally worse choice for your vote than Obama. Romney’s victory is sad and disheartening, though it would have been equally disheartening to see a Gingrich or Perry victory there – these candidates are such a minimally better choice than the status quo that we might as well at least keep what rights we have (as long as, heaven forbid, the current nimwit doesn’t get to appoint any more Supreme Court justices) and save a few million in redecorating costs for the White House.

On the plus side, Michele Bachmann is finally out of the race, though I fear the votes that remained behind her will shift to InSantorum as I see them as the two candidates with the greatest parity on the ticket (with Paul/Johnson as the second closest and Romney/Gingrich rounding out the pairings IMO). Seeing Perry and Gingrich satisfyingly distant is encouraging, but it’s still the first caucus and I’m not sure either of them put any real focus on Iowa. Perhaps best, while Ron Paul came in third, he’ll still get the same seven delegates as the top two vote-takers.

What’s the takeaway? Whatever else you do, don’t vote for Santorum. Or Obama.

Be the first to comment

Property rights – allodial or fee simple?

Posted December 1, 2011 By Landis V

The proper right of ownership of land or other real property is something I’ve wrestled with for some time, and will probably continue to do so in the future. I certainly won’t solve it tonight.

Essentially, possession of property exists in one of two states: allodial title or fee simple. What’s the difference? To paraphrase, fee simple grants absolute ownership of property, except as “limited by the four basic government powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat”. Allodial title grants absolute ownership of property, but for the decision of the sovereign. Hobbes would argue that these two are essentially the same, as the decision of the sovereign is law, and that as such, the sovereign has reign to at any time to exercise the same government powers which limit fee simple ownership (see Leviathan, audio and Project Gutenberg links at bottom of article).

Fee simple bothers me, because that for which one has already paid or has taken by some reasonable force (I will not sidetrack on what might be a reasonable use of force right now, suffice to say I believe such exists), should not be subject to loss due to one’s inability to contribute or perhaps temporary hardship. Your ownership should be absolute to the extent that you require no access to common services and infrastructure, and that you are able to provide completely for your own welfare within the confines of your own property. Difficult in any case, I’m not sure whether it’s possible or not.

This is in direct conflict with my belief that the primary, and almost sole (again, will not diverge here) purpose of government is the defense of the property of its jurisdiction, and that the contribution to such defense is the responsibility of all property holders under the sovereign. Perhaps it would be reasonable that those who do not pay are subject, then, to the loss of defense of their property from within. That is to say, the right or worthiness of the individual to hold said property in lieu of remittance for sovereign defense of ownership then falls to the community – the peers, if you will – of the owner. They then have a decision to allow the propertyholder to continue his allodial title, and perhaps even to provide defense for said title of their own volition in the event of other internal or external attack on right to hold, or to take – by force or by lack of protection – the property as their own, and to take over responsibility for payment of its defense to the sovereign.

A related idea that I have considered is that a man should be free to offer for sale to another the fruits of his labor at his own discretion – specifically, this would be counter to the provisions of the Civil Rights movement. Not to advocate that discrimination based upon any arbitrary characteristic is reasonable, indeed it’s generally a stupid precept. However, at least in our current society, there are certain members whose presence is generally not desired within certain communities, and I have considered at some length whether it would be reasonable for merchants to be able to refuse goods and services to those they consider undesirable, such that it would be an impediment to the undesirable’s ability to remain within a region where their presence was not desired. If there were sufficient merchants who collectively agreed that a person or persons’ presence was unwanted, it would provide strong incentive for that individual to either find more accommodating residence. Alternatively, I cannot find fault in violent uprising from one who is oppressed in order to take what is required to provide for himself or his family.

Now I have wandered much farther from the topic of property rights than I had intended, but I’ve at least shifted some of these thoughts and ideas to copy. These are simply theories, and always evolving, but it gives a reference for me to reflect upon in the future and see how they may have evolved.

Be the first to comment

Government Hate Rant

Posted March 27, 2011 By Landis V

I hate the government of the United States at all levels.  And when I say I hate it, I mean I hate it.  It is fundamentally broken from the top nearly all the way to the bottom.  There is absolutely no accountability, and no incentive for accountability.  For one prime example thereof, look no further than your real-estate taxes.  How hard would you have to work to even determine an actual reachable person with some responsibility for any itemized charge listed there, let alone get contact information for that person?  When nobody’s accountable, it makes it really easy to not have to be responsible for overspending.  Lets get some accountability back into this country.  It needs to either start at the community/county level, or be mandated from the top.

Be the first to comment

6/7 #2

Posted June 7, 2010 By Landis V

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/thesimpledollar/~3/lxY6OGJTX3Y/ Honey Mustard Chicken Strips

“As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth’s final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny. The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.” Commissioner Pravin Lal “U.N. Declaration of Rights” From the movie Alpha Centauri (1999)

http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/FZrg0UrXy50/J-P-Barlow-m dash-Internet-Has-Broken-the-Political-System

Be the first to comment

3/24

Posted March 24, 2010 By Landis V

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/03/24/1214239/Full-ACTA-Leak-Online Full text of ACTA.

http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/yhoE4n4Idxs/Drunk-Histoy-Presents-Nikola-Tesla-NSFW Looks interesting. Worth checking out sometime.

“Speak not injurious Words neither in Jest nor Earnest. Scoff at none although they give Occasion.” — The Papers of George Washington, Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour Something to work on.

http://idle.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1596654&cid=31626326 Superb.

http://www.orc.soton.ac.uk/61.html How Fibre Lasers Work, includes a layman’s explanation of excited electron decay.

Be the first to comment

Leviathan 14 Hobbes 64kb

Posted January 14, 2010 By Landis V
Source: www.archive.org
Listened to chapter 14 of Leviathan this evening, a -great- discourse on contract and covenant tied in with natural law. I -love- Hobbes’ emphasis on the importance of definition, and as such the preceding chapters do benefit this chapter. However, this one stands exceptionally well on its own. MP3 link attached.
Be the first to comment

12/23

Posted December 23, 2009 By Landis

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/janetdaley/6845967/

There’ll -be-nowhere-to-run-from-the-new-world-government.html tl;dr. Read it later.

BAMA.TO Not a URL, though it’s curious.

Be the first to comment