When the Governed Don't Consent - Occupy Cafe2024-03-28T22:32:42Zhttp://www.occupycafe.org/forum/topics/when-the-governed-don-t-consent?commentId=6451976%3AComment%3A13640&feed=yes&xn_auth=noA friend of mine is an organi…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-07:6451976:Comment:202742012-01-07T02:53:29.104ZMark E. Smithhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/MarkESmith
<p>A friend of mine is an organic gardener who has chickens and goats, lives about an hour away from me by public transportation, is also involved with Occupy, and invites me out about once a year for tea in the garden so that I can escape from the city and be reintroduced to the chickens, whose names I always forget, and pet the goats. My friend just emailed me a link to what is happening in Detroit, which I think is of great importance:…</p>
<p></p>
<p>A friend of mine is an organic gardener who has chickens and goats, lives about an hour away from me by public transportation, is also involved with Occupy, and invites me out about once a year for tea in the garden so that I can escape from the city and be reintroduced to the chickens, whose names I always forget, and pet the goats. My friend just emailed me a link to what is happening in Detroit, which I think is of great importance:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nationofchange.org/work-reimagined-detroit-gets-creative-1325863575" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.nationofchange.org/work-reimagined-detroit-gets-creative-1325863575" target="_blank">http://www.nationofchange.org/work-reimagined-detroit-gets-creative-1325863575</a></p>
<p>Here's what I wrote back, slightly edited (the video is one that David Eggleton posted here on Occupy Cafe):</p>
<blockquote><p>Yes, that's what it's all about. Thank you for sending it along. Here's a short video of a teach-in that permaculturalist Andrew Faust gave at Zucotti Park to Occupy Wall Street NYC:<br/><br/><a href="http://vimeo.com/33206215" target="_blank">http://vimeo.com/33206215</a><br/><br/>The Democratic Party operatives who co-opted Occupy San Diego didn't get everybody. Occupy Garden is still doing good stuff. Those who are marching, chanting, holding up signs, registering voters, petitioning, making demands on government, and getting themselves arrested won't accomplish anything. Gardening does. Your chickens and goats are more productive than anybody in government. Government can't produce anything, not a leaf of lettuce, not a single egg, not a drop of milk, not even the bombs it needs to stay in the mass murder business.<br/><br/>Once upon a time there was a very big, very successful organized crime syndicate like Murder, Incorporated, but this one wasn't just a small gang that killed a few dozen people like Murder, Inc., this gang was global and killed millions of people. This huge gang was called the United States Conglomerate Corporation, or USCC. Unlike most gangs, this one didn't just let whoever was strongest be the leader, they let everyone vote for who would be the gang officers, but of course the gang itself set its own agenda. After many years a lot of people got tired of the gang killing millions of people with impunity, so they decided to vote for somebody who was against killing. Against all odds, their candidate won. "Finally," cheered the people, "now we'll have some change!" But nothing changed. The new gang leader kept trying to get the gang to stop killing, but everybody in the gang was making a lot of money from killing, so they just keep right on killing. Eventually they killed the newly elected leader and got another leader who understood what the gang was all about. Nobody lived happily ever after. End of story. It isn't a very nice story, but it isn't a fairy tale either.<br/><br/>Here's a better story. Once there was a little child named Sage who lived in a nice house with a mommy and daddy who both worked. Sage had a lot of spare time alone after school and became interested in gardening. At first mommy and daddy didn't pay much attention, but when Sage began bringing vegetables from the garden to mommy and daddy to cook, they saw that gardening was a good thing and that it saved them time and money shopping for vegetables and the vegetables tasted better. Then Sage's mommy got laid off. After a few weeks of futile job hunts, mommy became depressed. Sage saw mommy crying, but instead of trying to comfort mommy, Sage said, "Mommy, I need some help in my garden. Will you help me?" Mommy was very sad, but being a mommy had no choice but to wipe away the tears and see if there was something to do to help the child. Mommy saw the garden Sage had planted and enjoyed helping Sage cultivate it. Soon mommy and Sage had enlarged the garden, were growing almost all their own vegetables, and had enough left over to give some away and sell some. When mommy's unemployment ran out, mommy stopped looking for work because by now the garden was supplying enough food and extra income to compensate for the lost job, as long as they were careful not to waste money on things they didn't need. But then daddy's company moved away and Sage's daddy no longer had a job. Daddy tried desperately for months to find another job, but without success. One day mommy walked in and saw daddy crying. But rather than try to comfort daddy, mommy said, "I'm sorry to bother you, but Sage and I need some help in the garden. Will you help us?" Well, you know the rest. With the help of daddy, the garden expanded to the point where it not only supported the family, but fed most of the neighborhood. And everyone lived happily ever after. Isn't this a much better story? This story is still a fairy tale, but it needn't be, because in some places it is already happening.<br/><br/>I really enjoyed the few hours I got to spend at your place. Restoring the earth is the only way we can restore our own humanity.<br/><br/>Love,<br/><br/>--Mark<br/><br/></p>
</blockquote> In addition to rejecting the…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:202432012-01-04T22:40:56.700ZMark E. Smithhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/MarkESmith
<p></p>
<p>In addition to rejecting the normal and dictionary-defined usage of English words, you have now rejected the entirety of English grammar. The "i.e." does not refer to the verb, it refers to the noun, "equity." For example, if somebody writes, "The falling of the rain, i.e., liquid precipitation, was continuous," the "i.e." does not refer to the verb "falling," but to the noun "rain."</p>
<p>Do you believe that because a person on welfare derives a benefit from government, the…</p>
<p></p>
<p>In addition to rejecting the normal and dictionary-defined usage of English words, you have now rejected the entirety of English grammar. The "i.e." does not refer to the verb, it refers to the noun, "equity." For example, if somebody writes, "The falling of the rain, i.e., liquid precipitation, was continuous," the "i.e." does not refer to the verb "falling," but to the noun "rain."</p>
<p>Do you believe that because a person on welfare derives a benefit from government, the citizens of the US have granted people on welfare the right to govern and consented to such governance? If so, why aren't the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court staffed with people on welfare instead of people who were voted for or appointed by those who were voted for?</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p> "I answered the question" No…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:202322012-01-04T20:04:06.873ZNDThttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/NDT
<p>"<span>I answered the question</span>" No you didn't, Mark. The "i.e." referred to the central idea of the sentence, which was the action conveyed by verb "arise". In other words The right to govern can arise by obtaining a benefit from the government. The right does not arise from law, but from equity, and the meaning of equity is the jurisdiction of courts of equity like Chancery.</p>
<p>"<span>I answered the question</span>" No you didn't, Mark. The "i.e." referred to the central idea of the sentence, which was the action conveyed by verb "arise". In other words The right to govern can arise by obtaining a benefit from the government. The right does not arise from law, but from equity, and the meaning of equity is the jurisdiction of courts of equity like Chancery.</p> I answered the question, NDT…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:202242012-01-04T08:29:17.080ZMark E. Smithhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/MarkESmith
<p></p>
<p>I answered the question, NDT. You asked what definition of the word "equity" you had used.</p>
<p>I quoted you as defining equity by using the abbreviation "i.e." meaning "that is" and then defining it as "obtaining a benefit from." I quoted your exact words, and answered your question precisely and accurately.</p>
<p>But yes, your accusations against me are always unfounded, illogical, irrational, and based on nothing more than your refusal to accept the dictionary definitions of…</p>
<p></p>
<p>I answered the question, NDT. You asked what definition of the word "equity" you had used.</p>
<p>I quoted you as defining equity by using the abbreviation "i.e." meaning "that is" and then defining it as "obtaining a benefit from." I quoted your exact words, and answered your question precisely and accurately.</p>
<p>But yes, your accusations against me are always unfounded, illogical, irrational, and based on nothing more than your refusal to accept the dictionary definitions of words. Because you do not accept the dictionary definitions of words, and because you do not wish to engage in any discussion about the topic of an election boycott, you just keep saying that it doesn't mean what the dictionary says it means, that you don't mean what you say, and that I'm a liar because I use the dictionary definition of words and you think the dictionary is just one big lie and that I'm therefore a liar because I use the dictionary definition of words.</p>
<p>Actually, I don't think you believe that. I think you have extremely clever ways of being disruptive, such as making unfounded allegations, denying that words mean what the dictionary says they mean, denying that you said what you said, changing the subject, and insisting that unrelated topics which you'd prefer to discuss are related, which you do by interpreting the topic to mean something other than everyone else agrees that it means.</p>
<p>The topic here is an election boycott used as a means of delegtimizing government. You have defined government as a lower court, delegitimizing as pursuing litigation, and now you're saying that you did not define a word when you did, and that therefore I didn't answer your question when I did.</p>
<p>Due to the hostility of the Cafe Steward, there doesn't seem to be anything I can do to keep this discussion on topic.</p>
<p>I wouldn't be in the least surprised if you respond by defining the word "topic" as meaning "tapioca pudding," as that seems to be your objective, to keep babbling off-topic gibberish to provoke me until I lose my temper so you can get Ben to ban me and delete this topic.</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p> So, Mark, the reason that you…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:203332012-01-04T06:35:16.851ZNDThttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/NDT
<p>So, Mark, the reason that you didn't answer the question is the same as the reason for the accusation that I made against you before? Just so were'clear.</p>
<p>So, Mark, the reason that you didn't answer the question is the same as the reason for the accusation that I made against you before? Just so were'clear.</p>
NDT, you wrote, "No, the ri…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:199872012-01-04T05:30:30.720ZMark E. Smithhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/MarkESmith
<p> </p>
<p>NDT, you wrote, "No, <span>the right to govern can arise through equity, i.e.by obtaining a benefit from the government.</span>" You defined "equity" as "obtaining a benefit from."</p>
<p>Are you now going to deny that the abbreviation, "i.e." for the Latin "id est," or "that is," as defined:</p>
<p>Adv. 1. i.e. - that is to say; in other words<br></br>id est, ie</p>
<p>also doesn't mean what the dictionary says it means, and that therefore you were not defining, by stating it in…</p>
<p> </p>
<p>NDT, you wrote, "No, <span>the right to govern can arise through equity, i.e.by obtaining a benefit from the government.</span>" You defined "equity" as "obtaining a benefit from."</p>
<p>Are you now going to deny that the abbreviation, "i.e." for the Latin "id est," or "that is," as defined:</p>
<p>Adv. 1. i.e. - that is to say; in other words<br/>id est, ie</p>
<p>also doesn't mean what the dictionary says it means, and that therefore you were not defining, by stating it in other words, what equity means?</p>
<p></p> "Again, NDT uses a definition…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:199862012-01-04T04:58:44.568ZNDThttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/NDT
<p>"Again, NDT uses a definition of a word that is not in any dictionary, not even in an informal sense:"</p>
<p>What definition of the word "equity" did I use?</p>
<p>"Again, NDT uses a definition of a word that is not in any dictionary, not even in an informal sense:"</p>
<p>What definition of the word "equity" did I use?</p> Again, NDT uses a definition…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:199842012-01-04T03:54:31.966ZMark E. Smithhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/MarkESmith
<p>Again, NDT uses a definition of a word that is not in any dictionary, not even in an informal sense:</p>
<p>eq·ui·ty<br></br> [ek-wi-tee] Show IPA<br></br>noun, plural eq·ui·ties.<br></br>1.<br></br>the quality of being fair or impartial; fairness; impartiality: the equity of Solomon. Synonyms: disinterest, equitableness, impartiality, fair-mindedness, fairness, justness, evenhandedness, objectivity; justice, probity. Antonyms: bias, discrimination, inequity, injustice, partiality, partisanship,…</p>
<p>Again, NDT uses a definition of a word that is not in any dictionary, not even in an informal sense:</p>
<p>eq·ui·ty<br/> [ek-wi-tee] Show IPA<br/>noun, plural eq·ui·ties.<br/>1.<br/>the quality of being fair or impartial; fairness; impartiality: the equity of Solomon. Synonyms: disinterest, equitableness, impartiality, fair-mindedness, fairness, justness, evenhandedness, objectivity; justice, probity. Antonyms: bias, discrimination, inequity, injustice, partiality, partisanship, prejudice, unfairness, unreasonableness; injustice.<br/>2.<br/>something that is fair and just: the equities of our criminal-justice system.<br/>3.<br/>Law .<br/>a.<br/>Also called chancery . the application of the dictates of conscience or the principles of natural justice to the settlement of controversies.<br/>b.<br/>Also called chancery . a system of jurisprudence or a body of doctrines and rules developed in England and followed in the U.S., serving to supplement and remedy the limitations and the inflexibility of the common law.<br/>c.<br/>an equitable right or claim.<br/>d.<br/>equity of redemption.<br/>4.<br/>the monetary value of a property or business beyond any amounts owed on it in mortgages, claims, liens, etc.: Over the years, they have carefully avoided tapping into their home equity for unnecessary expenses.<br/>5.<br/>Informal . ownership, especially when considered as the right to share in future profits or appreciation in value.</p>
<p>-------------------------------------</p>
<p>NDT then reeturns to the false definition of "delegitimize geoverment" by stating that something which does not remove or revoke power or authority from government, such as not interacting with it, or delegitimizing its court process in a civil case about a minor infraction, is the same as something that does revoke power and authority from government, such as refusing to grant its power and authority by delegating to it that power and authority when it asks for it in elections.</p>
<p>In no sense has NDT ever been willing to discuss the topic of an election boycott except to continue to insist that fighting an eviction process is the same topic, which it is not.</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
<div class="dndata"></div>
<div class="luna-Ent"><div class="dndata"></div>
</div>
<div class="luna-Ent"><div class="dndata"></div>
</div>
<div class="luna-Ent"><div class="dndata"></div>
</div>
<div class="luna-Ent"><div class="dndata"></div>
</div> "Only if people vote to grant…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:203202012-01-04T02:52:35.485ZNDThttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/NDT
<p><span>"Only if people vote to grant a government the legitimacy of their consent, does it have the legitimate authority to tax without it being considered theft. "</span></p>
<p><span>No, the right to govern can arise through equity, i.e.by obtaining a benefit from the government.</span></p>
<p>Governments can be delegitimized by people refusing to interact with them. Voting is only one form of interaction, participation in the court process is another. Delegitimization via the court process…</p>
<p><span>"Only if people vote to grant a government the legitimacy of their consent, does it have the legitimate authority to tax without it being considered theft. "</span></p>
<p><span>No, the right to govern can arise through equity, i.e.by obtaining a benefit from the government.</span></p>
<p>Governments can be delegitimized by people refusing to interact with them. Voting is only one form of interaction, participation in the court process is another. Delegitimization via the court process can be effected by showing that the government does not have the jurisdiction that is usually assumed.</p>
<p></p> Thanks, David. I was amused…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2012-01-04:6451976:Comment:204042012-01-04T01:10:25.759ZMark E. Smithhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/MarkESmith
<p></p>
<p>Thanks, David. I was amused to see among Bill Blum's predictions for 2012:</p>
<p><a href="http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer101.html" target="_blank">http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer101.html</a></p>
<p>NOVEMBER 8: The turnout for the US presidential election is 9.6%. The voting ballots are all imprinted: "From one person, one vote, to one dollar, one vote." The winner is "None of the above".</p>
<p><br/><br/></p>
<p></p>
<p>Thanks, David. I was amused to see among Bill Blum's predictions for 2012:</p>
<p><a href="http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer101.html" target="_blank">http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer101.html</a></p>
<p>NOVEMBER 8: The turnout for the US presidential election is 9.6%. The voting ballots are all imprinted: "From one person, one vote, to one dollar, one vote." The winner is "None of the above".</p>
<p><br/><br/></p>