Legal Navel Gazing for

Educational Purposes
Adam Richard Tanielian

2023

I Spy 3

Keep-away 8

Make Believe 17

Cops & Robbers 29

Teeter-Totter 45

Copycat 56

Monopoly Money 61

Tug of War 68

Team Meeting 72

About the Research 82

About the Author 82

 I Spy

“Life is physics orchestrated.”

- Brian Greene, Until the End of Time

Wave-particles radiating superposition, shyly dart across timespace upon observation.

Subatoms randomly crisscrossing, colliding, merging, intersecting, diverging, splitting, melding,
smashing and surging. Orders of magnitude broader pushes and pulls emerge as ow at scale
takes form. Arising of the primitive substance, further orders of magnitude wider discernible
features, states, structures appear which are observable from multiple perspectives. Harmonic,
symbiotic, entangled - living and nonliving - masses and volumes move across, into, through
and beyond one to others and back to all. Combinations expound as matter reorganizes in
pursuit of higher e ciency. Waves across, over and through all move the tiniest fragments of
information. Each meta-datum shifts, slides, weaves around others, sometimes nudging or
crashing into data. Severable, regenerable, malleable molds take form and are sculpted away
by passersby in a wiki-project of epic magnitude. Fractals spun out into the heavens do as
circles and ows of molecules in ocean waves surging and retreating, sending individual
packets careening out into the blue while keeping even time at orders of magnitude greater
scales. So too do celestial bodies have their neighbors slung about, caught up in the tail wind
of a larger object, spinning away from and toward increasingly larger, heavier objects which
collectively spiral inward and outward through in nitely denser objects contained in the very
same space that subdivides and supports the structure of matter. All perfectly ordered at some
scales despite distressingly greater levels of entropy at other scales.

“This ain’t back in the days.”

- Notorious B.I.G., Things Done Changed

Things done changed. This ain’t back in the day. Democrats. Unions. Rhythm & Blues
(R&B) music. Ray Charles and Usher share about as much in common as Jimmy Carter and
Joe Biden: they’re professional entertainers, but beyond a few more super cial similarities, it’s
just that they had roughly the same job…albeit in di erent economies and cultural
environments. 2023 shares about as much in common with 1963 as R. Kelly and Marvin Gaye.
1993 was halfway between the two, but technological growth and development since the early
2000s put 1993 closer to 1963 than 2023 regardless of the math. Laws are sometimes
updated, revised, amended, repealed, or in the odder cases left to rot in de facto
obsolescence, but only a sorry case can be made that the laws of today are appropriate,
popular, e ective, or e cient at any sort of scale. The world is famously convenient for about
fty-three people, give or take, but that is not a story of billions, and since laws extend their
in uence and power into just about every observable human activity, one can reasonably go
about one’s life with the understanding that if there is something wrong with how the world is
working, it is a complex failure but most certainly includes problems at-law.

“If we’re not schooling the youth with wisdom,

Then the sense of the father will visit the children,

And that’s keeping it real,

That’s keeping it wrong.”

- Gang Starr, Robin Hood Theory

Almost everybody has a complaint at the ready. If they cannot think of one on the spot
about something that they would really like to change in the world, it will not take long before
some problem comes to mind. To be sure, individuals are without power to x problems at
larger scales, but if they desire some power, then the process from here to there includes
fi
fl
ff
fl
ffi
ffi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fl
 speaking about the problems and thinking about solutions. Navel gazing is essential though
considered a passing fad some thousand years ago. Talking about the world as if it is xable or
worth xing, is…like…so nger-snapping, black turtleneck, Dadaist voodoo or something…but
let us lean into the void all the same.

“You don’t have to be a supergenius

To open your face up and sing.”

- Ani DiFranco, Face Up and Sing

Alice Cooper sang in Eighteen, “I’m a boy, and I’m a man.” Similarly, a culture and
society and country and system can simultaneously be multiple things at once to multiple
people, and to varying degrees the same to others. Reductionist thinking, though ironic or
hypocritical in academia, has taken a leading role in how many students and teachers perceive
their world, resulting in misconceptions like that singularity is possible, let alone preferable over
plurality. On controversial issues ranging from abortion to drugs laws to Gays, et. al, left-
leaning academics believe themselves in the moral right while reducing people to a few
comments they made or were said to have made, possibly decades ago, taken out of context
and viewed in isolation as if those same people have never uttered a compassionate thought
otherwise. Meanwhile, RuPaul Charles drops knowledge in between eleganza extravaganzas in
AJ & The Queen with Truthisms like “people can be more than one thing”.

“You better work.”

- RuPaul, Supermodel

Despite RuPaul’s on-screen wisdom, the American Democratic Party has claimed all
matters GBLT+ as their exclusive territory, leaving a few notable gay “conservative” men
ironically or hypocritically excluded from the “liberal” agenda. Andrew Sullivan, for example,
regularly skewers the dominant cultural philosophy that has succeeded in little more than
raising up voices of victimhood and anger, whereas substantial improvements necessitate
agency and opportunity take the lead; that is, positive thinking and action over destructive
tendencies. Similarly, Douglas Murray consistently o ers lucid, articulate, erudite analyses of
social and political events and conditions. Albeit somewhat grotesquely at times, Milo
Yiannopoulos brie y ran a successful shock and awe campaign for libertarian and more diverse
viewpoints. That all three of those white men came from Great Britain was irrelevant in the USA
where their media sold like hotcakes to conservatives, liberals, libertarians, and
independents…activity in the marketplace of ideas suggesting consumers are hungry for more
diversity, equity, and inclusion of viewpoints…possibly in a similar spirit as fabled Speaker’s
Corner in London…or supporting Constitutional or Human Rights law.

“Again, with gusto: Life does not and can not contravene physical law. Nothing can.”

- Brian Greene, Until the End of Time

Ah, but if we seek to enact great changes, there are risks and dangers, pitfalls and
traps, saboteurs and adversaries. The engineers who built the machine did so such that it
would be fail-safe, meaning it’s safe even if all else fails. Ask around, and it will not be long
before somebody mentions all the world’s problems come from that nameless, faceless,
faraway “system” which cannot be “ xed” because those engineers designed it to work for
only a few people, and so it is not broken, per se. The system is a colossal letdown, but it is a
huge success for a lucky few. Hence all the shouting to “burn this mother f***er down” or the
more socially acceptable calls to “dismantle structures”. If those messages were the best
available solutions, then in order to solve one problem, another must be created. Open one
door, close another. That only shifts problems rather than eliminates them. In order to have no
fi
fl
fi
fi
ff
fi
 problems — or at least approach a limit of zero problems — then we must envision something
entirely di erent.

“Imagine if you can what it is like to have no possessions at all.

Nothing. Very few people are able to imagine such a thing, to have nothing at all.

Well let us, you and I, try to imagine something a hundred times harder:

Not just to have nothing at all, but when there was nothing at all.

The very beginning of time.

The dawn of history, page one.

Nothing at all.

The Earth itself with out form, and void,

Only an emptiness, formless, a dark endless waste of water.

No living thing, no plant or tree, no bird or animal. Nothing.

This is before people, before anything at all.

A void, sitting silent.

Still.

And then:

Nothing.”

- Lemon Jelly, Page One

Was there plebiscite among peasants establishing nobles’ ownership, control, or rights
over property in the Ancient Regime? Of course not. At some unknown historical point, people
starting claiming the world outside of their bodies as their domain. What was public became
private when a human took from the common spaces in the natural environment, claimed
ownership, and protected ownership against interference. Over time, private property came to
encompass real estate and intellectual properties. Our current situation emerged from all that
came before, and while today is the greatest day ever in terms of universal rights, privileges,
immunities, opportunities, growth, development and such, we still have lingering remnants of
history in our midst. As individuals cannot remove the DNA of their ancestors, it is reasonable
to accept populations cannot collectively cut out their histories or cure wounds from historical
atrocities that left the people scarred or otherwise harmed. Perfection may always lie at the
outer limits of our potential, but so long as we approach it, there shall be a sense of
accomplishment and equity.

“Impossible is nothing.”

- Adidas

There are, as Brian Greene demanded, certain rules to how life works. Forces and
actions yield responses and reactions. Physical laws are still in play, but humans do still try to
bend the universe to their will. Each individual who creates, sustains, modi es, or enforces
policy also projects their own aws and shortcomings into the the rules and guidelines of an
organized, collective whole. In cultures where people believe all humans are inherently awed,
sinful, or sel sh, those projections create awed language in awed policies which individuals
most certainly do intentionally misinterpret for their own sel sh or sinful purposes. These
axioms are baked into the cake, and long ago men and women of political stature gave up on
the idea of a perfect world (utopia is for dreamers); many even quit believing a reasonably
happy & prosperous population is possible at scale. Legal traditions, economic systems, and
nancial paradigms are not akin to the weather; rather, these human inventions are physical
manifestations of social consciousness, subconsciousness or unconsciousness as it may be.

“Wake up to nd out that you are the eyes of the world”

- Grateful Dead, Eyes of the World

fi
ff
fi
fi
fl
fl
fi
fl
fi
fl
 Constructed realities are a natural consequence of the personal image gathered by
listening to one’s own voice and seeing one’s re ection. This is comparable to the “residual
image” from The Matrix lms. It’s the constant daydreaming the leading female did in
Everything, Everywhere, All At Once. This is samsara: trading deeper knowledge of a singular,
integrated reality for fantasies of discrete, compartmentalized, independent or mutually
exclusive subject realities that change based on context and standpoint epistemologies.

“And I’m slowly turning into you.”

- The White Stripes, I’m Slowly Turning into You

A great warrior gains the trust of his fellow soldiers who submit to the Great’s
leadership, and a King is born. A noble or monarch claims territory, possibly employing militias
to take property by force, and thereafter the realm is defended with the State’s monopoly on
violence. Columbus planted his ag on land, projected his ego onto the tapestry his brain
perceived from his sensory inputs, and the unlawful European settlement in the Americas was
converted to lawful possession by European standards. Lords and Senators create laws with
varied intents, some reinforcing or supporting the status quo that has been more or less
continuous since Ancient Times. First take, and later defend, with force. Language helps to
pacify, manipulate, negotiate, and stall con ict, but force is the ultimate negotiator. Capital,
resources, real estate, and power are acquired with violence, which is then the means of
defending those acquisitions regardless of moralizing how capital, property, and in uence were
originally acquired. The ends have justi ed the means even as the intelligentsia eschews
Machiavellianism. In fact, many of the very same people warning of the dangers of
Machiavellian thinking themselves express comparably rigid, pragmatic, self-serving ideas.

“Everything is all stuck together.”

- Talking Heads, Burning Down the House

At some scale, matter must be indistinguishable from other bits of matter, and
boundaries between space and matter must blur. Similarly, problems can often be reduced to a
few common themes or core issues (e.g. poverty, poor education, discrimination, violence).
Problem-solving sessions fail to produce results when each new idea has comparable aws
and shortcomings. Well-intentioned conversations can dead-end when answers seem just out
of reach. Sometimes people cannot agree on simple semantics, such that the de nition and
application of a commonly understood word becomes ambiguous, as if meaning is mutually
exclusive between individuals, as if solipsism is unavoidable. However, obviously there must
exist some shared premises, or we wouldn’t so much as recognize other people aren’t food, or
furniture, or pets, or lawn ornaments. Everything is one thing and “everything is everything” like
Lauryn Hill sang. Silliness aside, a common language and mutual understanding of physical
reality are helpful but not required elements for building a subjective reality experience. Given
low rates of lifelong learning in physics, chemistry, biology, and mathematics, we can
reasonably assume knowledge of the physical world is skewed. Depth and breadth of literacy
across populations resembles that of numeracy and scienti c comprehension — shallow,
narrow, incomplete. The “least common denominator” among the people is not intellectual,
which creates opportunity to exploit common weaknesses, to mislead people.

“I ran my mouth o a big too much,

Oh what did I say?

Well, you just laughed it o ,

It was all okay.”

- Modest Mouse, Float On

“Woke

ff
fi
ff
fl
fi
fl
fl
fi
fi
fl
fl
 “Woke” is a dumb word, but that it is grammatically incorrect makes it a be tting
moniker for organizers of a failed Cultural Revolution who assumed they could elect a
deontological judge-jury-enforcer. Around the time Trump became President, observant English
speakers discovered that not only could a public or private entity or agent compel purchase of
a product under threat of penalty (e.g. car insurance), but also that such entities or agents
could compel purchase of a way of thinking. If campus activists and HR departments had got
their way, the population would have been compelled to subscribe to a “socially conscious
philosophy” (or other marketable buzzterm), or face penalties of sociocultural or occupational
exclusion. Organizers may have expected some kind of spontaneous cultural evolution, and
while not impossible, such a supernatural occurrence is never a likely outcome. As such,
proportionally more time and energy should be poured into behaviors and thoughts that are
more likely to prove useful in a foreseeable future. A time and place of universal peace, love,
harmony, and justice is unlikely to materialize, but in our world there will be growth and
mutations on that theme. Growth a ects resource security. Mutations include potential
environmental disasters, but the more instant concern for most people is likely to be securing
nancial resources to purchase su cient consumer goods and services to sustain an
acceptable quality of life. All hence, STEM! Somehow we get @LibsOnTicTok.

Of all the possible combinations,

The probability of our situation’s formation is in nitesimal,
Like p equals a zero with a billion zeros after the decimal,
Then a one and done just as nonzero status begun.
To some extent, this extremely unlikely event
Presents questions about what our lives must have meant.
Should we be content that last chances came and went?
Is it not a fact that life does not relent?
That the living have duties to prevent harm regardless of consent?
To represent fact whether held by one or ninety-nine percent,
To reinvent the segment that underwent the Great Ascent,
Such that arguments represent wise knowledge sent,
Received, converted and spent.
fi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
 Keep-away

“A chain is as strong as its weakest link.

Each one his brother's keeper.

A say unity is the foundation of survival.

Got to make your love come shining through.

Say, stop your fussing and your ghting brothers.

Now is the time for uniting sisters.”

- Dennis Brown, Stop the Fussing & Fighting

Watch them as they rush to silence the mildest of disagreements, to deliver summary
judgments with extreme prejudice, to pass over mountains of details as if they were implied,
and to drag everybody through this hasty detour around deliberate, intentional, conscious,
thorough conversation. Then everybody is expected to arrive at a singular exclusive
conclusion? Numerous possibilities exist, of course, but then why does only one of many get
treated as the only probable outcome? Knowing that the event is possible does not imply a
discrete probability. Could the reason for choosing this hypothetical over others just be
personal preference? Or because it supports some agenda or bene ts the person making the
choice? That methodology would generally nullify objective, scienti c claims, but science is
hardly an objective when people go about their personal business.

“It’s all about the Benjamins, baby.”

- Pu Daddy, It’s All about the Benjamins

Don’t want to answer hard questions? Make a straw man. Don’t want to sound
ambiguous? Only focus on a few ideas that support your point, and to the extent possible
avoid legitimizing other points. Make a nervous situation. Imply other ideas are shameful,
immoral, immature, reckless, excessive, impossible, or dangerous. Hurry people to explain
years of study in 30 seconds without using big words, or act like they’re obscuring issues with
complicated jargon. Make it seem like complexity is a hoax, or like simplicity only implies
incompleteness. Say whatever helps you win the emotional argument. Facts can be cherry
picked or excluded. Methods, sampling technique, participants, procedures can all be
designed to support predetermined conclusions. Data can be selected or excluded to win the
public argument, win the power, money, status, and security. Act like it’s civilized as you and
yours destroy others’ lives, cancelling, bullying in the name of law and ethics, ending careers,
breaking up families, and generally harming people as much as legally permissible. Most
importantly, treat dissenters like they’re stupid, ignorant, unrealistic, dangerous, outdated,
sel sh losers. Winning isn’t everything; it’s the only thing; ends justify means.

Those audacious, ostentatious,

Brazenly mendacious faces,
Whose arguments are fallacious,
Who are irtatious with that vexatious,
Whose ideas are salacious, sebaceous,
Who still feign perspicacious, gracious,
Then abuse & manipulate mental spaces.

Combine this bad faith academic/intellectual debate with militarism (aka psychos with
impunity) & it looks like we’ve got a plausible cause of the current breakdown/impasse in what
could be civilized, intelligent, productive discussion on how to proceed, prevent and x
problems. Schools have been Bedlam since they opened to mass education markets. Child
labor laws put everybody in school, and so they emerged like factories or prisons — like other
fi
ff
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
 institutions which failed to help some and harmed others. There have been calls for paradigm
changes from within the ivory tower itself. More than a tad ironic or hypocritical, the NEA
emerged as one of the wokest social justice warriors in the ght. Coincidentally, educational
institutions and personnel have reason to feel guilty consciences, but regardless of how messy
their histories were, two wrongs still do not make a right. Much like the “white guilt” that
propelled the wealthiest “liberals” to support looting and rioting in 2020, people will say
anything to make themselves feel less guilty, to keep their jobs and power. Pass the buck.
Scapegoat. Name names. Cancel. Dox. And they learnt it in school, no less! From oddly
militant borderline sociopaths “managing” their classrooms with fear & intimidation,
harassment & corporal punishment.

“But who can unlearn all the facts that I've learned,

As I sat in their chairs and my synapses burned.”

- Phish, Chalkdust Torture

Then they’ll read research from colleges of education, written by people who might
have never worked in the private sector, essays and articles often enough authored by 20-
somethings who have spent almost no time with anybody outside their age group. PhD
dissertations likewise generally come from people who have not been out of school. This is
where extremist academic content emerges: from individuals embedded in ethnocentric groups
sharing rigid beliefs, relying on their relative youth or popularity to propel their messages which
fall apart at the seams under strict scrutiny. Blame it on anticompetitive behavior in academia
and education markets. Academics know about central tendencies and normal distribution,
knowledge they use to pitch messages that appeal to the middle. At least 2/3rds of the group
lies within one standard deviation of the mean, so appealing to that majority might see, like
democratizing knowledge, however fallacious.

The middle is painfully normal — average intelligence, average looks, average sense of
humor, average ignorance, nothing extraordinary. The only problem is, the best ideas are not
“normal”. They are rare. A brief look through history shows the greatest, smartest, most
in uential people — those who built and invented and discovered — are outliers, or they at
least rank higher than the 84th percentile. If products and ideas were pitched to the 99th
percentile, maybe great things would happen, but that is a tiny target market. Given the
importance of democratic majority, the top x% will never cast enough votes by themselves, so
the most pro table sale is to a range of thinkers approximately analogous to the Overton
window. Only problem is if radical change and dynamic, creative, super smart-ideas are
needed, they’re not going to appeal to the mediocre middle. Maybe Mr. Overton and other poli-
sci guys missed that part, but considering those and other constraints and circumstances,
mediocrity look like it’s greater. The bottom 51% can outvote, out-purchase, and out ght
individuals and small groups in the range of +3 standard deviations above the mean. That’s
probably very comforting to the middle: their numbers suggest they get to be the leaders. Their
voices get heard. They are the majority and can set trends. That is ne so long as the majority
aren’t wrong…but there is plenty of evidence the majority can be and has been wrong, and if
the wrong ideas are in front, then that is a net negative for everybody. Therefore, we have got a
bit of a collective action or scalability problem.

“The school oors are covered with pieces of pencil eraser, too.”

- White Stripes, 300 MPH Torrential Outpour Blues

How can a child be the same race as one parent and a di erent race from the other
parent? Does that not suggest the other parent is not actually a parent? More than enough
mixed race couples and their children have confronted the problems with American
interpretation and construction of race as if it were discrete and not continuous. Maybe the
fl
fl
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
 headlines were buried, but luckily their truth can be discovered independently rather than
memorized and regurgitated. Are milk cows, Dalmatians, and zebras “black”? Then neither
should Barrack Obama be considered “black”. Unlearning Race (Chatterton Williams) seems
like a step up for mothers and fathers who are not identi ed as the same race as their children,
because anything less seems like delegitimizing biological parenthood. If Obama is black, then
his mother was not the same race, but his father was? That hardly seems reasonable. Schools
ought to be safe spaces to discuss these complicated issues, but instead they have become
spaces where such discussions are more likely banned out of fear of somebody getting the
wrong idea. Rather than expanding their minds and developing linguistic uency in matters of
substance, students are steered away from investigating semantics, methodologies, and
controversies themselves. Instead of students learning and applying rst-principles, scienti c
reasoning, then trying to steel-man arguments and validate them independently, schools have
morphed into hostile territory for free thought intended to understand the world rather than
merely be its object.

“And the county judge,

Who held a grudge,

Will search for evermore,

For the band on the run.”

- Wings, Band on the Run

Luckily, every justice on the Supreme Court had a chance to a rm the crucial legal
importance of intent during oral arguments in Countermand, and thankfully the opinion
rea rmed the obvious: that one’s intent matters. Whether by intent or e ect, school from
Kindergarten through tertiary postgraduate had morphed into the ironic or hypocritical kinds of
safe-spaces in little more than a decade since the failed Woke Cultural Revolution commenced.
Coincidentally, a rmative action was set to expire in the College Admissions cases, and a new
set of private agents was then likely to takeover signi cant parts of the public machinery and
money. Simultaneously, dramatic shifts in university policy through waning years of War on
(Islamic) Terror grew disturbingly anti-Islamic as forbidden behavior was advocated as normal
whereas traditional moral reasoning was painted as racist, bigoted, blank-phobic, toxic, violent,
ill. No conversations were allowed, like the Woke Revolutionaries were the parents in that
house, and their word was law. The very places people learn to read, write, calculate,
understand their world became infertile ground for neutral facts, for pluralism, for civilized
discussion, for di erences of opinion, for freedoms of mind, conscience, belief, thought, and
self. Luckily, the Supreme Court delivered in 2022–23.

“Some will hate you, pretend they love you now.

Then behind they try to eliminate you,

But who Jah bless, no one curse.

Thank God, we're past the worse.

Hypocrites and parasites

Will come up and take a bite,

And if your night should turn to day,

A lot of people would run away.”

- Bob Marley, Who The Cap Fits

The Great Depersonalization coincided with rise of automated customer service,

cashless venues, an entire economic sector void of human contact. Humans adapted to live on
Earth, and as such they became social creatures, but in man’s conquest to control and subdue
the planet, culture surpassed consciousness on our way to a splintered population of pseudo-
autonomous individuals living and working in and among a larger social group. Though illusory,
each discrete individual could plausibly argue their lives are mutually exclusive. Against the
ffi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ff
fl
fi
 backdrop of dehumanization of economic activity — which is the majority of human
interactions since we spend more time at work than anywhere else — there has been this rise
in a sort of authoritarianism that masquerades as democratic liberalism. In the United States of
America, people genuinely believe they are supporting a higher reading of the Constitution, or
what should be, when they censor college professors; when they shout angry chants and
prevent tra c or business from being conducted in a district; when they end a target’s career;
when they cause public shame resulting in belligerence and otherwise threatening behavior
aimed at a target individual; when their opposition feels threatened, belittled, violated,
disrespected, let down, embarrassed, afraid, or even compelled to passionately defend him/
herself. Some people exhibit the very same type of behaviors they purport to loathe and detest,
but they fail to recognize such behavior in themselves, presumably because they are not on the
receiving end. Not everybody can empathize; some people are unable to recognize and
process pain and su ering others as they would in themselves; and it usually looks horrible.

“Dem a backbiters,

Hypocritical two-side lass.

We call them modern day Judas,

The spreaders of rumors.”

- Jesse Royal, Modern Day Judas

In 2023, all of these intersecting, con icting, competing, confounding plot lines and
characters together revealed almost-comedically awed reasoning demonstrated by nearly all
individuals in the group(s). A remarkably high percent of individuals in the general population
appear to believe they have some leg up on their fellow people, and that their advantage
comes from some esoteric intuition about others that allows them to be somehow superior
despite absence of observable evidence. These individuals apparently believe their methods to
be sound, but virtually nobody can utter a word of explanation for the phenomenon, and none
can describe cognitive methods/processes in lengthy detail such that the situation could be
studied more scienti cally. Perhaps that is part of the strategy — to keep a straight poker face
— but if there are solutions to problems in populations of strangers, then they will require quite
a lot of uncomfortable discussions about the mind games that people are known or believed to
play.

“It was a crazy game of poker.”

- MOE, Crazy Game of Poker

The situation is quite absurd. Just about the only reason not to laugh is the gravity of
our shared circumstance which presently requires more, not less, sincere understanding. Deep
and broad conversation is almost certainly a prerequisite to accurate & reliable social-
emotional intelligence. Unluckily, the order of the day virtually anywhere seems to be small talk,
shall we say, less-than-universal parameters. Lively debate may arise over acceptable topics,
but if inputs to socially-desirable conversations must come from approved sources, then
appreciable change is not a potential output. Noam Chomsky hit the nail on the head when he
said governments can easily control civilians who they believe they have rights to speak freely,
but in actuality they may only speak freely within certain boundaries. While almost none of the
“free” people negotiated terms of our conversation, and nearly nobody consented to rules of
etiquette, politeness, or what topics may be o -limits, somehow enforcement of such rules is
ubiquitous. For example, English speakers often strongly believe that raising one’s voice is a
sign of hostility or anger, and as such talking with passionate feeling at a volume above some
arbitrary decibel threshold is to be avoided in polite company.

Whether deliberately or not, English speakers adhere to this learned cultural belief
about volume and tone of voice, which technically has only what meaning the speaker intends
ffi
ff
fi
fl
ff
fl
 (Countermand v. Colorado), and cannot be reasonably expected to signi cantly change the
literal meaning of the words, however loudly or animated they are spoken. Listeners and third
parties have long made a habit out of deconstructing communication and improperly
reconstructing it, so there are some latent disagreements about what intent is, and to what
extent it matters — before, during, and after Countermand, since legal decisions are not what
many people consider guiding lights in their social lives. One consequence of people living
aside the law but not necessarily following it so closely, is that customs, etiquette, and cultural
norms emerge. People make rules about how to act as a sort of preventative e ort. They beat
around the bush, walk around on eggshells, and mostly keep the fetishes and Jinn at bey; or
maybe all the little symbolic gestures support a system whereby people follow rules believing
they are protected from demons — who may use human proxy. The situation is unclear
because so little discussion is tolerated, and matters of arts, communication, culture and the
like are often compartmentalized as if they were mutually exclusive from scienti c reasoning.

Like other cultures, English speakers learn these rules as children, and after some
guided practice, individuals will self-censor and participate in the process of socio-cultural,
linguistic operant conditioning. English speakers will continue to speak softly and “politely” to
appease either people or spirits or both, and they will do so rather automatically after some
time in the culture. Reasons are not necessarily important to know in detail, which is a good
thing because it is anybody’s guess what the deeper story is today. Loud English is but one
example of arbitrary, objectively meaningless behavior that people think means something.
Like a composite function in math, proxy symbolism helps establish and maintain hierarchical
relationships between Lords and peasants, employers and employees, adults and children,
and อง. Parents teach their children outer (proxy) symbolic functions like purported moral and
ethical implications of body language and tone of voice absent other factors, but the inner
functions are scarcely discussed; in fact, it seems people must think physicists discovered that
eye contact, posture, volume and such have meaning rather than that people just made it up a
long time ago. In some way, people must think that all the inferences about character and
social skills and politeness from volume, pitch, intonation, jazz hands, emotional delivery,
animation, facial a ect, etcetera just plain mean whatever the school teacher, preacher,
policeman, and aunties said it means, and that’s all there is to it. As if there could not be a
second, third, or no meaning attached to words, volume, looks, actions or whatever helps
deliver the words; also sort of as if the speaker does not have the ultimate say so in the
meaning of his/her communique; as if Article 6bis of the Berne Convention. concerning moral
rights, does not exist.

Complex emotions in motion

Flow through mental ocean,
Cause commotion, bonds woven,
Experience erosion and corrosion.
Like molecules from elements,
Emotional content is elegant, intelligent.
Complexity is no relevant impediment
To memory better than that of an elephant.

“Learning loss” was and still is a buzzy topic of discussion among educators and
parents who recognized something not-quite-right happened during Covid school closures.
Few experts appear ready, willing, and able to consider the entirety of lockdowns and school
closures a failure or mistake, which is learning loss itself — loss of opportunity to learn and
know an inconvenient truth. That online learning mostly failed young people in 2020–2022 is
well known in part because it is a convenient truth. The world is just getting used to devices
whose functionality can be great but is still not quite where it needs to be for billions of
น้
ff
fi
ff
fi
พี่
 consumers. Evidence of failure in the online learning experiment was obvious; so was evidence
of failure in the bigger experiment where governments made it illegal to work, did not allow
people to leave their homes, and forced them to take drugs (vaccines) if they wanted access to
public spaces. How admitting the complicated truth about those failures is more inconvenient
than the policy blunders, remains unsettled.

Cyber-school demonstrated that individuals left to explore the world and piece together
information mainly by themselves, without rigid academic guidelines that evolved over
centuries, will only rarely succeed. Not only will most individuals fail to conduct targeted
searches for high-quality mature content, but they will often sort and read resources incorrectly
when they do encounter accurate, reliable, and helpful material. Usually it seems individuals
online are most likely to become distracted as a primary directive. Distraction has very weirdly
become its own type of attention. Evidence is robust in social media business models that rely
on keeping people tactfully distracted. A result is utter lack of direction among consumers of
online services that function primarily to gain and hold attention, which for humans today
means the content is provocative, sexualized, controversial, outrageous, and moreover
anything but intelligent, productive, and pro-social. Ironically, “social” media consumption has
led to a rather antisocial population — one depersonalized and dehumanized over decades of
working in cubicles, sent through phone trees of robots, inundated with spambot mail and
robocalls, overcharged, gouged, extorted by corporations and other entities that can debit
accounts without consent, and most recently forced to stay inside and take drugs.

“Shake it up,

Just like bad medicine,”

- Bon Jovi, Bad Medicine

Healthcare professionals experienced learning loss when they failed to let better
responses to changing statistics direct their evolving Covid response. When shops were
shuttered, when it was illegal to go to work, when landlords were stuck with mortgages and no
right to evict delinquent debtor tenants, when international travel was closed, and especially
when vaccines were mass marketed, the medical establishment showed its hand; turns out
they were blu ng. Early on in the pandemic, people knew and spoke about di erent categories
of risk for di erent groups. There were reports that surface transmission was not a thing. There
was evidence that masks were not e ective, and more importantly that outdoor masking was
unnecessary. Something other than science motivated a response that did not include rst
advocacy and prescription of dietary and lifestyle changes in the broader population. Were we
all in it together? No, but that is a nice marketing campaign for the worst policies ever
deployed. If we were all in it together before or after Covid, then the proposition that we were
all in it together then would hold more water, but hitherto humans have not chosen whether to
be in this life together or apart; not consistently, not nally, not sincerely.

If you want to lie with statistics,

Follow simple heuristics,
Double-down on stylistic linguistics,
Characteristic of mystics.
Power extends as far as the ballistics.

Failures in Covid responses worldwide illuminated older ontological and epistemological

ghts in sciences. Who is to say that pharmaceutical intervention is the best course of
treatment? If one keeps an open mind, one could imagine a rainbow of possibilities on matters
of health and wellness. Mainstream medicine has made miraculous advances, especially in
matters of reactive internal medicine (brain surgery or organ transplants, for example), but the
environment is closing the walls in faster than medicine can respond. There are no cures for the
fi
ff
ffi
ff
fi
ff
fi
 biggest killers — heart disease, cancer, stroke, kidney disease, complications resulting from
diabetes, etc. — but most cases can be avoided through lifestyle and diet interventions prior to
emergence of disease. Despite growing evidence that obesity, tobacco use, sedentary lifestyle,
and other preventable factors are responsible for the bulk of net deaths worldwide, the
mainstream medical establishment has all but withdrawn from advocacy and prescription of
individual behavioral changes aimed at improving overall health, which thereby reduce risks of
premature or preventable death. As if to say the AMA does not believe diet and exercise are
suitable interventions, or that it is appropriate and advisable to encourage patients to diet and
exercise and yes, prescribe diet and exercise as routine elements of treatment plans.
Fortunately, there are still people alive in the world who can intuit the obvious long term health
bene ts of maintaining a t body. If medical professionals cannot bring themselves to talk
about a patient’s obesity as primarily a lifestyle choice, and that obesity is one of the top two or
three predictors of premature death, then rationally curious individuals looking for answers
must get creative, because the boundaries of acceptable thought among and within healthcare
industry groups have been framed exceedingly narrow.

Opinions jurisprudential have never been more essential

For our collective attainment of greater potential.
Di erential, existential threats may grow exponential,
But still fall torrential no thanks to powers Presidential.

Imagine, if you please, the possibility that humans have greater physical and mental
potential than they currently exhibit. This is not the urban legend that humans only use 10% of
their brains, nor even the mistaken belief that half or more of the brain can be used at once.
Rather, history shows improvement and advancement, which suggests more improvements are
yet to come, in turn implying humans have yet unrealized potential that will hopefully surface in
the future. Perhaps thousands of generations ago, parts of the brain developed more strongly
than other regions, and still more batches of neurons lay dormant to their fuller potential.
Adaptation and occurred incrementally from germination to root and fruit on the family tree.
People acclimatized to survive and thrive in inhospitable physical and psychological
environments, and as a result we are the humans we are today regardless of de nitive reasons
or processes of those genetic, behavioral, and cognitive augmentations.

“Since the Prehistoric ages and the days of Ancient Greece,

Right down through the Middle Ages,

Planet Earth kept going through changes,

And then no renaissance came (Came),

And times continued to change (Change),

Nothing stayed the same, but there were always renegades.”

- Rage against the Machine, Renegades of Funk

People hold beliefs individually and collectively, and they participate in group behavior,
whether because they are obliged, or voluntarily. Our brains are the sources of all our thoughts,
feelings, and actions. There are rewards for people when they use their brains in ways that
other people like and value; there are also consequences for people who use their brains in
ways that other people dislike and devalue. There is operant conditioning happening all around
us, at scale, across frontiers, in layers and levels. An individual simultaneously sense both the
deep, internal, subjective self (e.g. ego, superego, id) and external, objective “reality” mainly
because of the observable contrast between individual and the collective. Rules and
conditioning bridge the gap between individual and collective; they give individuals a sense of
ownership and agency in the collective; they also dilute identities of individuals who leverage
power to compel maladaptations to other individuals in the group via involuntary compliance
with rules of politeness, etiquette, customs, culture, religion, and laws regarding orderly
ff
fi
fi
fi
 behavior. Individuals create the group, make up the rules, and enforce the rules on other
individuals. The group develops an identity of its own, but the group has no singular body, so in
a sense the group is abstract, intangible, illusory; that is, until we examine how di erently
individuals think, feel, speak, and act along or in groups.

“Humans been controlled since the day that they was civilized.

The truth has been so heavily politicized.

If you don't know who's controllin' you and killin' all the little guys,

Find out who you're not allowed to criticize.”

Tom MacDonald, Sheeple

The Stanford Prison Experiment made big academic news, but the researchers hardly
came up with the idea on their own. Some Stanford fraternity’s intellectual property may have
gone missing prior to the Prison Experiment because it seemed suspiciously like Hell Week
when brothers turn from nice guys to crazy people just because pledges got in the house. That
people do things in groups that they would not do alone is obvious; this is how violent protests,
riots, mob rule, and wars happen. The brain and mind are extremely complicated machinery,
and human comprehension is still in incubation stages on matters of social psychological
forces, laws of nature, actions/reactions, and physical phenomena relating to psychiatry.
Precisely how large the group must be before individuals lose their moral compass is unknown,
but proof exists in lexicon (words) used to communicate concepts in languages: gang
mentality, herd mentality, sheeple, groupthink, mob rule, collective action problem, just to name
a few. One cannot Occupy Wall Street alone, now can one?

“Far away across the eld,

The tolling of the iron bell

Calls the faithful to their knees,

To hear the softly spoken magic spells.”

- Pink Floyd, Time

Step aside from the concrete world as observed hitherto by empirical scientists and
yield to alternative possibilities. If one is reasonably open to suggestion, somewhat like going
with the plot of a good movie, then one should be able to imagine electricity moving and
owing throughout the body. There are machines which have proven this phenomena.
Neuroscientists partnered with video game developers and engineers to make a video game
where a player’s thoughts are the controller; that’s right, noninvasive technology worn on the
head received, decodes, and interprets brain waves, then rewrites signals into computer code
to tell the game which direction to move. The science underlying those technologies bridge the
game between physics and the energies owing in and around human body. Presumably,
scientists began with kernels of truth — that magnetic elds rotate clockwise on a plane
perpendicular to current of electric elds, as according to the right hand rule. ‘Twas not faith
that compelled those ladies and gentlemen to recognize the body must be radiating some
electromagnetic eld, and that those elds could be observed, analyzed, and represented
mathematically; ‘twere the same science Fleming used to make the rst vacuum tube and
transAtlantic radio transmission. The range of these organically-produced, chemical-
electromagnetic signals is unknown, but there is no reason to believe they must be localized or
terminate just outside the cranium. In fact, there are su cient anecdotes of people
communicating or intuiting facts remotely that there is prima facie evidence humans actually do
experience telepathic or otherwise “psychic” states. Premonitions, out of body experiences,
extra sensory perception, necromancy, Sea of Mind — that there are words identifying these
concepts is evidence of belief. Of course, there are words for dragons, unicorns, fairies,
sprites, trolls, gnomes, monsters, and assorted cartoonish life forms, too, so the words alone
do not con rm Sea of Mind, but physics and engineering seem to support its likelihood.

fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
ffi
fi
fi
ff
 Choices were seemingly endless,
But tame and civil ones were left friendless,
Among cave people left defenseless,
Vulnerable to tremendously senseless menace.
One door opened as another shut.
Powers of leadership transferred to other huts.
Never mind what of the pile of guts.
Just one of many tiny cuts
Leaving us presently in a rut,
Got glut of smut,
But try rebut & hear none but “tut tut tut”.

Heaps of generations prior, humans of Ages past might could have, maybe, possibly
come to a sort of branch in a decision tree. They went left instead of right or up or diagonally or
some other direction. Entertain the idea that one of those other possible future paths would
have witnessed no war, or less disease, or generally better behavior at the population level,
after all cases are aggregated and the stories pieced together. Now recall people today still
believe in auras and chakras and mentalism and such. Then try to make sense of all the parts
of the story. What if humans are naturally wired to perceive health and wellness in themselves
and others? Could it be that the human species is capable of interpreting the mindsea? One
possible method could include visualizing those observable ows of energy and electricity
around and through the body, in the organs, muscles, skeleton…everywhere in the body and
radiating outward in some observable pattern. Spots and geometric patterns, waves and
ripples — a total sensory kinetic experience for those attuned to the bio-mathematical
functions of themselves or another, observed subjectively (and potentially communally) similar
to augmented reality (AR). If it were all possible, that would help explain witchdoctors,
shamans, medicine men, spiritual healers, some practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine,
and the like. A clever application of Occam’s Razor could link all these “fringe” beliefs together
with those bits of proven science to suggest something like this alternative interpretation is the
most appropriate conclusion given the complex, divergent premises. Why, then, are such
plausible scenarios so easily sco ed at and dismissed as absurd?

Because it’s game?

Because we’re di erent but treated the same?
Because leadership is lame?
Because they blame & maim in our group’s name?
Because they ought to be ashamed at what they so proudly proclaimed?
Regardless of how we became what we became,
Our aims have got to be reclaimed,
Such that we may fan the ames of something far more tame.

ff
fl
ff
fl
 Make Believe

“Don't ask me why,

Things are not the way they used to be.

I won't tell no lie.

One and all got to face reality now.

Though I try to nd the answer

To all the questions they ask,

Though I know it's impossible,

To go living through the past.”

- Bob Marley, Natural Mystic

People literally make themselves believe. The ability to think, justify, rationalize, and
believe is distinctly human. No other animal has demonstrated such cognitive capacity. All
animals and some plants are sentient, but humans are a far outlier among other living things.
Thumbs allow the hand to grasp and use a pencil or other writing tool, which humans needed
to keep track of large and abstract ideas. Without mathematics, the manmade elements of
today’s environment would not have been possible, and the math would be too much to keep
in mind without a system of writing. There were many possible outcomes through human
history, but that we have today’s technology is evidence that humans have come to one of the
best possible outcomes with regard to knowledge of the physical world, and knowhow to use
the Earth’s resources to create nanotechnologies, GMOs, clones, and synthetics. At each step
in the gradual, continuous progression from re, to stone tools, through metals, and into space
and cyberland, professionals staked their livelihoods and lives on their beliefs in science,
innovation, growth and development of knowledge, and experimentation.

“I wish that we could talk about it,

But there, that's the problem.”

- LCD Soundsystem, Someone Great

Boltzmann’s suicide, Galileo’s imprisonment, and who knows how many executions and
banishments were direct results of failures among the majority to accept new discoveries of
fact. Usually, only one lonely bacterium1 has the newest, hottest update, and then it’s up to all
the other bacteria to do the natural thing and follow. Sometimes there are resistors among the
population. Whether out of pride, ignorance, or for the safety of self and the group against
negative change, resistors may seek to isolate, suppress and repress innovators. Galileo was
one astronomer up against the most powerful group of Clergy/Noblemen/Soliders in the
Western World at the time. Boltzmann’s entropy equation was treated more as a work of
creative art than a discovery in thermodynamics by the scienti c council who failed to
recognize one of their peers’ ascension to greatness. Cantor was probably depressed because
he was so smart, and people probably hardly noticed, or they acted like he was a freak or
something silly like that. To be fair, Newton’s apparent personality disorders were probably just
an unavoidable consequence of a man embedded in lthy old England who opened a door to
the universe out of which he received, decoded, translated, and communicated in nite
knowledge by way of derivative calculus and physics.

“All alone or in twos,

The ones who really love you,

Walk up and down outside the wall,

Some hand in hand,

1 Sure, it’s pronounced /Jūn/, but is it written 菌 or 君?

fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
 And some gather together in bands.

The bleeding hearts and the artists make their stand,

And when they've given you their all,

Some stagger and fall after all it's not easy,

Banging your heart against some mad bugger's wall.”

- Pink Floyd, Outside the Wall

The artist’s works are, oddly, seldom appreciated before the artist’s death, and as if the
artist knows the examination period extends throughout his life, he acts a fool a bit and rubs
people the wrong way because he does not feel they are making use of his works that he
knows they will eventually celebrate; the artist feels ripped o and used, underappreciated, and
wrongfully set aside. This is all because people make themselves believe one thing rather than
another that they eventually come to believe.

“…every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end,”

- Semisonic, Closing Time

Educational, social, judicial, correctional, and other formal systems function as

o shoots of prior models. Di erent regions of the world have distinct legal traditions, cultural
traits, religious beliefs, and linguistic systems. Middle East North Africa (MENA), for example, is
semi-discrete while adjacent and proximal to the European Union (EU), Sub-Saharan Africa,
South Asian subcontinent, Caucasus, and East Asia. There is diversity within each of those
groups of nations, territories, and people, but it is constrained by forces — some tangible and
some intangible, or make-believe.

Operational De nitions, Semantics & Pragmatics from Glenn Loury’s old stu :

“For me, then, the term “race” refers to indelible, heritable marks on human bodies—
skin color, hair texture, facial bone structure—of no intrinsic signi cance, but that
nevertheless have through time come to be invested with social expectations and social
meanings that are more or less durable. Two distinct perceptual processes are
implicated: categorization and signi cation. Categorization entails sorting people into a
small number of groups based on bodily marks so as to di erentiate one’s dealings with
such persons accordingly. It is a basic e ort to comprehend the social world around us.
By contrast, signi cation is an interpretative act—one that associates certain
connotations, or “social meanings,” with the categories.”

In the United States of America, the magnitude and range of diversity in the population
is the greatest in the world. Despite the widely-held belief that the USA is a “melting pot”, and
in spite of the demonstrated blending happening in the culture, the legal system remains tied
only to English common law — but one of many traditions among American people. In a
democratic society, exclusion from o cial government of beliefs and attitudes that sizable
portions of the population hold, treads toward misrepresentation or non-representation. But
even if the American Bar and bench adopted elements of Civil (Continental) and Islamic legal
traditions to better serve the State and public interest, the American system would still be
limited to re ecting epistemologies of Abrahamic religions, where all of history is guided by a
few early facts and interpretations, and there is little if any room for latter inputs. Question not
why there has been a de facto moratorium on prophecy since Mohammed (‫)ﷺ‬. Never mind
why the Bible hasn’t been updated with more recent testimony, or revised in some acceptable
manner, which is reasonable since it is a book written by humans who err. Abrahamic religious
precepts often prompt the faithful to believe one’s early years are the basis for their entire life,
like all of the in nite future is already setup because of some incredible people and ideas that
happened some 1500–3000 years ago. If they get the wrong idea — and people seem to have
ff
fl
fi
fi
fi
ff
ffi
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
ff
 a bad habit of that — they will perceive early criminal convictions as evidence of antisocial
behavior through middle age; poor academic performance as a teen almost guarantees lower
socioeconomic status throughout one’s life, and so on. All the while, people will holler about
forgiveness and clean thoughts, too, as if to say they just don’t care at all about whatever else
anybody could imagine.

“Imagine all the people living life in peace.”

- John Lennon, Imagine

Sometimes faith is a beautifully empowering sense that propels people to do

extraordinary things beyond their expected limits, and sometimes “faith” is just a fantasy, a
crutch, a limitation. Whereas Homo sapiens have gured out their natural world quite well,
especially with regard to manipulating Earthly elements to create tools, progress is spotty with
regard to civil conduct (i.e. belligerence and assorted mala des). Consider Piketty’s comment
in Capital and Ideology:

“What the South African case demonstrates in its own particular way is, once again, the
power of proprietarian inegalitarian mechanisms: the concentration of wealth in the
country was built on a foundation of the most absolute racial inequality, but that
concentration largely endured even after the advent of formal equality of rights, which
plainly has not been enough to eliminate it.”

Creativity has been sti ed as status quo baseline violence is a substitute for stasis;
peace is only localized; externalities ought to yield interventions, but the oor was set millennia
ago, so the standards aren’t exactly threatening. As people feel satis ed they can bide their
time and look to the afterlife, their individual and collective conditions scarcely improve since
their physical reality is perceived as temporary and largely inconsequential. Charlattans
masquerading as holy men, business and government leaders, heroes and other authority
gures, over thousands of generations, coerced and persuaded people to incentivize business
as usual and disincentivize targeted improvement. Politicians push the Overton Window like it’s
a physical law. Chomsky talked about illusions relating to limits of acceptable speech. Sects
suppressed & repressed viewpoints within their territorial domain such that ontological
mutations occurred, resulting in legitimate plurality, a context where absolute reality may be
unknowable but closer pictures would be a owery array of intersecting and overlapping Venn
diagram circles. Mathematically speaking, capital R reality is the universal superset, ε, and
individuals each have elements of that superset in their discrete subsets, Sn.

ε ⊃ Sn

∴ Sn ⊆ ε

∀ Sn

∃ {x|x∈S1 and x∉S2}

The crop-circle maze work of intersections and complements on the larger sample
space of the superset eld is rather pretty, but if people are innumerate or proudly ignorant of
math, it is as meaningless as counting crows. The old ways are a subset O, and our modern
ways are a subset M, of the universal superset U because U contains all possible elements.

U ⊃ O and U ⊃ M

U ⊆ O and U ⊆ M

There exist, then, elements of O in M, and elements of M in O, since humans are still the
same species, and there are some constants among humans of any day.

fi
fi
fl
fl
fi
fi
fi
fl
 ∃ {x|x ∈ O and x ∈ M}

For example, if O = {0,2,4,6,8,10}, M = {0,1,2,3,4,5,7,9,}, and x = 2

Then O ≠ M, but x ∈ O and x ∈ M

Just because things are not exactly the same does not imply they are completely
di erent. Just because things are not completely di erent does not suggest they are the same.
The idea of formal logic, which is part of rst-principles reasoning, is that anybody can arrive
independently at the same conclusion, anywhere, any time, without help if they apply a little
clearheaded thinking through serious questions, paying close attention to improper
conclusions in set theory or algebraic philosophy. Logical fallacies may be popular and
valuable in certain social settings, but technical, formal analyses one must avoid errors in
reasoning such as false dichotomies, straw men, denying the antecedent, a rming the
consequent, reductio ad absurdum, false equivalencies, fallacies of false cause — just to name
a few.

“There is no other place I want to be.

Right here, right now,

Watching the world wake up from history.”

- Jesus Jones, Right Here Right Now

History is all some people can talk about, but somehow it hides in plain sight. In a
Hollywood-ized world where everybody is a celebrity on their own pro le page, “based on a
true story” comes to real life. Instead of the facts, people present narratives (stories). Rather
than pursuit of truth, rather than collaborative means to collaborative ends, people use
competitive language as a means to competitive ends. This interpretation of “competitive”
means only that these people are not cooperating; it does not imply their means have value nor
will help them win anything. In this way, “competitive” people craft strategies and deploy
messaging with intent to satisfy some desired end; they create plausible scenarios as
substitutes for objectively veri able reality; they think in clay and not concrete; it’s actually
rather anticompetitive, or worse, a loser’s folly.

“The revolution will not be televised.

The revolution will not be brought to you by Xerox,

In four parts without commercial interruptions.

The revolution will not show you pictures of Nixon,

Blowing a bugle and leading a charge by John Mitchell,

General Abrams and Spiro Agnew,

To eat hog maws con scated from a Harlem sanctuary.

The revolution will not be televised.”

- Gil Scott-Heron, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

Some journalists base their careers on imagining things. They run headlines about what
will happen if something happens or doesn’t happen. Their predictions are never correct, but
that doesn’t matter. They get their clicks, likes, reshares. They both create and maintain
lopsided, incomplete discussions, aggressively pushing inaccurate and unreliable hypotheses
passed o as fact or likely outcome. Like War on Terror politicians, they use fear and
information asymmetry as tools to manipulate people for their own bene t. They are skilled
practitioners of whataboutism. Cheny and Rumsfeld leveraged American innumeracy to
persuade a large majority to believe in the necessity of preemptive war and trillions of dollars in
socialized defense spending. Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rachel Maddow, Don Lemon, Chris
Cuomo, and less divisive names leveraged that same innumeracy to persuade Americans to
“support the troops” and then either “dismantle structures of systemic racism” or “stop the
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
ffi
 steal” — all preventable snafus with a high school level understanding of statistics and
probability.

“Don't know much trigonometry,

Don't know much about algebra,

Don't know what a slide rule is for.”

- Sam Cooke, What A Wonderful World

If the average voter knew probabilities and a more comprehensive threat matrix, none
could have rationalized the largesse and murder of the 20-years war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
By comparison, in reality, the average person seems exceedingly likely to con ate possibility
with probability, and that is as much a failure to understand high school math as it is
attributable to another cause. In other words, high school graduates ought to know that just
because something is possible, it is not necessarily probable, and that a high probability event
is not imminent. Misconceptions of basic math made voters ready to expend virtually unlimited
resources to prevent a threat which was actually more imagined than real.

“Radio plays what they want you to hear .

They tell me it's cool, I just don't believe it.”

- Reel Big Fish, Sell Out

Without the reach of corporatized media tentacles, burrowing into cultural segments
and grabbing attentions across a population, none of the recent cultural hostilities would have
been possible. And despite the destructive e ects of the Woke Reactionary Leftist movement,
since at least 2016, so-called professionals have monetized a viral anger that may not have
persisted if the most prominent media forces had not planted the seeds and provided material
support for rioters, tortfeasors, and various individuals and groups adverse to universal First
Amendment protections. Oddly, media and protest culture led a charge of fear of thoughts and
feelings, and ironically or hypocritically, those radical extremists managed to convince untold
millions of readers and viewers that it is more just to engage in doxxing, deplatforming,
cancelling, wrongful termination, violent protest, compelling speech, and otherwise censoring
speech that is Constitutionally protected. In other words, the people claiming to be ethics
experts launched an attempt at revolution, and it was televised as it originated in television
studios. Meanwhile, the situation on the ground level only got worse for the very people those
proud political activists claimed they fought for.

“Saw things clearer,

Once you were in my rear view mirror.”

- Pearl Jam, Rearviewmirror

Hindsight is 20/20, but the frauds of media charlatans were transparent in the instant
moment they were perpetrated. The problem, however, is the very same entities that control
the ow of media had a stake in the proportionality of coverage and direction of the arc of the
story, so they were able to create and sustain at least virtual information asymmetry even in the
communications age. Consumers were, of course, complicit after some time and exposure to
counter information that at least occasionally penetrates partisan echo chambers. But if ethics
were literally a concern at media conglomerates and tech giants, there would have been a
more diverse conversation. Instead, some MBA decided it was more pro table to publicize
mis/dis/mal-information than something more consistent with higher academic standards.

fl
ff
fi
fl
 Writers and producers may have believed the lies and half-truths they released for
public consumption, but that should not be an excuse. Somewhere around 2020, alternative
facts were pro ered on both sides of the American political aisle. Each side summarily
dismissed the other’s claims and rebukes of their opposition, but if the creative personnel
behind clickbait and doom-scroll diamonds did at some point become aware of their folly, they
hid it rather well. One had to put in work to sort out the grain from the cha and piece together
a reasonably concrete, observable, objective picture of reality. For example, black Americans
experienced higher instance of severely adverse Covid outcomes. A thorough scienti c
accounting of underlying causes would have included rst, analysis of obesity, hypertension,
diabetes, and heart disease rates in that community, considering those comorbidities were
predictive of Covid outcomes across racial, ethnic, and national groups. Instead of the whole
story, however, English speakers heard most about how public health policy was “racist”, and
that “systemic racism” or “institutional racism” and in particular “anti-black racism” were the
most or only signi cant factors driving disproportionality in Covid-related deaths between white
and black Americans. Similarly, sometime around the murder of George Floyd, the narrative
emerged that it was “open season on black bodies”, meaning police were just sniping African
Americans for sport, and the most dangerous thing any black person could experience was a
routing tra c stop.

“Detached from opposing points of

Views and values.

The top of the food chain will

Decide what they'll tell you.

Weaponized words, the truth ain't real.

Monetized content to sweeten the deal.

Fake news on the run, on the loose.

Fake news hot on the wire.

Fake news trumped up truth.

Fake news spread like wild re.

Fake news on the run, on the loose.

Fake news fake fake news.”

- KMFDM, Fake News

Obviously, there have been cases of police abuse and murder. The media did well
publicizing some of the more recent incidents as they were captured on camera. However, the
idea that police represent the most signi cant threat to the lives of black Americans is patently
absurd. And again, this mistaken belief arises out of innumeracy — failure to learn basic skills
in math. Mere understanding of simple ratios would have cleared up the confusion — that’s if
honest interpretation and good faith argument were ground rules, but apparently they were not.
The probability of a black American being shot by the police is the total number of police
shootings of African Americans divided by the total number of police interactions with African
Americans. A simple mathematical comparison of potential shooters shows black Americans
are more likely to be shot by people in their own homes and neighborhoods by an
extraordinarily large margin. The chances of a black American beings shot by a police o cer
are basically less than their chances of being struck by lightning or winning the lottery. Police
were similarly misreading threats by the numbers as, while their likelihood of getting shot is
greater than that of an average civilian, it’s extremely unlikely that an encounter with a random
civilian would result in violence. Yes, the possibility is real, but it is also negligible in each
independent trial encounter.

“Kid can’t read, he’s seventeen.

Words he knows are all obscene.”

- The Grateful Dead, Touch of Grey

ffi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ffi
 On their Dark Horse podcast, Heying and Weinstein have spoken at numerous moments
on how strange it is that American academic culture certainly would not support or explain-
away illiteracy among the ranks of PhDs, but somehow innumeracy became acceptable
insomuch that Liberal Arts dummy-Docs joke about their incapacity to pass middle school
math, openly and without shame before their educated peers. Mathematical laziness may seem
innocuous to the innumerate and their allies, but there are ostensibly some very serious
problems that turn up in an anti-math culture like the United States of America. If one
summarily dismisses technical probabilistic or statistical arguments, one’s methodology is left
with some gaping holes. If an event can be categorized as imminent or likely just because it is
possible; if data can be selected or excluded in construction of a narrowly-focused ad hoc
argument; if events are decontextualized, then bad science gains a foothold. If conclusions are
inferred from incomplete or manipulated premises, or if certain truths are invalidated simply
because they are inconvenient, then one should question what the objective is, and if there is
an objective at all.

“We're all stuck in a dystopian bubble.

We're all fucked if science is a lie.

(Is a lie) you ask me, humanity's in trouble,

(In trouble) so kiss your ass goodbye.

Disinformation a cancer that spreads.

Disinformation they control your head.”

- Ministry, Disinformation

Stephen Patterson dubbed the discombobulated mazework of semi-autonomous

specialists Our Present Dark Age. Specialization and division of labor increases e ciencies in
production of material goods, but for the optimization of services and innovative works there
must simultaneously be intricate cooperation, owing consciousness, exchange of ideas,
communication, and interconnectivity among specialists. Interdisciplinary works yield miracles
of modern medicine and technology while the philosophy, attitudes, culture and values of
executives remain stubbornly resistant to the degree and kind of change they helped deliver to
the world in the opening of their market systems. Police departments, courts, prosecutors want
to use digital networks to communicate records, warrants, orders, but they fail to recognize
neither reality nor justice is served when actual innocence does not automatically free a person
from a false conviction. The Davos People want to monetize the world, then go cashless, have
the BIS use blockchain, persuade central banks to issue digital money — all very much
requiring science — but those same people are reluctant to accept science can x a lot of
social, cultural, economic, and security problems; the problem is science could undermine the
Old Moneyed, aristocratic, oligarchic, autocratic order among the uber rich. In this way, the
Present Dark Age is probably a lot like the last Dark Age in that the nobles, clergy, and military
conspire to suppress knowledge that would empower the 80% of the population in serfdom
and poverty. Who knows what would happen if everybody had a roof over their head, clothes
on their backs, food in their bellies, a sense of safety and security, eh? Sounds dangerous, no?

“When some loud braggart tries to put me down,

And says his school is great.

I tell him right away,

Now what's the matter buddy?

Ain't you heard of my school?

It's number one in the state (Hey, hey! Take it away! Get that ball and ght!)

So be true to your school now,

Just like you would to your girl or guy.

Be true to your school now,

fl
fi
fi
ffi
 And let your colors y.

Be true to your school.”

- The Beach Boys, Be True to Your School

Universities may be the source of this problematic social-psychological

compartmentalization or cognitive dissonance. Professors are expected to publish in top-rated
peer-reviewed academic journals which, to be clear almost nobody outside of academic
research institutions ever read — journals which pay nothing to authors but charge fees for
readers to access works whose copyright journals compel authors to transfer — and those
journals reject articles that divert from their main foci which are almost never so diverse,
inclusive, integrative, innovative, groundbreaking, or interdisciplinary. In the Ivory Tower, each
individual knows almost nothing, but they know one tiny thing very well; their job is to function
as a cog in a machine, staying in their respective lanes and focusing on their area of expertise;
and somehow the system is expected to take care of itself, or individuals not assigned to tend
to the system are expected not to concern themselves much with it. Hence, the Dark Age
comparison, since while there is plenty of illumination in and around each individual’s itty bitty
niche, if one tries to nd anything else, then there might be a bunch of dots to connect, or there
might be darkness for what seems like forever, but in no case is there a clear picture of a
whole.

Ah, yass, the American University: where those loud talkers and charismatic writers who
are also, sadly, dumb as a bucket of wet hair on all matters numbers, somehow seized control
of HR/PR and DEI where they roosted, proud as whores in rehab, and made miscalculation
after erroneous conclusion about life processes that they could not imagine had any relation to
numbers. But just because one did not make it to physics class does not imply the knowledge
from that physics class ceases to exist in the absentee’s life. Just because somebody could
not do math, does not mean that language and ego are suitable substitutes for math. Of
course, words can describe the world, but usually not as well as mathematics. Even when
math is not the main story, statistics support narratives, and statistics are easily misused or
misunderstood. So many were their mistakes in reasoning and logic that one can scarcely help
but question what the intent was; if there was some endgame; what the point was other than to
start a ght. Were these Liberal Artists indirectly seeking revenge against job market devaluing
their degrees? The lot of upset, outspoken, college-educated people could have taken their
complaints directly to the market excluding them, or better still, they could have learned 21st
century skills that would have provided them with a job, which would have also given them
something to do with their spare time and energy instead of protesting. In review of the Woke
Cultural Revolution 2016–2022, future researchers should investigate the backgrounds of major
voices and in uencers of the time, looking for statistical trends relating to disciplines of study
among those in uencers prior to becoming propagandists in the Woke Militia.

Hypothesis: Nearly all (90% or more) of the sources of Woke Militia propaganda were
holders of degrees in relatively high supply and comparatively low demand today (e.g. BA or
higher in philosophy, gender studies, history, English, journalism, communications, liberal arts
and humanities); that in instances where university or corporate HR/PR, DEI, or other
administrative/management were hijacked or co-opted as Woke Ma a nodes, the leadership
was almost always from an outdated or otherwise economically disadvantageous degree
program that does not yield adequate return on investment.

“American public law su ers from a terrible amnesia.”

- Adrian Vermeule, Common Good Constitutionalism

Imagine a judge were contacted remotely, o duty to sign a warrant, for example,
authorizing a police agency to arrest a person suspected of narcotics use, and to take blood or
fi
fl
fl
fl
fi
ff
ff
fi
 urine from that person who refused to take a drug test. The judge is not present on the scene.
An o cer writes a request, and so long as it is worded properly, the judge makes no further
inquiry on what could more objectively constitute “probable cause”. Usually o cers observe
some body movements, behaviors, or manners that clue them to the fact that somebody is
high on drugs, but none of those indicators are exclusive to drug use; they could be manifest in
mental illness, or somebody could be acting some way which is not against the law. The judge
essentially accepts the o cer’s hunch is correct and does not so much as investigate the
potential for error. In some jurisdictions, the law prohibits judges from asking questions, but
then they still have opportunity to deny signature and instead almost always just accept the
o cer’s request. That legislative branches limited checks and balances in their prohibition of
judges making inquiries regarding evidence before signing warrants, does not abrogate the
judicial branch’s duty to ensure a check on executive power. If x% of warrants are signed
without a second thought, then the process is not a reliable check or balance in those cases; it
is two or more branches runaway, possibly ultra vires the Constitution. Notice again poor
mathematical reasoning in the manipulated sample space which conveniently excludes the
potential that the o cer is plain wrong or lying. These same erroneous methodologies give rise
to warrant-less searches. If a warrant is nearly guaranteed, then there’s no reason to increase
expenses and decrease e ciency by requiring them. It is hard to imagine such bad science,
such ignorance is constitutional, but since admission the bench and bar does not include a
math test, there is little hope that persons seated in those positions of power have the capacity
to reason through such complicated interdisciplinary matters.

“The power of equality

Is not yet what it ought to be (ought to be)”

- Red Hot Chili Peppers, The Power of Equality

Equality is a fundamental to rule of law, but is it possible? Access to justice costs

money. Legal processes are exclusionary in that those without the wherewithal cannot sustain
engagement over time or o er vigorous response to high power actions. Equity then emerged
as a means to the ultimate end of legal equality. Race, gender and other identi able di erences
between individuals became the focus of public and private political ghts. Barrack Obama’s
presidential campaign both bene tted and su ered from his identi cation as “black” rather
than the more nuanced “biracial” or “mixed” which people from other countries would more
likely classify his race. Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 campaign was likewise propelled and
blocked in part due to her being a female. Joe Biden promised to nominate a black female
Supreme Court justice, and he intentionally built a super cially diverse cabinet and sta ,
selecting people from various groups sorting people by their skin markings, sex, gender, or
sexual orientation.

“Free your mind,

And the rest will follow.

Be color blind.

Don’t be so shallow.”

- En Vogue, Free Your Mind

The promise to include nonwhites, females, and members of other target groups among
appointees can be interpreted as an endorsement of meritocracy. If race is nothing more than
arbitrary markings on the skin, bone structure and such physical distinctions, then the race of
an appointee does not matter. Indeed, there are many quali ed candidates, and their
demographics or identities are independent of their ability to perform services. However, using
race or sex as a primary quali cation — after political leanings or a liations in the case of
government appointments — potentially excludes the most skilled candidates if they are not in
desired interest groups. A rmative Action did not guarantee reduction in quality, but that the
ffi
ffi
ffi
ffi
ffi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
ff
ff
 person who got the job may be in the 95th percentile or lower certainly increases the likelihood
that somebody other than the top candidate gets the position.

If the best person got the job at the Supreme Court, for example, then political a liation
would not matter either. Republicans balked at nominations, arguing Biden’s choices were
in uenced too much by identity politics and not enough by meritocratic measures. Democrats
had done the same for Trump’s appointees, arguing they were unquali ed and at least implying
racism in uenced Trump’s decisions not to nominate individuals from historically persecuted
groups. Maybe today there is, or later there will be, a broadly diverse and inclusive group of
highly-quali ed individuals from which to recruit public o cials, but in the short term and due
to partisan feuding, the perception is that each party has mutually exclusive lists of quali ed
candidates. The pragmatic takeaway for the average citizen is that racial and other
demographic preferences and prejudices within discrete political factions severely erode the
quality of government services because people are hired based on their appearance and
political party rather than strictly on their skills. Indeed, parties shortlist candidates on their
partisan political leanings and salient physical or sometimes spiritual characteristics that voters
from the base of that party will respond to.

Mayor Pete’s Department of Transportation could have prevented the East Palestine,
Ohio train disaster by simply changing the de nition of what is a highly hazardous load.
Buttigieg almost certainly received a bonus point in his application due to his sexuality, and
although there no reason to conclude Buttigieg’s sexuality impacted his assessment of the
system of classi cations, the optics are such that one can reasonably argue Biden’s choice for
Transportation Secretary was motivated too much by political concerns instead of technical
expertise and experience. The Democratic Party has been courting LBGTQIA+ and Mayor
Pete’s cabinet appointment appeared to be a concession to an important segment in the
market of voters that Democrats need to win national elections. Surely, there was somebody in
the United States with more education, training, and experience in matters of transportation
than Pete Buttigieg. Like retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson was an unlikely HUD Secretary pick
in the Trump administration, Buttigieg’s political drew scrutiny and suggested meritocracy is
not an serious ideal; and maybe usually there is no signi cant consequence when politics
a ect hiring, but at high levels in government, when accidents or problems happen, people get
hurt, so hiring the best candidate is more consequential in the Capital than on Main Street.
Regardless of whether such a strategy has net costs or bene ts over several transfers of
power, donors and voters respond favorably enough to candidates and pundits in the present
such that none are signi cantly inspired to think about the future e ects of their ine cient and
somewhat suspicious tactics. Both parties shout about how the other party is doing it wrong,
but neither shows how to do it right, either.

“What does it matter to ya?

When you got a job to do,

You got to do it well.

You got to give the other fella hell!”

- Wings, Live and Let Die

Vermeule cited every prominent historical reference available in his development of

Common Good Constitutionalism, in which he establishes semantic boundaries and lls in
pragmatic details with help from an army of legal scholars, advocates, adjudicators, experts
and other top-shelf references:

The Common Good: “In brief, the common good is, for the purposes of the
constitutional lawyer, the ourishing of a well-ordered political community.”

ff
fl
fl
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fi
ffi
fi
ff
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
 Precepts of Classical Justice: “to live honorably, to harm no one, and to give each one
what is due to him in justice.”

Central Goods at which Constitutionalism Should Aim: “peace, justice, and abundance;
health, safety, and economic security; solidarity and subsidiarity.”

In spite of robust calls from public intellectuals, legal scholars, NGOs and morally
persuasive social institutions, the legal system and its personnel have mostly managed to
march on as if nothing has ever changed, or as if everything that needed to change has already
been changed, as if nothing presently observable needs to change, and as if nothing shall ever
change again in the future, so there is no reason to concern oneself with dissenting voices
even if they emerge from established, reputable individuals or groups.

Like a good teacher, Vermeule de nes what the common good is and is not. Antonyms
for the common good include:

1. Aggregation — good for a sum of individuals is good for those individuals but does
not represent common good.

2. Tyranny and Faction — the tyrannous rule of the one (dictatorship), the corrupt rule of
the few (oligarchy), or the oppressive rule of the many (democracy).

3. Confusion of public and private function — multiplicity of quasi-independent private

tyrants dominating a weak public authority.

In spite of all the good faith e orts of people like Vermeule to educate and advise the
people, “public” o ces and o cials still operate as private entities. They disclose no more than
they volunteer. Agents are relatively anonymous through engagement with the actual public,
which is coerced to produce information, or dealt with however the so-called public authorities
so desire, without consent of the public or individuals from the public upon whom these faux-
public agents perform searches, seizures, detentions, nancial manipulation, and executions.
The actual public is not uni ed on on anything, and there isn’t normal distribution on many
topics, so the idea that wannabe-public agents are acting on behalf of the public, is incomplete
at best and as such, misleading. Actually, the public is composed of individuals, and only some
individuals have in uence; some are disenfranchised; some have no access or voice; some
have access via capital or position. The government is publicly owned and privately operated,
which is communism. Publicly traded companies are in a similar situation, where ownership is
di use but capital gains are concentrated. A few individuals can tank the whole ship, so to
speak, which does not suggest public distribution of controlling rights. If the general public
were the going concern, we would probably see less privatization; but if private gain and
interest were prioritized above and beyond that of 2 out of 3 individuals or more in the public, it
follows that wealthy minority segments would hold majority stakes over the majority of people.

“Give me human rights and justice.

I want it.

I can never do without it.

I must have it.”

- Daweh Congo, Human Rights and Justice

Considering American, and moreover Allied English-speaking, in uences on the

formation of the United Nations, framing of its Charter, and later publication of Eleanor
Roosevelt’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is fair to say the USA, UK, Australia,
Canada, Ireland, and New Zealand — all English speaking nations with English common law
ff
ffi
fl
fi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
fl
 traditions — recognize basic rights, liberties, and freedoms of citizens. An internet of free
speech in English is only possible because constitutions in those countries provide rights to
speak and communicate freely. English is a UN language, and it is the la lingua Franca of the
world. As such, English is the most common medium for publication and dissemination of
human rights literature, much of which is aimed and directed at non-English-speaking
populations. To be fair, modern interpretations of human rights are unevenly constructed, and
progress is slowest in those regions where capital and development are scarce, which means
non-English-speaking populations may be disproportionately “behind the times” in some larger
socio-governmental-legal scheme.

“I’m a man.”

- Bo Diddley, I’m a Man

One would be remiss, however, to infer that human rights are somehow generally
disrespected in non-English-speaking regions, or that rights are so well-supported in English-
speaking regions. On the latter point, the proof is all right there in the idioms and language. For
example, American male friends may refer to each other as “dog” (e.g. “That’s my dog, Jay”).
It’s an a ectionate term, but at the same time the word dog is known to be derogatory (i.e. “All
men are dogs”). Similarly, the phrase “old farts” can be used to lovingly describe oneself and
friends or group of other elders; the word fart is a stand-in for person; a person is a fart, and
that is not considered devaluation of the human form. From “don’t throw the baby out with the
bath water” to “he’s not the sharpest tool in the shed” English speakers compare living,
breathing, thinking, feeling humans to inanimate objects (e.g. R Kelly’s “you remind me of my
Jeep”), minerals (e.g. box of rocks), plants (e.g. bump on a log), other less intelligent animals
(e.g. monkeying around) without thinking of the potential downstream problems that could
arise out of habitually comparing Homo sapiens with anything but just what they are. Add to
the language all the behaviors (e.g. war, domestic gun re, mass incarceration), and there is a
solid case to be made that the world is being sold a bit of a hoax in English; either that, or a
sizeable chunk of the story has yet to be told while one or maybe two angles are being
crammed down the world’s English speaking populations throats, so to speak.

Still people make believe,

Make it up, turn it out, then leave,
Con rm only what they perceive.
If truths are inconvenient, they’ll gladly deceive.
Tangled webs they weave hardly grant reprieve,
To those who can’t conceive being so naive.
Nothing can be achieved,
Seeing only what one wants to see.
Make believe doesn’t set any minds free.
No matter how many nominees from the bourgeoisie agree,
These are the only guarantees we can foresee:
A potpourri of Mindsea debris,
Decrees to seize fees to the nth degree,
Esprit de corruption Jubilee despite pleas from me & thee.
fi
ff
fi
 Cops & Robbers

“The law is back to front yeah!

Up side down yeah ah!

What do we want justice

What do we need justice”

- Steel Pulse, No Justice No Peace

Educators should understand too well what law is at its core. They see young people
mob up & make up rules of order, etiquette, fashion, style, civility and whatever each day.
Cliques and rival crews “other” and penalize people not meeting their standards. Just because
they are exaggerated, ridiculous, contrived and arbitrary does not nullify the similarity of
adolescent factions to formal adversarial systems. McBain & Moss’s Boys State Texas
documentary showed teenagers scarily resemble grown men, insomuch that viewers should
wonder if the adults act like kids because the adults want to feel young again, or if the kids are
the leaders and the adults just want to be young again (and completely irrational and ridiculous
without consequence again like a child).

Then there sat another one busted

Rusted, dusted,
Come back ten years be crusted.
Windbags blew too much to be trusted.

Meanwhile in Louisiana, prisoners often get an extra 90 days tacked into their
sentences. DOJ blamed snail mail & human ine ciencies in the process, again showing focus
on justice procedures rather than something more consistent with the spirit of the law, which
should support and protect the common good. Bureaucratic procedural justice ensures
prisoners never get let out early. Only late. States say a year, but they’re consistently late. Then
if they even acknowledge this inconsistency, it’s nobody’s fault — it’s the faraway nameless,
faceless system which is conveniently unmanageable/unchangeable by any person or o ce.
Real people give e ect to these passive abuses — the abuse of NOT doing something — but
in the unlikely event that anybody involved cares enough to accept this is preventable error,
and that the state has a duty to release prisoners on time (to uphold its own sentences and
orders exactly), that person is powerless over the political machinery that has to update and
manage the apparatuses. To recapitulate, law is considered independent of politics — or even
that the two are mutually exclusive. To the contrary, though, individuals and collective must
pass political tests before public o ces can make those adjustments. People who have a
genuine will to be e cient and e ective stewards of a wholly consistent system, stall or avoid
action out of fear of reprisal. Overall, individual practitioners and the legal system as a whole
appear to lack commitment to scienti c principles.

Purposivism: not the intellectual property of any political party or brand identity.

According to Legal Theory Lexicon 078:

“Purposivism refers to the approach to statutory interpretation that maintains that the
legal e ect of a statute should be determined by the objective purpose of the
statute. That is, statutes should be interpreted to have their reasonable meaning —
even if that meaning diverges from the plain meaning of the text or the subjective
intentions of the actual lawmakers.”

ff
ff
ffi
ff
ffi
fi
ffi
ffi
 [T]he purpose that a reasonable, public-spirited, or ideal legislature would have had if it
had passed the statute.  Anyone who is familiar with the ways in which actual
legislatures operate in the "real world" will realize that the actual purposes of legislators
concerned with raising money and pleasing constituents may be quite di erent from the
idealized purposes of reasonable legislators.  Real-world legislators may pass
legislation with the aim of favoring a politically powerful special interest group, whereas
an ideal legislature will always have a purpose that advances the public good”

All that big talk about anti racism & they’re still putting police in school, who are mostly
concerned about drugs since that’s far more common than guns or serious violence. They still
search and arrest students, almost certainly violating privacy rights, and probably the Fourth
Amendment, stretching the limits of what constitutes probable cause, pro ling based on saggy
pants or hoodies. Unfortunately, the word “probable” has mathematical meaning, and neither
police nor prosecutors ever o er a p-value or methodological explanation regarding how they
calculated the discrete probability of an event in their justi cation of probable cause.

“You don’t have to break no laws.

They say probable cause.”

— Brand Nubian, Probable Cause

What do red eyes imply? Surely not only drug use. Sleepiness is more likely. When
nearly all kids are cognitively absent or perpetually confused, how do they decide which kids
are this special kind of dumb that they must be high? Adults can’t claim this psychic power of
knowing something about a kid beyond what they directly witness. In cases when there is
direct witness of drug activity, there are still gaps. There is no proof a substance is what an
o cer thinks it is until after arrest, after they test the substance. Absent robust, tangible,
visible, physical evidence, there is no evidence that they may be evidence of a crime; probable
cause is a guess, an assertion, having nothing to do with probability. Campus police, resource
o cers, teachers and administrators can better use their discretion: take the drugs away, issue
warnings, take any course of action available including ignorance — because they almost
never satisfy high legal thresholds to exact a search on a civilian adult, let alone a minor.
Behaviors cannot be eradicated reactively; enforcement will not catch a signi cant percent of
o enders; enforcement across time and personnel will vary, which is all unjust and unfair and
inequitable for the few unlucky ones who are caught & punished. All that BLM-sponsored
rhetoric out of colleges of education and teacher’s unions is exposed as fraudulent by the
continuation of campus policing of anything but serious violent crime.

“Yo! Y'all can't handle the truth in a courtroom of lies.

Perjures the jurors, witness despised.

Crooked lawyers, false indictments publicized.

It's entertainment, the arraignments, the subpoenas,

High pro le gladiators in bloodthirsty arenas.

Enter the Dragon, black-robe crooked-balance.

Souls bought and sold and paroled for thirty talents.

Court reporter catch the circus on the paper,

File it in the system not acknowledged by the Maker.

Swearing by the bible blatantly blasphemous,

Publicly perpetrating that "In God We Trust".

Cross-examined by a master manipulator.

The faster intimidator receiving the judge's favor.

Deceiving sabers doing injury to their neighbors,

For status, gratis, apparatus and legal waivers.

See the baili representing security,

ffi
ffi
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
 Holding the word of God soliciting perjury.

The prosecution, political prostitution.

The more money you pay, the further away solution.

Legal actors, Babylon's benefactors,

Masquerading as the agency for the clients.

Hypocritical giants, morally non-compliant,

Orally armed to do bodily harm,

Polluted, recruited and suited judicial charm.

And the defense isn't making any sense,

Faking the con dence of escaping the consequence,

That a defendant is depending on the system,

Totally void of judgment purposely made to twist 'em.

Emotional victim blackmailed by the henchmen,

Framed by intentions,

Inventions whereby they lynch men.

Enter the false witness slandering the accused,

Planting the seed openly showing he's being used,

To discredit, edit, headed for the alleged,

Smearing the individual fearing the unsuspected.

Expert witness (the paid authority),

Made a priority to deceive the majority

Of disinterested peers, dodging duty for years,

Hating the process, waiting to be returning to their careers.

Do we expect the system made for the elect,

To possibly judge correct? Properly serve and protect?

Materially corrupt, spiritually amuck,

Oblivious to the cause, prosperously bankrupt.

Blind leading the blind, guilty never de ned.

Filthy as swine, a generation pure in it's own mind.

Legal extortion, blown out of proportion.

In vein deceit, the truth is obsolete.

Only two positions: victimizer or victim.

Both end up in destruction trusting this crooked system.

Ma a with diplomas keeping us in a coma,

Trying to own a piece of the "American Corona".

The Revolving Door, insanity every oor.

Skyscraping, paper chasing, what are we working for?

Empty traditions, reaching social positions,

Teaching ambition to support the family superstition?

When the Son of Perdition is Commander in Chief,

The standard is Thief; brethren, can we candidly speak?

Woe to the men, trusted in the chariots dem',

Leaning on horses, they run their intellectual sources.

Counterfeit wisdom creating the illusion of freedom.

Confusion consumes them.

Every word they speak it turns them outwardly white,

Internally they absent of light.

Trapped in the night and bonded to the Cain of the night.

Under the curse, evil men waxing more worse.

Faxing the rst, angelic being cast to the earth,

It's time for rebirth, burnin up the branch and the root,

The empty pursuits of every tree bearing the wrong fruit.

Turn and be healed, let him who stole, no longer steal.

Oh it's real, surrender for Jehovah is real.

fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
 How long will you sleep, troubled by the thoughts that YOU keep?

The idols YOU heap, causing the destruction you reap?

Judgment has come, nd it and return to the One.

Abandon the esh, self-interest: Broadway to death.

Pride and the Greed, hide and subdividing the seed.

The knowledge of Good and Evil is what caused us to lie,

Caused us to die. Let your emotions be cruci ed.

Renounce all your thoughts.

Repent and let your mind be re-taught.

You'll nd what you sought

Was based on the deception you bought,

A perception of naught where the majority remains caught.”

- Lauryn Hill, The Mystery of Iniquity

To prevent or terminate a public life no sooner than it began, by branding adolescents

and young adults with criminal records that never expire — this is malicious and collectively
self-defeating. The purpose of a legal code cannot be to make it nearly impossible for 1 in 4
Americans to get high-level jobs because of their arrest records. The objective of policing
cannot be to oversee a neighborhood’s death and destruction, nor can local government be
satis ed with the aim of keeping those neighborhoods just barely alive. Private individuals and
groups have the responsibility of doing nearly all the actual daily work, but private and public
sectors must cooperate in an e cient, mutually bene cial environment. Again, the goal of
government cannot be to fail, so perhaps some silver-tongued politicians should pick up
purposivism as a catch-all methodology that could support assorted platform items across the
political spectrum.

“Wait, back to the enemy of the state,

Is the Republicans or Democratic candidate?

Debate, now even the black box hold the fate,

Clueless like Shaggy and Scooby befo' commercial break.”

- OutKast, The Whole World

Liberals do not own matters in criminal justice reform, minority empowerment,

improvement of America’s urban landscape, improvement in public schools, safer streets and
homes. If liberals did own those issues, conservatives could claim a resounding victory
because hitherto those issues are failures. However, in fact, both parties share blame for
waning interest, ossi ed creativity, and lack of e ort toward continually improving common
spaces. Conservatives could man up, be brave, recognize how many guns they got lying
around to fend o any attack that ain’t coming anyway, and argue downsizing prisons on the
basis of costs. Setting people free has the added bonuses of endorsing rugged individualism,
doing the religiously tolerant thing by giving people chances for redemptions, and
demonstrating concern for liberties and freedoms of others regardless of past action which,
though our memories deny, is not real in the here and now.

O’Shea Jackson Jr. (Ice Cube) launched his Contract with Black America campaign
almost certainly with intent of appealing to Republicans. In 1994, Newt Gingrich took charge of
the GOP, won majority control of Congress, due largely to campaigning for the Contract with
America. Approved by both houses prior to midterm elections, the Contract was a Gingrich-
Republican project that took parts of a Reagan State of the Union speech, updated those
Reagan-Republican ideals, and marketed the new GOP as a national brand capable of
competing with Democrats. Ice Cube may have made his money shouting “f*ck the police”
with NWA, but he may well vote Republican given their preferable tax policies. Cube’s Contract
mentions “equality” as the goal, which Republicans prefer over “equity”. If history is any
fi
fi
fl
ff
fi
fi
ffi
fi
ff
fi
 indication, Jackson’s activism will not result in appreciable change for Black Americans for
whom the Contract is meant to bene t, but it stands as another example of how bridges across
aisles are ready to be crossed if public servants or voters who put them in o ces allow it.

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.”

Rush, Freewill

It’s worth wondering even if ignorance has virtue. Consider how awareness of America’s
ills often leads to activism or other fervent exercise of free speech with the aim of changing the
system perceived as oppressive. Rights to speak are a win, and in a society where the people
can and do have signi cant in uence over policy direction, these rights to speak are a crucial
tool for advocacy leading to change. However, if the people have little direct, measurable e ect
on legislation, then their dissent, petitions, demonstrations, and other protests would be in
vain. If those same people believed their actions could or would materially a ect government
decisions when, whether in law or fact, they were precluded from having signi cant persuasive
power over o cials — elected or not — their failure to accept what they cannot change would
be a source of stress, anxiety, and anger. In such a scenario, one could argue people’s
emotional well-being might be better should they (A) not know any di erent, or (B) accept the
futility of ghting, and submit (C) hope for better privately but withhold public commentary, and
(D) learn to be happy independent of external factors. In other words, if they were ignorant
instead, they might be happier than if they knew but their knowledge was useless for anything
other than torturing them with what can never be.

“Observe the vibe and check the scenario.”

- A Tribe Called Quest, Scenario

Drug crimes are the most common type young people are arrested and charged on, and
the ostensible reason for strict enforcement is the dangers drugs pose to individuals and
communities. But alcohol, not illegal drugs, are associated with 40% of violent crime. Alcohol
contributes to more deaths worldwide than all illegal drugs combined. Tobacco and alcohol
contribute to heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes, and other such harms but still less than
addictive foods like sugar, salt, and fat. There is no serious ban on Pepsi-FritoLay, pizza, high-
fructose corn syrup or exotic, processed trans fats, and certainly not the unknown GMO.
School lunches do not come with nutritional facts, and if they did, hardly anybody would pay
attention. Instead of prioritizing the biggest risk factors in the environment highest, public
budgets have spent disproportionately more on issues that cost comparatively far fewer lives,
whereas more lives could be saved if money were spent on bigger issues. Instead of getting
scared o bad eating and movement habits, kids see an endless parade of anti-drug posters,
PSAs, T-shirt slogans, and assorted multimedia content designed to scare, shame, and
intimidate kids into complying with drug policies — all on the basis that these substances are
reportedly more dangerous to individuals and communities than various other substances that
kill more people without much legal interference. Simultaneously, pharmaceutical companies
target audiences in homes and the Capitol building with the aim of getting consumers to use
their products for a lifetime. Medical doctors consider a patient a “success” if they stay on
meds inde nitely; there’s little or no attempt to remedy the condition, only manage symptoms
with meds (podcast).

“I’m gon’ make u sick.

I’m gon’ make u sick o’ me.

Then I’m gon’ give u the antidote.”

- Parliament, I’m Gon’ Make U Sick o’ Me

ff
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fl
fi
ff
ffi
ff
fi
ff
 This type of seemingly deliberate indi erence to the con icts of interest, or the double
standards, or the favoritism, or the latent inconsistency in messaging shows up in other areas
of criminal law. Public policy promoters conveniently ignore the death, destruction, and despair
caused by American foreign wars, or by corporate crime, or potential climate climate disasters,
or a long list of harms to individuals and communities that could be prevented, mitigated,
diminished, or penalized under sui generis legislation. Marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine,
natural or synthetic opioids, and other drugs listed in municipal laws & treaties surely can be
dangerous, but there are also plenty of testimonies suggesting they o er reasonably safe
entertainment, surges of creativity in the arts, relaxation, escape, or some other pleasurable
state for users. Sales of narcotics — if not including violence — provides a little harmless
income to people and districts where cash is scarce. Yes, obviously there are risks, and people
get hurt sometimes, but there is abundant evidence showing no single predictable outcome
exists across all drug activity at scale. Street drugs have existed for long enough that their
e ects are known. The same cannot be said for puberty blockers & transitioning drugs, nor for
many pharmaceutical medicines, nor even for GMOs. If the objective is to reduce risk and harm
to the health and safety of individuals and communities, then the umbrella of banned
substances should have been expanded to include alcohol & tobacco, and the aggressive
social engineering project to change lifestyles and beliefs should have included obesity
prevention measures at very least. As the project stands, as viewed in the context of all active
public policies, it is a massive failure unless success is measured only by the millions of drug
arrests documented in 50 years. And to qualify success as such, we must willfully ignore the
harms individuals and communities su er when somebody is uprooted and imprisoned.

“He saw a war was raging,

Had to escape it.

She told the youths get ready.

They're gonna make it.

Run for your life.

She tells them

The walls are breaking,

Peace should be in your future.

It's for your taking.

I'm a refugee.”

- Skip Marley, Refugee

The United States of America probably should become state party to the United
Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. While being member to the Protocol is
a good show, the United States’ support for elements of international law demonstrate best
practices and leadership. The US has a special position as permanent member of the Security
Council and primary sponsor of the UN budget. The US undermines the mission of universal
human rights by withholding rati cation on core human right treaties such as the the 1951
Refugee Convention, 1954 and 1961 Statelessness Conventions, 1966 International Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1979 Convention on Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child. Less
than universal recognition and enforcement of human rights in the US is implied given that the
US has not and probably will not join the ICC, nor ratify Geneva Convention Protocols, nor join
various arms treaties on light arms, cluster munitions and, of course, nuclear weapons. The
international system is unduly jeopardized by non-performance of treaty provisions, but the US
is not party to the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the US is one of only a
few nations to refuse performance of an ICJ order, so inconsistencies and failures should be
expected. Notwithstanding that logic, if the United States of America seeks to personify
freedom, liberty, independence, and rule of law, then it probably should take up that bona de
ff
fi
ff
ff
fl
ff
fi
 leadership role wholeheartedly, then both ratify and implement the international instruments
that it wanted to help negotiate and draft.

Conservatives could use that same Refugee Convention to support broad immigration
reform, aimed at simultaneously accepting refugees as per treaty obligations and limiting
unlawful presence. Oh, but maybe employers like employees who are not legally present, and
as the donor class goes, so do elected o cials. US Courts have not infrequently made
comparison between expatriates (presumably legally present) and stateless persons. Persons
illegally present have natural rights, but their status is diminished before courts on the basis
that their very presence is evidence of a crime. Employers can more easily abuse workers who
have no legal personality, who are vulnerable. Employers donate to political campaign funds
rather than employees, resulting in promulgation and administration of law tailored more
favorable to a minority of employers rather than a majority of employees. Wait, though, the
labor movement is currently without a Party in the United States; it had been a Democratic
supporter, but labor has been unsatis ed by the duopoly since Clinton’s signing of Bush’s
NAFTA, or at least since Obama’s nancing scheme to build the “big tent” with the leaky roof
and cover charge that helped big banks avoid repossessions but not average families. Labor
unions were amuck with ma a strong arm tactics, so Republicans responded with Right to
Work laws. Teachers unions, their mouthpieces in Congress, and their puppet public school
personnel operated as Woke, Incorporated, who tried to indoctrinate the population like mass
marketing didn’t die in the 70s, and the GOP responded by enacting anti-CRT laws and Bills of
Parental Rights that, despite media howling, were remarkably tame, plain, simple and concise
pieces of public policy that did not actually ban anybody from teaching any fact, nor opinion,
but rather that the two are di erent and must be treated as such. There is no reason the GOP
couldn’t just build a “bigger tent” to house the majority who are without party a liation.

“Every nation from creation.

The black one the white one,

The light one the dark one,

Out of many we are one.”

- Sizzla, Chino, Tarrus Riley & Dre Island, Every Nation

To recapitulate, conservatives could capture market share and lead on immigration and
labor, but a potential sticking point is the 30 million or so persons unlawfully present in the
USA, where some 15 million or more are employed by businesses that seem to prefer the
illegal workers over the Americans. Those companies are in violation of the law directly, or they
are accessory to legal infraction in that the unlawful presence could not occur without
economic means to sustain life (i.e. a job). Evidence is abundant among the 30+ million
persons unlawfully present in the United States. Millions of individuals know no other home;
millions more have gone to American schools, worked American jobs for decades. American
businesses are not legally hosting those foreigners by sponsoring visas prior to
commencement of work, but those companies are hiring and retaining illegal aliens for work at
a remarkable rate, over considerable stretches of time. These businesses and their owners are
considered upstanding members of local society. Unauthorized workers add value to the
economy, to be sure, but their continued presence at such scale also distorts domestic
markets; that is, the economic order and legal order are concurrently disorderly on the matter
of immigration. Conservatives, liberals, independents and unclassi ed observers should all be
likewise concerned about the status, health, maintenance, continuous and never ending
improvement of both the legal and economic orders. If the job gets done e ectively and
e ciently, it does not matter who does it.

“Who the cap t, let them wear it.”

- Bob Marley, Who the Cap Fit

ffi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
ffi
fi
ff
ffi
 In fair consideration of all parties involved in a similar situation in 1986, Reagan signed
an immigration reform law granting amnesty for anybody arriving prior to 1982. Proving time of
unlawful arrival is obviously problematic, but not more so than the American government
making record of anywhere near all undocumented migrants. One place the government could
start is in schools, but after Plyler, no school nor agent thereof may inquire about a student’s
immigration status in their o cial duties. The mere record of immigration status, whether acted
upon or not, was precluded by Plyler. If the case were heard again, it would probably result in
quite a di erent opinion.

Considering unavoidable macroeconomic distortions of unlawfully present persons

occupying some 10% or more of the labor force; recalling short supply in an una ordable
housing market, where millions of units are occupied by persons unlawfully present in the
country; given that public school budgets are abysmally low, that lower per student spending
threatens free and appropriate public education among citizens and lawful residents; mindful of
more factors, a learned panel of Justices today may infer of immigration status the same or
similar to Glenn Loury in Anatomy of Racial Inequality, that traits are neutral but that those traits
may signify something in the population. By comparison, one’s immigration status is an
observable fact, though it may require some verbal or written con rmation to prove, and the
implications of that status may vary depending on the legal and social context within which
those facts are interpreted, and for what objectives they may be constructed or used to
advocate speci c action. Humans cannot be “illegal”, but their presence in a jurisdiction can
be, and although that unlawful presence may not be immoral, it is punishable under criminal
law, the validity and enforceability of which is not limited or abrogated by moral arguments
(deontological, possibly in tandem with natural law theories) pertaining to outcomes following
civil or criminal penalties. That is, if a person is unlawfully present, then they may be deported
or otherwise interfered with because of their violation of immigration law; they need not violate
other laws before immigration laws are enforceable; and the fact that enforcement of
immigration laws causes hardship on such persons is understood as part of the trade-o s that
arise when a system of justice is setup and run over time and space.

“To this world I am unimportant,

Just because I have nothing to give.

So you call this your free country,

Tell me why it costs so much to live.”

- Three Doors Down, Duck and Run

A country can at once have (1) strong borders, (2) a functional system of immigration
that o ers individuals and employers options to sponsor visas and ensure lawful presence of
employees, (3) enforcement of immigration laws under labor statutes, (4) strong labor laws
mutually bene cial to employers and employees, (5) e ective constraints on business abuses
in the marketplace, (6) reasonably free movement of goods, people, and services within an
e cient system of records. Such a country can also provide assistance to refugees, but
today’s refugees are not the same as those from 1951 or 1967. Systems need to be updated,
whether OS software, nancial, or legal.

“Welcome to Jamdown.

Poor people are dead at random.

Political violence, can't done.

Pure ghost and phantom.

The youth dem get blind by stardom.

Now the Kings of Kings a call.

Old man to pickney,

ffi
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ff
fi
ff
ff
 So wave unno hand if you with me.

To see the su eration sick me,

Dem suit no t me,

To win election dem trick we,

Then dem don't do nothing at all.

Come on let's face it, a ghetto education's basic,

And most a the youths dem waste it,

And when dem waste it,

That's when dem take the guns replace it.

Then dem don't stand a chance at all.”

- Damian Marley, Welcome to Jamrock

African Americans living in parts of Detroit, for example, could walk to the Canadian
border over the Ambassador Bridge and apply for asylum or refugee status citing similar
conditions Hondurans claim in applications to enter the US on special visa status. There are
places in Detroit and elsewhere around the United States where drug gangs rule the
neighborhoods, where civilians live in fear of attack from both criminals and police, where there
is legitimate fear of political imprisonment or extrajudicial summary execution. Some people
living in American border cities would qualify for refugee status by the standards some media
pundits attempt to read into statutes. What would human rights-advocate Canada say then to
explain away how it criticized the US for denying applications at its Southern border but then
did the same at the Canadian Southern border?

“I remember when we used to sit

In the government yard in Trenchtown.

Oba, observing the hypocrites,

Mingle with the good people we meet.”

- Bob Marley, No Woman No Cry

With the expiration on a rmative action following the College Admissions cases came
opportunities to give seats at the table to the best, brightest, most meritocratic, and yes
diverse, inclusive bunch of people the world has ever seen. Liberals may have shouted down
the most speakers on college campuses, and Leftists may have cancelled the most careers
during the Cultural Revolution of 2016–2022, but it is hard to predict a winner in a game of
moving goalposts. Conservative groups could argue the current construction of Federal
immigration law unconstitutionally bene ts Latin American migrants against migrant groups
from Asia or Africa who would have to rst y into a third country and then arrange unlawful
border crossing by land or sea. By virtue of their birthplace, Central and South Americans are
capable of reaching the United States by foot, and if there is a lax enforcement regime
domestically, those people may become de facto permanent residents of the USA, and then
possibly later receive special status under a revised Immigration Act. The ratio of Latin
American migrants to those from Africa and Asia is arti cially increased under such a regime,
and the cultural face of the country is forcibly altered by unlawful acts. Asians and Africans may
have equally or more quali ed cases for refugee or asylum status, but because they cannot
arrive physically at the US border and apply, they are prevented from making use of what could
be their right — to asylum or refugee status as per international agreements, norms, and
customs.

Poor Americans are getting dealt raw hands from multiple directions. Underclass minds
have not been captured by any political movement since Great Society, but more so before
that with the New Deal. Carter’s post-Presidency Amnesty International and Habitat for
Humanity were successful global projects. Obama’s HOPE campaigns inspired some people,
remain symbolic of change, but material improvements did not match the rhetorical grandeur,
fi
ff
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fl
fi
 then drone strikes and deportations left demagoguery and cult of personality in the legacy.
Trump was the closest America came to a real social-political movement since anybody can
remember. Trump’s rise and tenure atop the heap of Republican white men stands powerful
testimony to diversity of opinion and viewpoint among the nation’s primarily labor class, public
school graduate, proud hardworking citizenship. That Democrats have to lead on immigration,
public schools, and poverty is not a foregone conclusion, but the GOP has to reconcile its
divided house of employers & employees, owners & operators.

“Funky boss, get o my back.”

- Beastie Boys, Funky Boss

Under Plyler, local districts which would enforce Federal immigration law if granted
jurisdiction but cannot due to the complicated system of Local/State/Federal law enforcement,
are then hit again with costs to educate children of persons unlawfully present in the district.
More than 80% of school revenues come from State and local, and not federal, sources.
Voters in those districts may support deportation of illegal immigrants, but because of opaque
bureaucracy among other factors, Federal authorities choose not to enforce immigration laws
widely or consistently. Local districts may not consent to unlawful residence, but due to a
complex patchwork of privacy rights, incomplete and fragmented bookkeeping, those places
host legal and illegal migrants to the extent that those individual migrants and their families can
nd jobs, homes, and schools. Depriving illegal migrants of free access to public schools was a
locale’s last defense against illegal presence when the Federal government refuses to enforce
its own law. Plyler required public schools to provide all students equal access regardless of
immigration status. Schools could have been sources of economic and social data on
immigration, if school workers could have been allowed to inquire about immigration status if
only for the purposes of diligently keeping records, but a misguided and awkwardly
hypothetical set of questions in Plyler oral arguments hinted enough of the justices had already
made up their minds before hearing Texas counsel. To summarize, the rationale behind the
decision did not stand the test of time, as observed in audio recordings of oral arguments.

Some future executive administration could set out to reasonably enforce laws banning
unauthorized residence and employment. If it were a campaign promise, and if it were popular,
a President could seek to deport as many as 15 million unlawful residents within a term of
o ce. Some schools could have to close after they lose half or more of their enrollment
population. Businesses would su er lost pro ts if they had to pay a minimum wage to
American citizens whose employment is documented for tax and compliance purposes. Rich
people in coastal cities would have to nd American maids and nannies; so, we know such an
executive move is unlikely, but if it happened that Trump or some future “law and order”
President stepped up the domestic “defense” spending, since decreasing the defense budget
is a Cardinal sin in Washington D.C., and began reasonably enforcing residency and
employment immigration laws, then local schools across the country would have empty space,
extra desks, no extra textbooks since they don’t have textbooks, but halls would seem empty,
and that excess State and local money was spent might seem like a bad thing at rst, but that
is also capacity that could be lled by law-abiding, tax-paying citizens and lawful residents.
Plus, housing would open up when eight a time clear out of ats that ought to hold three at
most. And jobs for young Americans would be back like a vertebrae.

“Get a haircut and get a real job.

Clean your act up and don’t be a slob.”

- George Thorogood & The Destroyers, Get a Haircut

If the legislative and executive branches cannot get their acts together to create and
sustain what appears to be a nation of borders and immigration laws, and facts on the ground
fi
ffi
ff
fi
ff
fi
fi
fl
fi
 suggest they cannot, then at least the Court can rehear some of these same issues and decide
schools can and should collect immigration data.

Objective: a record of all persons within a country.

Collection of immigration data is relevant to housing and job markets. Considering that
illegal migration at a rate of some 10% of the population almost certainly diminishes
opportunities for nationals and lawful residents, a reasonably responsive Court could probably
nd a compelling state interest in requiring local schools to possess all available identifying
information of its students and their guardians. Alternatively, a gangsta Court could issue a writ
of mandamus to deport persons known to be unlawfully present, and to collect information
such that persons unlawfully present may be located and deported. The Court could make the
government do what it said it would do, in other words, and in that case schools could still
collect information about immigration status since that is a reasonable thing to do in an
educational institution: collect and store data, information, knowledge, and wisdom or
combination thereof sans frontiers. The Court could also deliver the political question back to
local districts which may choose what to do in their districts, where most other matters with
schools are handled. By comparison in authoring Plyler, the Justices asked a political question
and then gave an answer they preferred as if it were the only possible answer to their very
inappropriate assessment of a very political question.

“Jay commited suicide.

Woah-oh

Brandon OD'd and died.

Woah-oh

What the hell is going on?

The cruelest dream, reality.”

- O spring, The Kids Aren’t Alright

We have Fent, or so much of it, at least in part because of attempted eradication of

opium poppy crops that could substitute synthetic opioids with natural opium, morphine, and
diacetylmorphine (previous Bayer trademarked brand name Heroin). Though problems with
heroin are well-known, the chemical compound diamorphine is simply not as potent, and
therefore less lethal, than fentanyl. Heroin is safer. Especially if their dumbasses snorted or
smoked it instead of injecting it like some moronic junkies. Imagine that.

“Temperature's rising,

Fever is high,

Can't see no future,

Can't see no sky,

My feet are so heavy,

So is my head,

I wish I was a baby,

I wish I was dead.”

- John Lennon, Cold Turkey

Whereas certain public entities have gone about an attempted forced extinction of
targeted ora species (i.e. cannabis, opium poppy, coca, mahuang, psilocybin mushrooms,
mescaline cactus) purportedly in the name of public health and safety, certain other public/
private entities (pharmaceutical corporations, most notably) have concocted their own, more
deadly and addictive versions of many of the same extracts from targeted plant species. Who
is to say what would happen if licit family-farming took o ? If locals controlled supplies of
poppy, coca, marijuana, and other naturally-occurring plant species whose trade could
fi
ff
fl
ff
 normalize across the globe according to market forces. Golden Triangles, Myanmar, Laos,
Thailand, Mexico, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Northern India, Turkey, Tasmania, and elsewhere,
production of poppy and opium are traditional cultural knowledge that could be protected by
WIPO administered treaties. Perhaps the situation would be more commonsensical today if
white men from Western European and American pharmaceutical companies had not
stigmatized shamanism and traditional, natural, herbal folk remedies back in the 1800s like
Benjamin Smith discussed in The Dope.

“I've got the stalk of Sinsemilla,

Growing in my backyard.

Don't cut down the cali tree,

'Cause it makes the best tea for me.

I've seen doctor say, it gives naturally.”

- Black Uhuru, Sensemilla

Family farms could sell to local hospitals if needed, to help supply the shortage of
essential medicines for severe pain. Those hospitals or their systems could purchase the raw
materials, particularly poppy gum, and produce natural opium, morphine, and
diacetylmorphine. A weening away from the pharmaceutical industry’s hold on pain
management while maintaining adequate supply of potent pain medication, would probably be
good for people, especially in areas su ering massive overdose deaths and other diseases of
despair. A licit farming system with simple and cheap licensing processes would also bring
incomes to subsistence smallholder farmers around the world. There are hypothetical
downside risks galore, but considering the potential pro t and quality of life upsides, the idea
seems worth a good college try.

“Heavy mind, every sign,

Makin' money all the time.

My El D and just me,

For all junkies to see,

Ghetto Prince is my thing.

Makin' love's how I swing.

I'm your pusherman.”

- Curtis May eld, Pusherman

Take a look at marketing campaigns for political and legal services - or propaganda
supporting the o cial directive. In Thailand, for example ยาเ น ษ (“medicine is poison”) is a
common gure of speech when discussing narcotics of any variety. ยา า is slang for
methamphetamine, literally means “crazy medicine”, and is the most common lexicon used to
reference varied kinds and grades of stimulant narcotics. If words have literal meaning, then
those meanings can be scrutinized; in this case, it is important to note medicine cannot be
poison; it is medicine or poison, but not both; toxic, possibly but not poison. Calling this that or
lumping instead of splitting has bene ts for service providers (police, lawyers, judges, jailers,
parole o cers) but consequences for the community, and thus another collective action
problem is revealed. Saying “no” is absolutely a right, and anybody should be able to say no
and refuse at any time, but the government should not attempt to compel speech, nor is just
saying no a reasonable strategy for the gamut of yes/no questions in our world. One needs a
more detailed and personalized approach, what since mass marketing died in the 1970s. Sure,
there are people who will say mass marketing is still alive, that Harvard Business Review and
the like pulled o a hoax, like they did with Tupac and Elvis, but that is not the simplest nor
most straightforward explanation.

ffi
fi
fi
ff
ffi
fi
ff
fi
ป็
พิ
บ้
 “We gotta make a change.

It's time for us as a people to start makin' some changes.

Let's change the way we eat.

Let's change the way we live.

And let's change the way we treat each other.

You see, the old way wasn't working so it's on us to do,

What we gotta do, to survive.

And still I see no changes, can't a brother get a little peace?

There's war in the streets and war in the Middle East.

Instead of war on poverty, they got a war on drugs,

So the police can bother me.”

- 2Pac, Changes

Whereas legal ganja should be re ected in farm receipts, those pro ts trickle up to
urban winners in the Drug Wars. Legalization bills often wrote capital requirements into the
statutes, excluding poorer classes from obtaining licenses to engage in legal business. Drug
money built skylines like Miami, Hong Kong, Shianghai, Los Angeles, at least in part. Pro ts
soared lower down on the supply chain while agriculture districts saw little to no development.
As fortunes were made and continue to be made on farm labors, political marketing campaigns
successfully stigmatized speci c species of plants and their derivative products. The public
concerned itself with harsh penalties for cultivation, processing, distribution, sale, or
possession of proscribed substances. People who abstained because they feared punishment
stayed out of prison, but irrational thinking and behavior were also predictable outcomes of
drug policies that ran roughshod over technical details. Less foreseeable, still, were long term
social psychological mutations arising out of prohibition.

Marijuana legalization has been a boon for urban and otherwise wealthy entrepreneurs.
But rural districts do not see proportional bene t, given that farms are main sources of retail
cannabis products that sell at higher prices per gram than nearly any other agricultural
commodity. Historical government propaganda left the poorest agricultural residents shocked
and paranoid such that even as the crops were legalized, support remained at for the only
feasible cash crop available to plant. As the urban:rural divide plays out across the developing
world, there are winners and losers in a new economy. In the cities, prices remain high from
decades of anticompetitive practices among cartels. Illicit currency owing around shadow
economies, and the resultant in ationary pressures from narcotics tra cking over decades of
prohibition are not irrelevant. Prices rose as dark money supplies increased, leaving honest
poor folk without many options. Farmers and other subsistence workers thus su ered doubly
as compared to their wealthier and more opportunistic city-dwelling counterparts.

In The Dope, Benjamin Smith mentioned how semantic drift occurred with the word
“cartel” in the 1980s after the DEA set o to stigmatize narcotics tra cking and distribution
organizations, namely the Guadalajara Cartel. For decades, drug cartels xed prices, muscled
out competitors, divided territories among competitors, and engaged in assorted horizontal
and vertical arrangements to limit competition and control markets. Smith’s Dope book recalled
how Mexican anti-narcotics agencies once ran protection for preferred narcotics cultivators,
producers, and distributors. The Dope brought to mind more recent events in Duterte’s
Philippines, where rational observers could not help but question methodologies, sordid
allegiances, corruption and criminal in uence in the 22,000 or extrajudicial killings in their
strongman’s Drug War. Smith implies Mexico’s experience is representative of the world’s illicit
narcotics trade, and what happened in Mexico probably happened elsewhere. With such
tangled, corrupt, opaque history, it is not surprising that international criminal organizations feel
above or beside the law, nor that the average civilian is woefully confused, nor that the
government is incoherent on the matters.

fi
fl
fl
ff
fl
fi
fl
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
fl
ff
fi
 “Hey, Babylon, you no like ganja mann,

But ya weed bring da foreign currency pon di island.”

- Barrington Levy, Under Mi Sensi

Existing prices in legal marijuana markets are still a ected by historical anticompetitive
and monopolistic practices. National legalization in the USA and deregulation of trade in raw
agricultural commodities would provide local supplemental income where none other exists
while allowing the broader market to harmonize prices that will likely fall below break even
margins for cartels. Michigan, for example, witnessed a threefold decline in cannabis products
in the rst ve years following introduction of recreational use. While suppliers certainly dislike
de ation, consumers in a free market have bargaining power to wrest some control of prices
back from gouging cartel monopolists. Herb trade ought to be a cottage industry, supplemental
income, providing local opportunities for cash, with the occasional bigger rm present in a
competitive fair trade market economy. In 2023, Thailand could have the best developed
marijuana retailing network in the world, relying on its homegrown synergisties: (1) national
infrastructural strengths of cellular and transportation networks, (2) policy strengths relating to
ease of setting up and managing payment portals online, and (3) relaxed business-friendly
atmosphere that comes across as positively laissez-faire absent some behavior beyond drugs.

Online ordering, credit card payments, nationwide same-day or express shipping of

Thai cannabis ower and products: this is a breakthrough. Thai prices have not adjusted as
much as Michigan to the market environment post-cartel hegemony, which is even more
reason for nations to legalize at federal levels such that they can organize an e ort to squeeze
criminal narcotics organizations out of free markets. In the future, import/export could be
available just as it is with booze. Let King Power Duty Free sell ganja goodies next to Jack
Daniels and Marlboro. Unless competition in the marketplace is some kind of problem, there is
no reason not to be honest about what a plant is and is not. If chronic bullshitters could paint
some candor, sincerity, and articulate linguistic philosophy into their decorum, the simplest
idea ever could already be written; it’s such a simple idea it seems like it should not have to be
written, but sure enough, everything has to be spelled out in alphabet soup for these English
quacks.

Fact: If it grows on planet Earth, it is implicitly permissible to have around. Nu sed.

“Yes I'm a ganja planter.

Call me di ganja farmer.

Deep down inna di earth where me put di ganja,

Babylon come and light it up on re.”

- Marlon Asher, Ganja Farmer

The Drug War was a hot war in some parts of the world, more of a propaganda
campaign and social-psychological clandestine in uence and persuasion op in other parts.
That the War on Drugs was a real war — and generally a war on poor people rather than
inanimate object drugs — helps explain post-traumatic stress and other psychiatric
phenomena present in the group. One of the cognitive blockages may be a sort of inability to
think and reason through and around topics relating to drugs, the law, and their intersection.
Try to engage a police o cer in discussion on the validity of laws which, if strictly scrutinized,
criminalize speci c thoughts and feelings; police are a prime yet not isolated example of
people who can only defer to authority (fallacy) or use coercive measures (fallacy) to back up
their arguments. The very people charged with operating the legal machinery cannot prove
anything beyond any shadow of any doubt in most cases, not without faith beyond the
observable. Meanwhile, they very observably demonstrate hostility for elements of the law
fl
fi
fi
fl
fi
ffi
fi
fl
ff
fi
ff
ff
 intended to protect civilians. For example, enforcement of laws banning personal possession
not only unreasonably intrude upon individual privacy, but also hamper and distort natural
market functioning. Behind the police whose job is to enforce laws he/she need not agree with,
we nd parents, school teachers, preachers, business people — respectable citizens — who
believe very strongly in criminalizing behavior that often manifests in little other than a slightly
modi ed mood or thoughts. Argue to a conclusive victory, they cannot, but stubborn, they are.

“Soldier in the herb eld, burnin' the collie weed.

Police in helicopter, a search marijuana.

Policemen in the streets, searching collie weed.

But if you continue to burn up the herbs, we gonna burn down the cane elds.”

- John Holt, Police in Helicopter

The United States could redeem itself and win a war again if it could sustain thought,
discussion, and then legal action making sense of what could be a manageable situation with
trade in psychoactive substances. After 50 years in the trenches, burning elds, destroying
product, arresting and imprisoning millions of participants in drug markets, the opposition has
not su ered attrition; in fact, it has grown in size and in uence. Some of the population
believes the o cial rhetoric demonizing substances and those capitalizing on their trade, and
stigmatizing possession and use as falling under the domain of either mental health or criminal
justice systems. Some of the population is too afraid to break the law, but enough of the
population has rationalized risks and sorted through the neutral moral aspects of behaviors,
and the trades have ourished regardless of legal status. Banks and corrupt politicians accept
the money whether the product of criminal or legal enterprise. An American victory in the War
on Drugs can only be secured in hearts and minds — something famously in short supply
among the military and police. A victory of hearts and minds would be a victory, nonetheless,
and America desperately needs a war win to close o the warring startup-launch phases of a
radically di erent kind of nation than had existed prior.

“Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery,

None but ourselves can free our minds.”

- Bob Marley, Redemption Song

Criminal codes prohibit behaviors that are casually associated with illegal substance
use and possession (i.e. theft, violence, recklessness, mayhem). Prohibition of selling, buying,
possessing, or consuming those substances is distinct from those other behaviors whose
penalties may be ampli ed by drug statutes when drugs are present in such other o enses, but
anti-drug laws were not required to implement other elements of criminal codes. As such, it is
fair to say, as Brian Muraresku did in The Immortality Key, that statutes prohibiting
consumption of non-lethal recreational or shamanistic psychoactive substances are, in e ect,
merely prohibiting people from thinking and feeling certain feelings, because one can assume a
high individual may just lie on the couch or stare at the wall or dance around the club and love
everybody, or possibly imagine some things a little too vividly and share some details of his/her
out of control imagination but nonetheless not actually physically harm anybody or damage
property. Evidence of this thought crime or feeling crime is found in law enforcement
encounters where a suspect’s mannerisms alert police to their being under the in uence of
illegal substances. For example, individuals who consume illegal substances are noticeably
“high” (illegal) as opposed to drunk (legal), and their di erent a ect, mood, and verbalized
thought processes are what tip police and others o to their being high rather than drunk.
Drunks and tweakers, for example, have di erent looks about them; they are discernible from
one another, but absent any actual crime, the only dividing line is that the tweaker or crackhead
has a di erent look on his/her face, speaks in di erent tones and rhythms about di erent
topics, moves di erently, but absent any actual crime the only di erence is psychological.
fi
fi
ff
ff
ff
ffi
ff
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
ff
ff
ff
ff
ff
fl
ff
ff
fi
fi
fl
ff
ff
ff
Thus, criminal codes appear unconstitutional in their intrusiveness with regard to policing
people’s thoughts and feelings. Still, try to talk about that with people who get paid to enforce
whatever wrongheaded idea the big shots of the day feel is best for their agendas.

On the streets and in the schools,

Criminal records are the harm, laws are the tools.
Stuck in the shallow end of the talent pool,
Elephant in the room cool to punishments unusually long and cruel.
Jackass government mules fuel loudmouthed fools,
Who presumably wrote their rules moments before they fell o their barstools.
Drunk as skunks, or as context were, a Kennedy.
False identities in that plenary,
Fewer friends than enemies.
“Remedies” emerge from outlier extremities,
To ensure their amenities and “serenity”.
At scale, this chain email is doomed to fail.
A dog whistle wails,
And they chase their tails.
Details are old & stale.
Situation beyond the pail.
Rationale clearly frail under the veil.
Why so many languishing in jail?
Why do “speedy” public trials move at the pace of a snail?
How can Truth and Justice prevail?
While police, prosecutors, and judges attempt to assail,
Travail to bind Justice as her subjects ail,
Calling for their mothers as they exhale.
Yale Law grads railing against their bail,
Regale as blind Justice ails, lacking Braille.
Wicked tales for sale on campaign trails,
Of ladies & males who refuse to curtail,
The volume of bullshit in their hot air, windbag gale,
Couldn’t care less about the details,
Of destruction at scale idle pursuit of their white whale entails.

fl
ff
 Teeter-Totter

“Mr Politician, I can see clear wat is yuh mission,

Yuh juss a sell bare guns and ammunitions,

But a we livin wid di consequences of yuh decision.

Mr Politician, stop playing games wid our life.

I dunno how yuh can sleep at night.

Cause everyday ya come anna be di poor people dem a ght?

Mr Politician, why yuh are treat me like a dumb.

We know seh yuh a liar and a fraud,

Everyday yuh come, and a trap yur politics high?”

- YT, Mr. Politician

On Real Time with Bill Maher 3/17/23, Andrew Yang told a story of how an issue
unresolved is worth more money to politicians than an issue resolved. They can keep plugging
people for donations and platforming with the ongoing issue, and that plays into demonization
for the other side — stall tactics which are coincidentally default litigation strategies among the
same donor class who bene t from resolved and unresolved issues. In a similar tone, Russel
Brand and Joe Rogan spoke on how it’s better for entrenched elites, oligarchs and such to
have the plebs bickering and splintering among themselves, whereas a united under class
would threaten the status quo. Who could deny their overwhelming numbers? Therein lies a
crucial weakness of the less powerful majority: they are poorly organized, and in today’s world
of communications, their failure to e ectively organize is not just a result of their being poorly
funded.

“You can fool some people sometimes, but you can’t fool all the people all the time.”

- Bob Marley, Get Up Stand Up

The American government in cooperation with private individuals and institutions, are
building a culture of dependence and dependents with helicopter and bulldozer parenting,
hyper regulation, and a general fear of what is possible driving action over a calculated
assessment what is probable. In other words, Whataboutism. Neither political party in control
of the government has o ered any practicable solution to a slew of fossilized problems. Instead
of being professional government agents, politicians and their reports are professional
campaigners and fundraisers, meaning the main message they promote is that they are
necessary and need money. A consequence is dependence on the government which was
billed as so important that it needs to interfere with how people eat, sleep, drive, walk, talk,
shop, do anything. Such dependence is either ironic or hypocritical because both parties
campaign on creating freedom, independence, and liberty.

“Every human being asks only to live,

With dignity, with ease.

Just live your freedom.

Freedom!”

- Jah Gaia, Libre (translated from French)

Politicians never promise a nanny state as such, and others actively advocate against
any version of a nanny state. No public gure wins votes or gains popularity by speaking in
favor of fewer rights or less freedom in the USA. Nobody ever says they want the law to be
wordier, with more paperwork for small businesses, and a regulatory framework that requires
high-cost legal counsel to navigate. We know people lie, but for so many lies and half truths to
be entered into o cial record, well, this is truly remarkable right now because the USA in
ffi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
 practice appears extremely di erent from visions of leaders, party mouthpieces, benevolent
neo-nobility, commercial branding of the country and legal system. For core problems to be
solved, there must be discussion of their parts, inputs and outputs, but the monkey and weasel
only chase each other around the mulberry bush; beating around the bush is a national pastime
insomuch that core issues cannot be addressed as there is no time or goodwill remaining after
the idle tri es of the day have been thoroughly bickered about.

“No justice, No peace.” Is a great protest song. Political speech crafted by a

professional whose voice projects a unity of peace, harmony, and righteous struggle. The same
line shouted repeatedly by an angry mob loses some of its artistic appeal. The reggae singer
communicates love and non-violent resistance as tools in a Rastafarian’s arsenal with which to
ght indecencies of Babylonian occupation. By comparison, a chaotic horde of apoplectic
protestors make themselves redundant with their hoarse droning of slogans which appear
more as threatening than re ective. They’ll make jokes about how dumb “the system” is, cry
and chant to no end about how bad it is, but none will give time to long, drawn out discussion
of possibilities, probabilities, and feasibility of solution options.

“I wish for peace between the races,

Someday we shall all be one.”

- Beastie Boys, Something’s Got to Give

Prior to the Kavanaugh hearings and Trump Supreme Court appointee ghts, or as the
events were broadcast globally in English media, there were rising arguments about how the
“conservative” pivot of the Court since the Warren era had hampered progress among the
poor, marginalized, historically segregated and disenfranchised minorities — protected classes
of citizens. Cohen’s Supreme Inequality presented cogent support for the main thesis: that
poor Americans were harmed by Court rulings, and that the Court failed to classify the poor
generally as a protected class, due in no small part to political gimmicks in the Nixon and
Reagan administrations, and that the so-called conservative turnaround in the Court’s political
leanings were to blame for the Court having a net-negative impact on poor Americans.
Apparently none of the nger-wagging, pearl-clutching, virtue-signaling, penny ante
thumbsuckers involved in all the political meandering cared so much about their country and
society that they would just let Democratic-Republic Je erson bridge the aisle. Meanwhile, in
some stodgy law library, Fishkin & Forbath discovered Je erson’s Notes on Virginia:

“The idea was that “nature has sown” talents “as liberally among the poor as the rich”;
yet the talents “perish without use, if not sought for and cultivated,” to the detriment of
both the individual and the state.”

If a teacher wants to get a job teaching math at an American public school, then except
for emergency cases that teacher must possess a bachelor’s degree in math, or at very least
pass a few exams showing pro ciency in math. Whereas the average person in their daily life
almost never uses high school math, each individual is almost continually subject to provisions
of civil and criminal legal codes. It should follow, then, that people charged with making,
enforcing, and administrating laws would have to satisfy at least the same minimum
requirements as a high school teacher before they could gain employment in such services.
Oddly, no. No knowledge whatsoever of law, government, or politics is required to hold public
o ce. Talents may be distributed fairly across segments of populations, but their use,
cultivation and application is uneven, and indeed as Je erson noted, such misuse of Human
Resources is to the detriment of those individuals and the collective whole.

Around the rst Trump candidacy, the media had perfected its business of manipulating
crowds with fear and paranoia such that they would vote in a manner that, uncoincidentally,
fi
ffi
fl
fi
fi
fl
ff
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
 bene tted the elites who own and operate the media agencies. In the 2023 Court news cycle,
mainstream media outlets routinely ran articles that read like doomsday scenarios when a
purportedly conservative decision was rendered, and then when a “liberal” decision was
handed out, all but a handful of known “conservative outlets” pared what it seemed they ought
to have considered a victory with claims that the rulings aren’t enough to stop the big scary
unstoppable red tide that is going to eat everything like a blob unless the blue team wins every
race. The red team’s corporate media wing of the Party plays by roughly the same gameplan,
and ironically or hypocritically the blue team’s media division points out in Red while failing to
recognize the same or near-enough at home at Blue.

“Never badder than bad 'cause the brother is madder than mad,

At the fact it's corrupt like a senator.”

- Public Enemy, Bring the Noise

How civilians have not recognized the folly of the situation is the real story, because if
somebody were paying attention, the inconsistencies and errors would be transparent across
platforms and outlets. The mala des intent, the mens rea is clearly present, or if not so
extreme then willful ignorance plainly in the modus operandi. Indeed, the terms
“misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation” became trite and cliche roughly as soon
as the Biden administration used them to classify political threat actors online, but those
concepts are very real threats in the online environment. In some cases, it seems people have
been misled to forgot to look out their window; rather, they prefer to think the weather is
catastrophic because that is what viral media algorithms pushed into their feeds. That public
schools are a known miserable failure, generally speaking, and that the public agencies of
government are mainly understood to be fatty, ine cient, slow-moving, dinosaurs, so to speak
— these are two sides of the same coin, and the edge between them is distrust in public
institutions and agents. The irony or hypocrisy is the general failure to recognize that education
is the only proven vehicle for class mobility, economic expansion, and positively dynamic
quality of life. That people would distrust education, whether as proxy for distrust of
government or because of inherent distrust in the message of formal education, is
counterintuitive and defeatist, to summarize. This self-limiting cognition at scale, across
individuals and groups, manifests into cultural, technological, social, and yes, governmental
stagnation, corruption, malfeasance, and overall declines in personal satisfaction across
diverse groups.

“You pay a toll to get to heaven, but on the road to Hell there’s none.

Get up, you’re asleep at the wheel!”

- Bloodhound Gang, Asleep at the Wheel

Our collective action problem extends around and through all of our nightmarish
problems as humans work with one another over time and space. If everybody were to shift the
status quo, everybody would bene t, but the current regime delivers consequences for
individuals who violate the status quo. There are often disincentives for innovation and
incentives for contentment or mediocrity. This is despite the fact that if the group were to adopt
some new approach to norms, how they are established, maintained and enforced, everybody
would bene t. Presently, the status quo among students is very much not putting one’s nose in
a book (or ebook or other media), or diligently going about acquiring cognitive and
philosophical skills as a higher purpose, pursuing a way of knowledge, a life of learning, and an
open mind to the world as it is, was, could or should be; recognizing unions and intersections,
mutual exclusivity, independence, complements, disjoint sets, subsets, empty sets, discrete
and continuous, real and imaginary variable objects in meta cognitive sample space. Instead,
the status quo is more automatic, less active, groupthink-ish, don’t-rock-the-boatism.

fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
 “When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school,

It’s a wonder I can think at all,

And though my lack of education hasn’t hurt me none,

I can read the writing on the wall.”

- Paul Simon, Kodachrome

On the face of descriptions in all available media — conservative, liberal, independent,

libertarian, public, private, local, regional, national, international — the American student has
got herself/himself into a funk, a slump of limited range imagination, con ating the possible
with the probable, and making inside-out, upside-down, sideways, illegible drivilish demands.
At occasion the brood hoard has taken liberty to distribute mob tortfeasor justice upon
academics — a trendy “educated” behavior that gained some favor in corporate Human
Resources departments. The story is not that the average student is a protestor shouting down
a guest speaker, but maybe at Evergreen that has been the story. Aside from Evergreen, there
are some very squeaky wheels among all the cogs matriculating in the Diag, Grove, Yard and
where else, and those loudmouths become the voice of the students because the average
student either agrees with the activists silently, has not made up his/her mind, or disagrees
silently. In other words, the students do not police themselves even as students attempt to
police the other student and elder population around them. Then, much like how the average
Muslim remained silent in the face of rare but known extremist rhetoric, leading to rises in
terrorism, the American college became infertile ground for a reasonable time, place, and
manner standard First Amendment construction to take root. Some opinions and ideas were
somehow more moral or appropriate, or less inappropriate, but the parameters and
methodologies were absent in the matter of how those groundrules formed among the “Woke”
clan, and how such a tribe could reasonably expect all other tribes to adopt the Woke way of
life when it stood on no more solid ground than other competitor ontological and
epistemological frameworks.

That members of some groups would receive special privileges or status is not
inherently adversarial to the cause of universal human rights, but there would be some
expiration clause or laches for a trial identitarian promotion regime, else it could not be argued
that universal human rights were as enumerated. The college admissions cases in 2022
explicated that principle. The Dobbs decision further triangulated how the Court, and therefore
the society for the foreseeable future, will approach sensitive matters of life and death. On the
Dobbs case, there were several arguments available upon which a reasonable court could have
likewise reversed a Roe decision. That there are other family members involved in the process
of bringing a life into the world, reproduction which is what the act of sexual intercourse is, or
that the fertilized egg contains a single cell of a man who may not oblige to terminating that
which is of him yet is temporarily possessed by the female, an arrangement neither had power
to negotiate terms over but nonetheless engaged in the act (in virtually every case, which is
what the law mostly deals with). Family or household members and potential fathers would
have standing in contests to abortion rights as compared to many activist protesters or the
journalists who platform them, those who are not materially a ected by the law but instead feel
themselves connected to others who do or do not desire abortions. Standing is not required in
the “court” of public opinion, but if the discussion is about law, then to invoke standing is not
o -limits.

An orgy of online viral media portrays apocalyptic futures where science ction comes
to life, but those same writers put on these airs ignoring that they work for companies or are
embedded in an industry that has brought Fahrenheit 451 and 1984 to life, among other
harbinger bestsellers of the 20th century. In a world so imbalanced, misguided, led astray,
willfully negligent, and most importantly inconsistent, there is little rationale available that would
compel a public governing body, or branch thereof, to sustain ad hoc remedies to problems
ff
ff
fl
fi
 which have shown partial and conditional resistance to the intervention, revealing complex
matrices of factors — analysis of which shows varied, dynamic, personalized, local, and
moreover holistic remedies would better suit a large, diverse population like the United States
of America, or for that matter, the world. Considering as broad and deep a set of facts, axioms,
theorems, precepts, principles, and postulates as possible, a learned judiciary ought to dismiss
policy that was not only controversial but also ine ective and only meant to be a temporary
bridge in our collective pursuit of universal sovereign equality.

“Don't let them mold your mind, they want to control mankind,

Seems like their only intention is to exploit the earth,

And you trust in their deceit, your mind causes your defeat,

And so you become an invention to distort this earth,

Propaganda and lies, is a plague in our lives,

How much more victimized, before we realize (hey),

It's mind control, mind control,

Corruption of your thoughts (yeah), destruction of your soul,

Mind control, it's mind control, corruption of your thoughts,

Destruction of your soul,

Ooh grand master, let the people go,

You put them in total confusion, to downs-troy their soul,

For they practice what you preach,

So they're always in your reach,

Hi-tech slavery in these days, it's mind control,

They'll make it attractive, to get man distracted,

Corrupting your (soul),

Polluting your (soul),

Destroying (your soul, mind control).”

- Stephen Marley, Mind Control

The new version of equity over classic equality cannot hold broadly in law in part
because equality rather than equity (of this newer meaning not of an English common law
etymology) is a hallmark of justice explicated in statutes and scholarly texts. Imagine if
sovereign equality among nations morphed into sovereign equity. In other words, prior colonies
and otherwise exploited or victimized states could violate provisions of international law that
historically dominant countries would be held to. This is, in a sense, an explanation for why
USA can be the cause of more civilian deaths than the Holocaust, albeit stretched out over
decades and across multiple peoples. Nearly all the people of the US originated from
elsewhere; many claim their ancestors were persecuted prior to emigration. The New World
then nds itself justi ed in bending and breaking rules of international order so long as the New
World can feel itself champion of the New Word Order, or away from Old World practices. The
New World’s people would qualify for equity according to the model, and thus the New World
could hold Old World a liates to di erent standards, possibly perpetrate harm or abuse
against Old World people while claiming victimhood and self-defense. Considering the world
stage, it’s not inconceivable that individuals found themselves on that stage, amongst those
other players, and then adopted macro-level characteristics and strategies for use at micro-
levels. It’s worth considering that this is an e ect of the wars overseas. Think about it:
fetishization of children, scantily clad women in every screen, sex as currency, pornography,
transgenderism, indulgent drug and alcohol misuses — these are all both prominent parts of
American and Western culture and they are completely anti-Islamic. Coincidentally, pork is the
cheapest animal protein at the supermarket. Of course there are market, social, and cultural
forces at play, but the market requires a legal order, and the culture of the democratic society
should be re ected in policy. Is it such a stretch to think that the $20trillion, 20 year war that
just ended could have changed the face of our culture, scarred our consciousness, and most
fi
fl
fi
ffi
ff
ff
ff
importantly just left people ready to ght on cue? That the public is generally supportive of the
military does not preclude the possibility that the government has persuaded the public via its
messaging and coercive apparatus.

“Why don’t we do it in the road?”

- The Beatles, Why Don’t We Do It in the Road?

People doin it in the road all over the information superhighway. It does not paint a
picture of erudite civility. Millions of people sharing their most private intimate moments with
the public, and generally at no fee for the user. There cannot be much money in it, which is in
some sense comforting, that these people would just be so committed to their beliefs that they
would post extraordinarily sensitive content without signi cant remuneration. Of course, there
is some coercion in the broader industry, and one cannot help but consider the act of making
pornography as an act of desperation. It is prostitution, the transaction legalized by its public
display on video. Though Latin is a dead language, it is rather amusing that people have
misunderstood the act which ought always be held only in camera would then be captured on
camera and broadcast publicly, if only for individuals consenting to view.

“Can you practice what you preach?”

- Black Eyed Peas, Where Is the Love?

The Supreme Court of the United States of America held ignorance is bliss in Lockner v.
New York. The opinion was such a misguided reading of the Constitution that one should
question whether the Justices were bribed. On the other hand, it was probably just the next in
a series of blunders that began long before and still has not ended: Dred Scott v. Sanford
(1857), Civil Rights Cases (1883), Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), Lockner v. New York (1905),
Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918), Buck v. Bell (1927), Korematsu v. US (1944), Bowers v. Hardwick
(1986), Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker (2008), Citizens United v. FEC (2010), and more. Lockner
may have given the American culture its “love it or leave it” response to complaints about the
country, government, and culture. If nding a new job is the solution to labor abuse and
exploitation, then nding a new country is probably also the answer to dealing with a corrupt
country whose government agents abuse citizens. That does not make sense, but neither did
Lockner. If there had been legitimate legal logic and compelling State reason for the majority
opinion in Lockner, it may have been the same foundational distortion in American law that led
to the Comity Clause not being read to imply all citizens of the US enjoy all and equal rights as
one another, in each and all states.

The plain meaning of the Comity Clause, to a reader who has not attended an American
Bar Association accredited law school, seems to demand equal treatment of American citizens
regardless of their location in the United States. If the Court read only the text and did not read
meaning into that text from outside sources including any annotations (nothing but the text),
the straightforward approach would preclude some States’ rights to de ne and apply laws
locally, a purported tenet of federalism. Not to worry, though, crafty legislation and big court
decisions could easily avoid the worst cases and give e ect to a coherent, consistent,
transparent system of individual rights for citizens of a nation as a whole. Consider marijuana
rights, for example. One state sentences to prison while another allows free production,
transport, sale, purchase, and consumption. Citizens in each state are American, but they in no
way enjoy equal rights and privileges per marijuana. Just as an employee may nd other work if
the job conditions are unsuitable — whatever those conditions may entail — so too may a
citizen relocate to another state if the conditions in their state are inadequate. Are these not
similar situations at di erent scales? But just as Lockner did not tend to the central question of
emergent rights among laborers, the current model of States’ rights fails to address emergent
and extant issues of civil rights, particularly that to privacy. Personal drug use is more private
fi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
than a medical procedure in that there are no third parties present, and the use is not
documented unless, that is, police or some other agent makes a document.

“Whatchya think all the guns is for?”

- Notorious B.I.G., Warning

At the end of the argument, there is a man or woman with tools to enforce their opinion.
As history is written by the winners, so too are the most heavily armed in the greatest position
of power, regardless of the merits of their argument. Similar to the situation in American courts,
where cases are tried on the costs, not the merits, the same can be said of elections — that
the big budget wins, and then the winner does the bidding of those with the deepest pockets.
It is a slipper slope, indeed. Is violence in the USA socialized aggression, due in part to the wild
history and ongoing military culture? It is fair to say American culture is a warring culture today
because casualties domestically and abroad exceed normal boundaries. Thus, it is reasonable
to infer the domestic and foreign behaviors resemble one another; that micro-level individual
violence is unavoidable given macro-scale aggression (belligerence, threat and use of violence
internationally, intervention in sovereign foreign state a airs, material support for clandestine
paramilitary activities that threaten legitimate governments, unlawful presence of active duty
US armed service people who conduct o cial military business in con ict with domestic laws
in foreign jurisdictions), and vice versa. Americans should consider it is probably not
inconsequential that killing is not generally considered immoral, but rather that morality can be
negotiated based on who is killed, where, and by whom. Ah, but then the walls really come
crumbling down, don’t they?

“A man drives a plane into the Chrysler Building.”

Soul Coughing, Is Chicago, Is Not Chicago (1994)

Trade o s. Oil brings the food to the table far away, but too much smoke seems like it
might make farming much more di cult later. Genetically modi ed crops improve yields, but
there is suspicion over safety of the foods themselves. There is con rmed toxicity of chemicals
like Roundup with which some GMOs are intended to pair. 9/11/2001 in New York one day,
China’s ascension to the World Trade Organization the next; well, the next week anyway.
Humans destroy, consume, and alter natural habitats for their survival and convenience,
pushing other species out or to extinction. One team wins while the other loses.

Lay battered and bruised,

Did we win or did we lose?

There are all kinds of games, but people seem to like those win/lose outcomes.
Whether coincidental or intentional, when one individual or group loses something, other
individuals or groups may gain something. Whereas competitive or cooperative means could
sustain innovation and continuous improvement, the ends should remain cooperative rather
than competitive, else collective action problems are more likely to result.

Whose views we choose

Will determine which crews to refuse,
Whose indoor shoes to excuse,
Whose news and muse ensues,
Whom reviews abuse and accuse,
With whom who is confused,
Which taboos jostle loose screws,
Or light short fuse,
ff
ffi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
fl
 Who’s in & out of queues,
Which clues to pursue & upon which to snooze.

Access to information about markets is helpful…so long as it’s timely. By the time
Cramer is mad about something on CNBC, too often, the run is already up. The media
attention garners mass consumption to sustain and arti cially rise the stock price which, too
often, falls considerably within weeks of promotional coverage on news TV. If Porter’s 5 Forces
were observable in all markets, maybe then information could be leveraged in a competitive
environment where merit and quality win out over nancial leverage and social politics. But
Porter’s Five Forces do not show up when providers of labor services intend to negotiate a
contract with clients; that is, employees generally cannot negotiate any terms with employers
despite there being a mutual transaction to satisfy reciprocal needs for employment income on
one side and labor on the other. Likewise, individual consumers (natural persons) generally
have no bargaining power in the supermarket, mall, online, in capital or nancial markets,
anywhere they spend money. If knowledge were power — like the 1980s and 90s after school
PSAs told viewers — then one would expect some proportional relationship between one’s
power (e.g. status, position, rank) and one’s observable possession of knowledge ranging from
intangible, abstract bits of trivia to more ad hoc pursuits. There is insu cient evidence to
conclude that knowledge can be leveraged as power in any marketplace such that suppliers
and consumers may use it as bargaining tool unless those participants are corporate sellers/
buyers or extraordinarily wealthy individuals.

“We all are one, we are the same person,

I'll be you, you'll be me (Oh, yeah),

We all are one, same universal world,

I'll be you, you'll be me,

No matter where we are born,

We are human beings,

The same chemistry,

Where emotions and feelings,

All corresponding in love,

Compatible.”

- Jimmy Cli , We All Are One

As people go out into the world each day, no matter where they are, they generally have
a few similar objectives: get enough money to provide food, shelter, clothes, sanitation,
transportation, education, hopefully some more frivolous purchases, entertainment, and nally
savings. These pursuits prove far too di cult for nearly everybody in the human population. An
economist from the Ludwig Von Mises Institute once quoted somebody from Austria or
somewhere who talked about how economic orders presuppose legal orders; that is, if we are
going to have a market or any kind of functional economy, then we need to have a reasonably
strong legal system to ensure the stability and function of a few key components of the
economy, notably that (1) the currency is not volatile, (2) nancial institutions remain solvent, (3)
fraud remains out of the marketplace, (4) consumers rights are protected, (5) companies are
held to a high standard and not allowed to abuse, manipulate, monopolize, or harm a
competitive or otherwise functional economy, (6) business does not interfere with broader,
longer term human objectives on Earth (e.g. not too many or too few people, not too much
pollution, not too much or too little consumption to sustain quality of life). If people had these
assurances from their governments, one can reasonably infer their average quality of life would
improve so long as they undertook to put in the work over many years. Surely, some people
have all those guarantees and still more — they are called billionaires and corporate
executives. However, many people do not necessarily feel they have such support. Headlines
in the news over the past couple decades have shown plenty of cases establishing prima facie
ff
ffi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
 evidence that the average person does not have a legal structure within which they can feel
safe taking risks necessary to gain greater rewards. Thus, their quest for food, shelter, clothes,
sanitation, transportation, etcetera remains unful lled.

“Down there in the ghetto I grow,

Where su eration I once know (Ehya!),

Mummy an' daddy, all of we so poor,

We all had to sleep on the oor (Ehya!),

Storm it come, and it blow down mi door,

Mi have nail up mi window,

Mi shoes tear up, mi toe jus' a show,

Mi nuh know a where really wan' go,

Mummy jus' a bawl, "Poor, poor, poor,"

Mi cry, she say "Son, cry no more."

- Eek A Mouse, Ganja Smuggling

To have a legal order would be a truly remarkable thing. If everybody had a structured
economic environment with supports, oors and ceilings, boundaries, steps, and obviously no
glass ceilings because who wants to look up people’s skirts and pant legs on the oor above?
That is gross. Why would any architect ever make a glass ceiling? It seems like that is
obviously illegal, too, considering the above mentioned skirt problem. Alas, maybe the people
dismantled the structure out of rage, and perhaps the reason they lack supports today is
because they tore down the walls and blew the roof o that motherf——, but even if that were
fact, it would not abrogate the government’s responsibility to build up another, newer, better,
sturdier structure around the whole bunch of ingrates…a structure so great and big and grand
that none of them could ever escape, and probably hardly anybody would ever gure out its
weak points since they would be getting maintained around the clock, like an actual structure.
See? The answers are right there in the language. It is okay to call it a “structure” — John
McWhorter said it’s okay that language changes sometimes — but if it is a structure now, then
there are going to be expert engineers and such technicians designing it, guring out which
materials to use, prototyping it if possible, building it, maintaining its upkeep such that it works
as well on day one billion as it did on day one.

“Kangaroo be stoned.

He’s guilty as the government.”

- Tool, The Pot

Ah, but the people who “dismantled structures” (burned the mother f—er down in 60s
lingo) and left everyone — themselves, their opposition, and the una liated — unhoused did
not think of what would happen after they defeated their foe. How cliche. Hence, back to
school we go like Billy Madison, a comedy but kind of an ugly one, too. Maybe if all the
freedom-loving people in this world just kind of left each other alone, and if they stopped
backbiting and gossiping and such, things could just sort of turn around. Alternatively, if courts
took on several First Amendment cases in the United States — the world’s most diverse large
population — this “conservative” turnaround could have some serious global impact that
ultimately relaxes the conversation and makes for more breathing room while we gure out how
to tackle the next gargantuan task. It might could just be that America still has something to tell
and show the world: aside from all the cuss words, murder tales, ass & titties, dead bodies
everywhere, the United States of America is a global leader in establishing case law (opinio
juris necessitatis) celebrating diversity of thought, of conscience, of religious faith, of mind, and
of freewill thereof.

You be you,
fi
ff
fi
fl
fl
fi
ff
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fl
 I will be me,
We may politely disagree,
But at that we can still eye to eye see
Between us Truth is also a mystery
We can talk about it or silently still be free
We can be opposites here but there be respectfully

The Quran 49:13 teaches of how tribes of people are on earth to live with and learn
from one another, yet somehow a complementary subset of Surah were selected ad hoc to the
exclusion of peaceful verses with the intent of constructing the entirety of Islam to reject
outsiders, nonbelievers, or believers of other faiths, as if even one word of continuous
prophecy could be removed without creating discontinuity in the prophecy as a whole.
Similarly, di erent Christians and their sects interpret and construct Biblical scripture out of
context in whatever order and manner suits their human desires. People use religion and the
law to justify war — which itself is a crime considering there is no mutual consent among
sovereign nations, and even if there were somehow that a contractual agreement were
negotiated and signed between two or more countries to engage in military con ict, the courts
in each respective country would be tied up for years over the issue of jurisdiction of foreign
agents operating ultra vires domestic constitutions. Any multilateral agreement to engage in
war would be summarily nulli ed by civil and human rights laws. A treaty to wage war and
destroy each other’s country would be immoral, silly and illegal, but it would be slightly more
legal and much more honest than the current situation. What is it all for? Tyranny of minor
di erences?

“Find the cost of freedom buried in the ground.”

- Crosby, Stills, and Nash

Whereas two decades and some tens of trillions of dollars were lost in wars throughout
the Muslim world following nine-eleven, so too were opportunities to live with and among other
people, to emerge victorious and unsullied from the depths of histories most terrifying
delusions. Learning loss. Instead of clans and tribes of villagers who stay up at night or hide in
dark spaces dreading invaders, humans have built up a world so far removed from nature that
one must stretch the mind rather far to associate trees and rocks and things with our consumer
goods. We live in a wonderful world of dynamic innovation, lifestyle diversity, and abundant
opportunity to succeed as a unique individual. Whereas historically di erences were more
threatening, today individualism can be a strength worked toward capitalizing on opportunities
— chances to do well that could be in higher supply if people got together and organized
themselves toward more collective goals while simultaneously also taking care of their personal
needs. In fact, if a social experiment at scale could take root and hold into the medium term,
there should be a strong likelihood that there exist mutually bene cial relationships. Instead of
a zero-sum, winner-take-all game, with a little more conscious e ort, populations could likely
discover symbiotic or synergistic ows back and forth between the individual and collective, in
around and among groups of individuals at scale. All of these interacting social, psychological,
and economic forces would probably have a magnifying e ect and turn the ywheel, so to
speak. More freedoms for individuals come from and lead to more capital which increases
likelihood of spending in a larger economy where more happiness, abundance, and quality of
life can be achieved with some trained and focused thinking. If only pockets and samples of
people could get behind keeping something else in mind all day, every day.

Back and forth over the line,

Lacking the patience to interpret the signs,
Who’ll remind consumers to rewind
& remember to be kind?
ff
ff
fi
fl
ff
ff
fi
ff
fl
fl
 We’re all at least a little intertwined,
So it’s best we got our goals aligned.
But then we can’t just do as we’re assigned,
And pay no never mind,
If it’s kind of maligned;
Rather, since we’re con ned to the grind,
Whether happily or disinclined,
It’s best to shine like divine,
Help redesign what was undermined,
Such that we may recombine,
Rise up the incline,
& not back down the decline.
fi
 Copycat

“Charades, pop skill,

Water hyacinth, named by a poet.

Imitation of life.

Like a koi in a frozen pond,

Like a gold sh in a bowl,

I don’t want to hear you cry.”

- R.E.M., Imitation of Life

Referencing the same principles considered in Countermand, foreign powers have been
inferring intent of media companies that may seek protection of copyrighted works in foreign
jurisdictions where piracy and counterfeiting have been more prevalent. Does the American
media cartel intend to inspire violence, advocate illicit drug abuse, promote fornication and
otherwise incite harm? Obviously, for a reasonable person familiar with American legal axioms,
cultural references, and notions of freedoms and liberties, the answer is no, the media
companies are exempt because they create ction or otherwise do not materially contribute to
violence or other crime, or that they are protected by capital and lawyers. However, another
person in a di erent country and culture may nd such rationalizations preposterous, and the
simplest conclusion may easily be to write o Warner, EMI, Sony, MGM, Universal, HBO,
Viacom, Fox and their crony a liates as Racketeering In uenced and Corrupt Organizations.
Criminal groups publishing criminal content, whether professional and artistic, are not entitled
to the same batch of rights as other good faith participants in the public discussion.

In Thai, the words for cuttle sh, squid, and octopus are all the same (ปลาห ก /blaa
muk/), which is ne so long as there is always a cue in the context of conversation to suggest
which one of the three is the object. Imagine calling a sh shop and asking for a kilogram of
cuttle sh, a half kilo of squid, and one octopus, but all three of those are the same word. This
linguistic example shows how sticky situations can arise when words fail to be exceedingly,
and indeed increasingly, precise in their ability to describe a material or immaterial thought in
minute detail. At some point, it seems people either forgot, or forgot to recall, that when one
calls this by that’s name, the likelihood of receivers deciphering the communication is
decreased. Sometimes con ating A with B is innocuous; sometimes lumping things together is
necessary to ensure e ciency; and then other times if one fails to split each discrete part aside
from the continuum of things adjacent and embedded within, then one fails to precisely
comprehend and communicate about the states and scales of matters.

Downloading infringing content was, and sometimes still is, con ated with unlawful
behavior. Much like tissues are called Kleenex, inline skates called Rollerblades, and some
people call all zzy drinks “Coke”, any and all unauthorized reproduction, distribution, and
communication to the public of copyrighted works has been confused with legally-actionable
infringement even as the law failed to support the approach. Speci c cases failed on various
points, like BitTorrent lawsuits and improper joinder, but there are broader and more
fundamental problems with levying nes and penalties against individual consumers of online
services. If the government and a ected parties are simply prosecuting and suing the most
convenient potential defendants, but if those defendants are not responsible for the network
systems that facilitate the improper transfer of les, then the supposedly aggrieved parties
have not made reasonable e orts at stopping the infringement at the root; instead, the prey on
low-hanging fruit which will never stop ripening on the vine that neither the rights-holder nor
government agencies could cut back at the root. Jurisdictional issues have interfered with such
online copyright cases — on the internet, where copyright is a rumor, where copyright went to
die, where copyright is little more than virtual reality.

fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
ffi
fl
ff
ffi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
fi
fl
มึ
 “Futures made of virtual insanity, now

Always seem to be governed by this love we have,

For useless twisting of our new technology,

Oh, now there is no sound,

For we all live underground.

And I’m thinking what a mess we’re in,

Hard to know where to begin.”

- Jamiroquai, Virtual Insanity

Schools in East Asia and elsewhere around the world have been using pirated software
on government computers for years because they cannot a ord to pay licensing fees. The
Business Software Alliance has decades of data in annual piracy reports suggesting the non-
English speaking, developing world outside of North America and Western Europe have been
enjoying severely discounted rates on operating systems and business software packages. Of
course, if the software companies had more reasonable pricing models, some of the piracy
could have been cut at the outset, but since the piracy actually enhances the monopoly
positions of the few major players in the market, there has been little incentive to intervene in a
market awash with products by Microsoft, IBM, Adobe, Oracle, Apple, Cisco and the like. Just
as Google reaps network e ects by tying in all its Suite of products which it provides to most
users free of charge, other major software companies entrench their brands in marketplaces
captured by pirate versions of their overpriced products. It is a pseudo-anticompetitive
practice. Meanwhile, back at the ranch schools in the USA, though, there is absence of
software like AutoCAD, SPSS, Illustrator, Photoshop, and even simple MS O ce installations
because the prices are outrageous.

Textbooks are missing throughout American schools — a problem that could be

mitigated by photocopying, but any conspicuous Xeroxing of instructional materials would
bring legal threats. Students in the very jurisdictions where the textbook authors live and write
are deprived of textbooks due to pricing whereas foreign students in other countries around
the world may enjoy those foreign textbooks because domestic enforcement agencies would
never take action against a school for doing everything in its power to provide education in
spite of nancial constraints. A government taking or acquiescing to legal action against a
government educational institution would be like cutting o one’s nose to spite one’s face. Still,
that’s apparently how American lawyers roll. Anything for a buck. Sue a grandma. Divorce your
son and daughter. Put teachers out on the street. Take away kids’ Mathematica and MATLab
software. Steal a pension or two to pay for copyright infringement nes against individuals
responsible for providing pirated materials to underserved students. And then never actually
revisit another solution to the grave problem of there being no textbooks or instructional
software available in public schools.

One the one hand, American kids — and moreover individualists — are somehow
expected to basically never copy others. Rugged individualism and personal responsibility
taken to extremes leads to the idea that intellectual space is nite in supply, and that there is a
system of private property for thoughts, feelings, words, styles, personalities, air, etc. If
somebody else does it, it’s o -limits, and if somebody did it a while back but doesn’t do it now,
it’s old and still o -limits. Monopolies over “intellectual property” apparently never expire. Fads,
chewing-gum pop music, fast junk fashion, and decade-culture result from the obsession with
new, di erent, unique but also temporary and super cial meaning. On the other hand, those
same kids are expected to never question laws, customs, and cultural rules for themselves,
never seek to prove and validate from rst-principles widely-held beliefs, only to have blind
faith in the system and to suppress scrutiny or alternative ideas. To imitate and not to copy,
and to ignore that the words are synonyms — that is the challenge.

ff
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
ffi
fl
 Cultural media markets in the English-speaking world are enormous. Consumers come
up o hundreds of billions of dollars annually for entertainment media, events, and
merchandise. Despite the aggregate volume of those markets, new entrants face mostly
insurmountable barriers to entry, due mainly to cartel behavior among the major media
companies, but also due in no small part to market response to varied content. Whether part of
the War on Terror or natural market development, American and most English media follows
youth trends that are inherently pro table but super cial, hyper sexual, and shortsighted —
coincidentally antithetical to Islamic business principles. Whereas popular American music had
a forty year or longer tradition of protesting war and other injustice, and of promoting peace
and love, and of advocating togetherness among all peoples, somewhere in the early Afghan
and Iraqi Wars on Terror, there was a noticeable shift to bubble gum sexy rhythms on video.
Draw a throughline from Brittney, Christina, Mandy Moore, Pink, Shakira, Nicky Minaj, Katie
Perry, Cardi B, Taylor Swift, and their lot to Sam Smith’s raunchy live shows and Lil Nas X
doing the nudist hustle in a prison shower music video; it is then not hard to imagine by the
2030s some “groundbreaking artist” combining pornography and music video. Clicks it would
get. Revenues would soar. Would the art or musical audiences bene t from the music? That
depends on what people think music is; that is a moral question. The answer is “no”.

A partly manipulated market leads to artistic compromises among some performers and
exclusion of others; that exclusionary phenomenon may be another inconsistency among
individualists who talk about diversity, equity, and inclusion or personal liberties but in their
political practice and social rhetoric seek to exclude or erase pluralism from the mainstream. In
other words, it’s okay to be di erent, but if you’re too di erent, then you’ll be sent out where…
well, good luck, but you can’t stay in town. If you want to stay in the popular crowd out in
public, you’ll have to nd some minor variation on one of maybe a couple generally accepted
genres. Like Chomsky said, people are more easily controlled if there are rm boundaries of
acceptable discussion but lively debate within those boundaries. Consumer markets are easily
bilked and hypnotized ad in nitum if there are narrow parameters on what they may consume
conveniently and a ordably, but within those limits there are robust o erings of slightly varied
content.

“You window shopping, that’s all.”

- Hank Williams, Window Shopping

Kids in American schools live in a sort of permanent state of window shopping, then,
because they are aware that textbooks and academic software packages exist in this world,
and that other schools have these tools, but poorer American kids and schools are excluded
from the opportunities because they cannot (a) a ord to pay licensing fees, and (b) justify and
get away with mass copyright infringement. Wait, though. Those copyrights are owned by
companies that have not exactly done the best for the future. How many of the world’s top
publishers and software rms have been the subject of antitrust lawsuits? We can assume all
of them or nearly all, and then absence of a criminal record does not imply absence of criminal
behavior, so it is fair to assume today’s MNC copyright holders have unclean hands. Aside
from Sherman Act violations, however, there are moral issues relating to public order and
safety. While not all textbook publishers are subsidiary or partner with major entertainment
media companies, most of the big ones are, and the a liated industries have hitherto
demonstrated the worst forms of social deviance in their glori cation, sensationalization,
commercialization, and gratuitous exploitation of drugs, violence, sexuality, and all manner of
behavior diametrically opposed to normative ethics and conventional religious moral reasoning.

“I am gross and perverted,

I'm obsessed 'n deranged,

ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
fi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
 I have existed for years,

But very little has changed,

I'm the tool of the government,

And industry too,

For I am destined to rule,

And regulate you,

I may be vile and pernicious,

But you can't look away,

I make you think I'm delicious,

With the stu that I say.

I'm the best you can get.

Have you guessed me, yet?

I'm the slime oozin' out,

From your TV set.”

- Frank Zappa, I’m the Ooze

Here is one of those unauthorized lines of thinking that never makes its way to the
mainstream discussion: School kids are misled and run through mental criminal Olympics every
day in the music and media on their devices, made available by companies whose business
also intersects with education (i.e. Google Chromebooks or Apple iPads used to access
murder rap and twerking videos instead of instructional resources for 10th grade math class).
Then the schools and their employees have to pay mind to those same companies on matters
of copyright? The government protects interests of companies that purvey materials which
advocate directly and indirectly the very same behavior that the government seeks to
eradicate? That makes very little sense, but at scale across a population such freedoms to
speak and make media are understandable so long as there is some exibility and
consideration on the part of the purveyor of what would have been considered obscene,
heretical, sacrilegious, and otherwise intolerable materials until about fteen minutes ago. In
other words, commercial infringement remains illegal, but there shall be a blanket exclusion to
copyright within the domain of education, or at least within Title I schools. This would be what
the kids call “equity” today if the term equity had not been lassoed and choked of its fuller
potential.

Chilling e ects were indirect.

A few randoms’ lives wrecked
When the owner came to collect,
When the law moved to protect.
But if the situation were correct,
Crimes & punishments would re ect
Some proportion a reasonable person would expect;
Instead, whether by defect or neglect,
Incorrect specs go unchecked in all sects.
People never had option to directly select
What legal architecture the government erects,
Nor did the people have power to object,
To elect another and this one reject.
Seems plenty feel the one they got ain’t quite circumspect.
Such a situation can only result in mutual disrespect,
Unless each shall recollect the need to connect,
To recognize what words do and don’t a ect,
That it’s usually unhelpful to dissect, de ect, or misdirect.
As parties detect a disconnect,
ff
ff
fl
fl
ff
fl
fi
From frequencies that once overlapped but now only partially intersect,
Negotiations shift out of phase,
Until they break the daze,
Adjust their gaze,
Appraise the situation & utter a phrase,
Move on some other potential plays,
Since there are about a billion ways
To navigate this maze.
 Monopoly Money

“Runaway train never going back

Wrong way on a one-way track

Seems like I should be getting somewhere

Somehow I'm neither here nor there”

- Soul Asylum, Runaway Train

In 1985’s Runaway Train, Jon Voight rode atop — you guessed it — a runaway train as it
barreled into certain disaster. Voight’s escaped convict “Manny” character intended to end his
life rather than face capture and return to prison. If there were any essence of victory in his
failed escape attempt, Manny’s would have been the associate warden he managed to take
with him to their death o the rails. One could glean various metaphors from the scene. In
2023, at least one of the dreary analogies relates to our current situation with the money. What
is it? What is it worth? Where does it come from? How much is there? How much can or
should there be?

Neurochemical, electrical, symmetrical, diametrical,

Impossibly dialectical:
Funny money,
Crummy, bloody scummy money,
Mummy’s Sonny’s honey money.
Could have been a thought
That paid for goods & services we bought.
Could have been mere thoughts people sought,
Rather than over scraps of paper or gold that they fought.
To have nought in thought is out of something else wrought,
As compared to the distraught rot the lot of snots taught the tots,
What begot them that day they nally got caught,
Passing hypothetical, heretical as theoretical,
Waxing poetical on matters evangelical to medical.
Unethical as all Hell but try to them that tell.
Parenthetical: matters $ economical utilize the arithmetical,
But nonsensical are the more profound numericals.
That nancials are nontechnical is commonsensical,
Among nonpolitical, empirical, mathematical analyticals.
Power surges geometrical, spherical, cyclical,
Like blood through the ventricle.

Money started out rational enough: precious metals or other coveted objects that could
store value and mediate exchange without barter. Paper money was more e cient and allowed
for expansion of the supply beyond the scales of prior mechanisms. The Gold Standard or
Bimetallic systems made sense given the limitations of the times. Fiat currency regimes were
natural outgrowths of their predecessor systems considering the need of sovereign nations to
more precisely tailor their money supplies and valuations. Then Modern Monetary Theory and
crypto hit like a rocket to the aw in the Death Star. Proof is in the crashes, the uncertainty, the
volatility, the imbalances, the corruption, the nance and tech bro culture, the gaudy pornstar
style all over the tellie, the fetishization of material wealth and denigration of conventional
morality, among other contemporary ills. While the fruit took thousands of years to ripen and
then rot on the branch, the roots of our money problems start back at the beginning of the
idolatry. Original people could have traded smiles, words, emotions, stories, and essentially
fi
ff
fl
fi
fi
ffi
parts of themselves as payment; they could have changed and adapted to others’ ways of life
as repayment for goods or services; a great mental and social psychological transformation
could have began instead of legacies of avarice, hoarding, psychosis and sociopathy in
matters of money and wealth.

“Can't blame your neighbor (No), can't blame your friends (No)

Can't blame politicians when you do nothing to help the situation,

To make the world a better place,

For the oncoming generations (Yeah),

We are borderline destruction,

Too much dam corruption,

Still some don't even care (Still don't care).”

- Morgan Heritage, Bedrock

There were many possible mediums of exchange, including barter of other goods and
services. Paper and digital money clearly have competitive advantages against barter
considering problems of physical proximity to sellers in a globalized market economy, but there
is no evidence that humans are so unintuitive and poorly constructed that they could not hold
together some sort of immaterial or lesser material scheme of payments.

“Just because you don’t believe that I want to dance,

Don’t mean that I don’t want to.”

- The Gap Band, Oops Upside Your Head

There is evidence, of course, that humans today are signi cantly unwilling to engage in
an abstract, emotional, otherwise psychological or spiritual system of payments, but we cannot
discount their millennia of experience in our material world, which is roughly diametrically
opposed to suggestions of intangible workarounds or metaphysical arrangements as
substitutes for money. The concept is laughable, but one should bear in mind that it is only
laughable because the long trajectory of our path to the present place and time seems too
great a void to stretch a hand across in search of something di erent. In other words, just
because people in an adverse population think it is impossible does not necessarily preclude
its possibility given a willing population.

“We've all seen a man at the liquor store beggin' for your change,

The hair on his face is dirty, dread-locked, and full of mange,

He asks a man for what he could spare, with shame in his eyes,

"Get a job you fucking slob, " is all he replies.

God forbid you ever had to walk a mile in his shoes,

'Cause then you really might know what it's like to sing the blues.”

- Everlast, What It’s Like

The $1.7 million dollar toilet in San Fran, million dollar homeless apartments in LA,
obscene costs and fees, consulting, management, permits, reviews, etc. The story is the same
to get a higher education. There are likely high and potentially runaway costs in virtually any
litigation, with ine ciencies preventing access to justice and otherwise complicating all matters
legal and government. Mostly because of clumsy, deadweight procedures & bureaucracy that
drag progress to a snail’s pace or halt for all but the few who have cash ow enough to outlast
the gauntlet of costs. Aside from poor design, just about any criticism of personnel is a fair
conclusion — corruption, malfeasance, sel shness, heartlessness, ignorance, stupidity, the
agency problem. Whatever the bug, a system update is urgently required. Just like owners &
operators of computers must download and install operating system updates to ensure
ffi
fi
ff
fi
fl
 continued protection and compatibility, so too must civilians and their representative o cials
debug, update, and upgrade legal systems.

Rats quit the race & set up shop in a market,

Where it seems they forgot there’s no oor under the carpet,
No ceiling where they’ve drawn a target.
Then came a crash,
And in a ash,
There was a clash over cash.
Some took it and dashed.
Others treated it like trash,
Burned it & laughed at the ash,
Rat nk took a cache from the stash,
And threw a giant bash.
Dirty rats lashed out & fought with cash,
Bashed others with it, used $ to smash & slash.
Like lawyers, the di erence between winner and second,
Is how much money A used against B as a weapon.
Now who does that money ght threaten?
Those with or without many possessions?
Throw money at it to increase deception,
Manipulate perceptions, or coerce confessions.
In this Rat Market, “Money makes the world go round” ain’t just an expression.
Tap outs are concessions.
Upon conclusion of these Rat Market trials,
The winners pick up the piles,
Smile for miles back to their domiciles,
Only to emerge after a while still more hostile.

To be sure, generally powerless over their educational system are kids, teachers,
administrators, district personnel, and nearly all parents. This is not because of some naughty
content that slips through some censors’ lter and unfortunately ends up in a library; it’s not
because history teachers started taking too many pop culture lessons to their classrooms; it’s
not because the adults don’t vote and petition for higher wages, for more funding, for new and
updated property and equipment; it’s not because there is su cient evidence suggesting
increased funding does not produce better student and community outcomes; rather, it is
increasingly apparent that the people most directly impacted by education spending have no
signi cant in uence on their inputs into those systems because public budgets are prioritized
in capitol buildings and executive o ces under the mildly coercive powers of lobbyists and big
business interests.

“I want to be a lawyer,

Doctor or professor.

A member of the UMC.

I want an air conditioner,

Cottage on the river,

And all the money I can see.

I want to drive a Lincoln,

Spend my evenings drinking

The very best burgundy.

I want a yacht for sailing,

fi
fi
fl
fl
ff
fi
ffi
fl
fi
ffi
ffi
 Private eye for tailing

My wife if she's a bit too free.

I've been told ever since a boy

that's what one aught to be:

A part of the UMC.

I want a pool to swim in,

Fancy suits to dress in,

Some stock in GM and GE,

An o ce in the city,

Secretary pretty,

Who'll take dictation on my knee.

I want a paid vacation,

Don't want to have to ration

A thing with anyone but me,

And if there's war or famine,

Promise I'll examine

The details if they're on TV.

I'll pretend to be liberal but I'll still support the GOP,

As part of the UMC.”

- Bob Seger, UMC (Upper Middle Class)

Corporate leadership can a ord to send their kids to private school or move to a district
with high enough property taxes to pay for high quality education. The upper middle and upper
classes do not have to concern themselves with the plight of low-income students in struggling
schools. Social media activists and loud mouthed, opinionated social justice warriors alongside
woke mobsters have compelled speech under threat of exclusionary penalty in their purported
mission for equity. Indeed, they have enforced some sort of voodoo equitable estoppel upon
millions of Americans who dare not utter a word about race or gender out of fear of
employment exclusion. Corporate leadership seized on marketing opportunities, helped
sensationalize tragedy and spun a hand-picked series of horrendous incidents into a lifestyle
brand that puts both education and civilized behavior in the crosshairs of a cultural revolution
e ort.

Education is a perfect foil for convergent economic, social, cultural, civil and political
threats — but not just bodies lling classrooms. We need high quality education that will
prepare citizens for a new, connected, globalized world. Whether we like that the world is like
this or not, we must accept it requires cultural and economic change, and we must then make
good faith e orts at bringing that future, better world into existence. Otherwise, we fail at our
ethical obligations; we fail at our moral convictions; we fail to make a life of meaningful
struggle; we fail to embrace our kinder, more productive potentials. You mostly get what you
pay for — sometimes you get a helluva bargain, sometimes you just get something cheap and
easy that is guaranteed not to last — but then sometimes you get ripped o too.

“Can’t forget, we only get what we give.”

- New Radicals, You Get What You Give

Digital dollars for subsidized rent and supplemental health insurance for teachers.
Digital currencies for subsidized goods and services, like EBT cards for expenses in select
categories, all tax free as part of compensations for public employees. Like military pay, digital
dollars can be for room and board, education, child care, medical expenses including dental,
and other such quality of life costs. Digital dollars can be approved for use in selected
categories of goods or services, fully supported by the Treasury and Federal Reserve Joint
ff
ffi
ff
fi
ff
ff
 Strategic Partnership (JSP). Private sector participation in the digital dollar project by o ering
corporate tax incentives for partitioning compensation packages with a company salary plus
digitized dollar expenses. Amounts companies pay out to employees for digital dollar expenses
count toward tax deductions since the company can save the JSP money.

No income tax for teachers. Incentivize participation in K12 education by o ering tax
breaks since districts can’t seem to negotiate reasonably higher wages at the state level.
Teachers are notoriously in shortage, especially in critical need areas like STEM, special Ed,
and ESOL. Potential teachers who hold degrees in those shortage areas have other
opportunities in the job market. Schools can’t compete with every employer, but they could be
more competitive employers with tax incentives since, again, apparently legislatures cannot
muster the goodwill to pay teachers appropriately — particularly in STEM subjects that are
more critically important for personal and macroeconomic wellbeing than other subjects.

No need to le taxes for expats making less than the foreign earned income exclusion
without US income; join every other country but Eritrea on not requiring expats to le for
foreign income. Put the IRS to work: they tell me how much I owe or get back, and if I think
that is wrong, I can contest it, but I get penalized if I lose the appeal. They ought not require
individuals to le complicated series of documents, and then it turns out the IRS already knows
how much the individual owes; like they were just testing people or entrapping them. On a
related note, make entrapment illegal procedure. Consider adopting some provisions of Islamic
criminal procedure codes to protect suspects’ privacy and other rights and freedoms; allow
judges some oversight in preliminary stages of investigations, like Civil Continental Law; cut
court dockets by 90% by raising the evidentiary standards to re ect what is a “reasonable
doubt” by scienti c standards.

“Yes, the strong get smart

While the weak ones fade.

Empty pockets don't ever make the grade (ooh).”

- Blood Sweat & Tears, God Bless The Child

Schools could probably also start paying quite a lot more for STEM teachers, and that
would succeed in lling vacancies across the country, but districts can only a ord to pay more
if the federal government pays educators directly for their valuable service in maintenance of
the country’s most valuable assets: human ingenuity and entrepreneurship. Until teachers are
paid adequately for their service, without which the nation would collapse in but a few years,
disbelief of the Purseholders is unavoidable regardless of all their grandstanding and
gladhanding about how much they believe education is important, or whatever bunch of half-
truths & failures to follow through seems to be the standard fodder.

“Fuck smiley glad-hands with hidden agendas.”

- Tool, Ænema

Like the Beatles said in Ticket to Ride, “She’s got a ticket to ride, but she don’t care.”
School’s the ticket. Until that ticket’s value is more universally recognized, we are likely to
muddle around in circles, grasping in the darkness for solutions to problems that cannot be
solved absent that high esteem for education, educators, and their knowledge.

“Money

It's a crime

Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie

Money

So they say

fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
ff
fi
ff
ff
 Is the root of all evil today

But if you ask for a rise

It's no surprise that they're giving none away”

- Pink Floyd, Money

SVB demonstrated disconnect between individual and collective. Sure, bankers are
cyber crooks. Tech bros setup the next bailout backlash, but those are just prominent gures
responsible for losses that a ect more average people than the aristocracy. The government’s
money men save their own and leave the rest to the wolves.

“Now you get what you want,

Do you want more?”

- Bob Marley, Want More

Cyber crashes and federal erasure of balance sheet obligations show new money rules.
Yet central authorities continue acting as if it were the 80s, extorting average people for taxes,
nes and costs, as if the government has to collect the very money it creates. Despite
developments since Breton Woods, in spite of FOREX volatility, long after the monetary
situation changed with crypto, Treasury and Central Bank o cials refuse to acknowledge the
Emperor has no clothes.

“We gon’ save dat money.”

- Lil Dicky, $ave Dat Money

Take the hundred trillion or however many dollars have been spent on militarization,
active war between and within states, and in the preparation for war. Spend that money on
value added transactions rather than negatives or double negatives. Value is subtracted when
a product is manufactured which will never be used for its purpose, and let us hope most of
the worlds arms are never used, in part because value is subtracted twice when the weapons
are used. Once or more times in the design, manufacture, and deployment of goods that
destroy humans and tangible assets, and then again in the rebuilding of assets which, let’s be
honest, might only be destroyed again in the future, absent serious changes in hearts and
minds of men. Lost human lives and their unful lled potential are irretrievable; the cost is
unde ned, possibly in nite given that life of the person who would have cured cancer or
something like that was cut short.

“But if you want money from people with minds that hate,

All I can tell you is buddy you have to wait.”

- The Beatles, Revolution

And those who fund, legalize, enact war & mass incarceration have minds that hate.

More they possess, yet they are satis ed less.

Some enjoy leisure while others stress.
Money is such a mess,
So often the cause of distress.
Some unimpressed unless money is in excess.
But what is it? Few can actually express.
Court & school out to recess,
Nevertheless, students & judges still nesse,
Lies they’ll never confess or suppress,
Despite passionate requests to address lack of progress toward collective success,
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
 In imaginary contests of checkers players obsess is actually chess.
Best they can do is repress,
Facts as they coalesce,
And uoresce the largesse,
Egress then things the press tries to repress,
Thoughts, emotions, and behaviors that invariably oppress,
Citizens who can’t be expected to acquiesce,
As more profess what they sense and digest:
That against those who transgress, they have no redress.
fl
 Tug of War

“And when the broken hearted people living in the world agree,

There will be an answer, let it be.

For though they may be parted, there is still a chance that they will see,

There will be an answer, let it be.”

- The Beatles, Let It Be

Individual identities today are more closely tied to race and gender than previous
generations, but the circumstances within which our diverse population live together are better
than they were for those past generations. John Q Public almost certainly distrusts the
government today, or if he doesn’t today then just wait until the Presidency changes political
parties, and he probably will by then; meanwhile, Jane W Public distrusts the opposite party.
With roughly half the population distrusting the public agencies and agents nearly all the time,
it certainly is di cult for a public body to gain su cient democratic support. Then, sometimes
the majority is wrong. Vermeule referenced the tyranny of democracy. Worse still, we have
witnessed a philosophical shift in the culture such that there are exceedingly few commonly
understood facts; that is, people have grown into adversarial individuals and factions whose
identities are tied to their being in con ict or competition with other rivals with whom they share
no common ground. Semantic drift and divergent senses of morality have been consequences
and causes of these social-psychological phenomena.

Distrust and rejection of education, its personnel, curricula, rules and routines may be a
function of distrust and rejection of government & its agents. Members of the public are
debatably traumatized by extrajudicial killings, false imprisonments, legacies of apartheid,
arbitrary arrest, excessive detention, taxation without representation, tyranny and despotism
from their governments and authorities. To be fair, governments and their agents are generally
untrustworthy, and people who work for the government have to accept that public persona,
leaving the citizenry with few options. Still, pushing away education accomplishes little other
than delaying progress by denying opportunities extant in pursuit of higher education.

“You've got yo' life, and got yo' health,

So quit procrastinating and push it yourself.

You've got to realize that the world's a test.

You can only do your best and let him do the rest.

You've got yo' life, and got yo' health,

So quit procrastinating.”

- OutKast featuring Cee-Lo, In Due Time

Maybe this idea that protests are likely to compel the government which can
successfully change policies and then reliably control behaviors of a few individuals — stop
mass shootings, for example…maybe that sort of thinking started in early childhood where
teachers and other adults are believed to control kids in classrooms rather than their controlling
themselves. Maybe the sense of powerlessness that inspires people to think of the government
as parent or deity, is a byproduct of a school system that operates on fear & intimidation,
where adults believe themselves solely responsible for kids’ behaviors. Schools: where people
with little to no work experience outside of schools model professional work behavior for kids
who have little to no other exposure against which to compare their teachers’ work culture. In
what other workplace in 2023 do grown adult peers call each other only by surnames? Why
aren’t teachers on rst-name bases with each other? That’s not professional in 2023, and kids
see it every day, then go to work and do the wrong thing.

ffi
fi
fl
ffi
 “I used to get mad at my school (No, I can't complain),

The teachers who taught me weren't cool (No, I can't complain),

You're holding me down (Ah-ah), turning me 'round (Ah-oh),

Filling me up with your rules (Fool, you fool),

I've got to admit it's getting better (Better),

A little better all the time (It can't get no worse).”

- The Beatles, Getting Better

In the College Admissions cases, Justice Sotomeyor incorrectly used the word
“stimulation” when referring to statistical race-neutral simulations from Harvard and UNC.
Sotomeyor also said there’s “de jure segregation” in the United States. If Sotomeyor’s claim of
de jure segregation was not another malapropism in oral arguments, her assertion should have
been shocking — that while on the bench a Supreme Court Justice con rmed the government
violates the Constitution intentionally in policy and practice. In reality, though, there is no
evidence of de jure segregation, and Sotomeyor meant to say “de facto segregation” which
she based on social scienti c statistical inferences drawn from proportionality, rates, mean
average di erences in outcomes between races. Unfortunately still, statistics weren’t good
enough in the court’s opinion in McCleskey v. Kemp (1987) to con rm racial discrimination in
criminal sentencing, but somehow Sotomeyor felt di erently about lazily referencing inferential
statistics in the College Admissions cases. Simple mistakes are more consequential at such a
high level; but those consequences are not for the persons making the mistakes, since
Sotomeyor and her ilk are protected by their power distance.

Much like how Muslims failed to simply address extremism in the Ummah, and that in
part led to growth and development of terrorist ideology under the guise of legitimate
interpretation and construction of Quran, the world’s problems emerge, take hold, and persist
largely because (a) higher-ups, o cials, and people with the authority to make an impact fail to
e ectively lead, and (b) the average person does not bother to speak on matters of serious
morality with standing, knowledge, and wisdom. Misconceptions, misunderstandings, mistakes
and errors occur at multiple levels, but there is little hope for a group if the leadership’s views
are deluded, distorted, deceitful, counterfactual, incomplete, or misguided. Lacking ongoing,
mature, expansive conversation on important adult matters, potential solutions are lost at
scale, and problem behavior only becomes more entrenched in the absence of even the
mildest opposition in casual social speech.

Using a bu et analogy, it seems like most everybody grabs and lls up on ass. Almost
nobody takes the brains.

“You are what you eat.”

- Keller Williams, You Are What You Eat

What are the people to make of uneven enforcement? Of dumb and unreasonable
rules? Of unjust laws? Of false convictions? Of systemic error? There are plenty of examples of
problems in public life, yet somehow the agents of rather awed systems and agencies go
about their work lives as if everything presently is just so, as if there is no reason to suspect
any speci c instant incident is handled in error. Surely, professionals involved in the
administration of justice and other government business know and accept that there are
mistakes in the practice, that some mistakes are criminal acts perpetrated by government
agents against members of the public, and that errors in government erode the public trust —
that is, external validity — and more importantly undermine the internal validity of the
government’s methods. They just stay quiet and keep their jobs rather than do their jobs and
x the problems they made and maintained.

fi
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
ffi
ff
fl
fi
fi
fi
 “Ya hotshot, want to get props and be a savior,

First show a little respect, change your behavior,

Change your attitude, change your plan,

There could never really be justice on stolen land,

Are you really for peace and equality?

Or when my car is hooked up, you know you want to follow me,

Your laws are minimal,

Cause you won't even think about lookin' at the real criminal,

This has got to cease,

Cause we be getting hyped to the sound of da police!

The overseer rode around the plantation,

The o cer is o patrolling all the nation,

The overseer could stop you what you're doing,

The o cer will pull you over just when he's pursuing,

The overseer had the right to get ill,

And if you fought back, the overseer had the right to kill,

The o cer has the right to arrest,

And if you ght back they put a hole in your chest!

(Woop!) They both ride horses,

After 400 years, I've got no choices!

Woop-woop! That's the sound of da police! That's the sound of the beast!”

- KRS One, Sound of Da Police

When police o cers pull over a random individual motorist among dozens traveling at
roughly the same rate of speed over the posted limit, the unlucky winner of this lottery is
frankpledge to some anachronistic vision of justice. When executives and other fraudsters
make o with millions but serve half the months or fewer in prison compared to a common
bank robber who took a few thousand dollars, there is no proportionality relating to the debt to
be repaid. Prison time is not subject to market forces; every prisoner’s time is worth the same
amount; if an unemployed man stuck up a liquor store and got popped with the weapon and
$572 in cash just down the street, his time in prison shall be calculated such that he is
proportionally less liable than the faux- nancier who defrauded investors for a few million
dollars. If some citizens in some places have rights, privileges, and immunities, then di erent
citizens in other places shall have equal rights, privileges, and immunities. This would be a
reasonable application of the Comity Clause. Otherwise, the system is inherently unfair, biased,
and does not construct or apply equal protection in a recognizable manner. Without equal
protection, even enforcement, and proportional consequences, government agents cannot
reasonably expect civilians to be able to infer meaning from the law, nor can public o cials
reasonably expect civilians to comply with many or any laws that are not supported by popular
opinion, including that at the local level.

If haphazard, lopsided, random enforcement and roughshod adjudication continues,

what are we to tell the children when they ask why? A teacher could not reasonably expect
children to learn how to do the right thing if the teacher does not model what the right thing is,
and demonstrate what it looks like, and set clear parameters distinguishing what is and is not
the right thing. Likewise, the government and its agents should be the teachers of the citizenry.
If some behavior is mandated from the top down, then those at the top must rst and foremost
demonstrate and be held accountable to their standards. The people will then learn to do what
they do.

If we’re all expected to live with the specter of war,

From surface to core, unsettled will remain the score.
Maybe if out public co ers trillions did not pour;
ffi
ffi
ffi
ff
fi
ff
ffi
ff
fi
fi
ffi
ff
 Perhaps if heretofore Marine Corps landed on shores only to peaceably explore,
Or if Huxley had succeeded in opening mental doors whose locks they adore,
Possibly then something could have survived from which balance could have been restored.
Anymore, Babylon’s whore is the guarantor of chores & gore galore we abhor & deplore.
Señor may implore equality restored, but on all matters antiwar they continue to snore.
 Team Meeting

“Woy, we gonna shout it out,

Yes, we gonna tell them,

Shout it out I said, loud and clear,

Tell them that we are free again,

Free from the wicked man,

Free from the misery,

We are free again.”

- Burning Spear, Shout It Out

A child breaks a parent’s rule, as the parent breaks their own internal vow. The parent
also violates statutes and regulations externally in some legal jurisdiction: Alabama, for
example. Alabama’s agents and agencies sometimes violate their own laws, too, but more
importantly the State violates a Federal Supreme Court order on voting district maps, and thus
the State seeking to punish insubordinate civilians simultaneously trespasses on Federal law it
purports to know and follow so well? But wait, there’s more. The Federal government via its
agents and divisions has been violating its own laws too, but more importantly the nation-state
has been violating international law it simultaneously seeks to enforce and compel other states
to adopt and enact. There’s some kind of 3D stereogram pattern in those last few sentences —
if the reader squints and relaxes their eyes just right, the picture should come together clearly
what that chain of o enses implies.

“We got to get together sooner or later,

Because the revolution's here,

And you know it's right,

And you know that it's right,

We have got to get it together,

We have got to get it together now.”

- Thunderclap Newman, Something in the Air

Given that there are known undiagnosed or identi ed mental illnesses and learning
disabilities in the student population, and considering some sort of fairness doctrine,
behavioral interventions might be best served by approaching participants in incidents as if
they may have unidenti ed psychiatric conditions that could have restricted reasoning at the
moment of incident.

“Gimme a break!”

- Nell Carter

Adult accommodations for work and quality of life, like no interference for personal drug
use, blanket sellers, unlicensed hotdog or food cart vendors. Let the market push out sellers of
subpar products and services. Su ciency economy urban (เศรษฐ จพอเ ยงเ ยว บเ อง).

“One love, one blood,

One life, you got to do what you should,

One life with each other,

Sisters, brothers,

ff
fi
ffi
fi
กิ
พี
กี่
กั
มื
 One life but we're not the same,

We get to carry each other, carry each other,

One,

One.”

- U2, One

Contrast Dawes Congo’s “Human rights and justice” with all the more popular songs
rapping about taking those away. The situation is dire and people desperate. Humans have
worked themselves into quite the precarious spot. To be sure, nobody knows exactly what the
weather or economy or security climates will be in the future. People can hardly forecast what
will happen in the next quarter, let alone in a few decades time. Rest assured, however, that
whatever the outcome, if people cannot muster some sense of togetherness as a species, and
if large majorities or nearly all of the people everywhere cannot organize themselves toward
some collective purpose, the future will be materially better in some ways but otherwise quite a
lot more stressful, ine cient, overly complicated, and threatening. The signs are all around us
today.

People want children, but then so often it seems they do not want to raise those
children. “If you can’t feed the baby, then don’t have the baby,” sang a frustrated Michael
Jackson some forty years ago. Parents say they want the best education for their children, but
those parents do not want to pay teachers out of pocket; they do not want to tutor their
children at home; they would have to learn with their children, and that would be asking too
much of parents, apparently. Consumers protest for stable, cheap electricity on demand, but
few can describe with any detail what electricity is nor where it comes from. Populations
doomscroll social media feeds, lost in a sea of intentionally distracting hypno-content, and
remarkably few could elaborate on how the hardware came together to make their devices;
fewer still could reliably analyze a sine wave similar to the one that carried their beloved
content.

Division of labor allows for specialization, and this is essential for high-tech, 21st
century economies to function, but when people lose the forest for the trees, they may nd
modern conveniences are as much harm as help. Blending and merging disciplines — the
acquisition, retention, recall, application, evaluation, and synthesis of technical knowledge — is
a tricky process, and it would be unreasonable to expect everybody to know so much about
everything. Division of labor makes individuals more e cient, but at scale, there is some
evidence that lack of generalists — who have signi cant knowledge and skill in multiple
disciplines — may have allowed some systemic weaknesses to grow, compound, and persist.
Threats emerge from those weaknesses like opportunities emerge from strengths.

In the Free Press, Kingsnorth said “Technology is our new god”. That technology
facilitated Woke crusades must have seemed obvious to him. That social justice warriors
captured the internet but not the IRL is a symptom of suboptimal utilization of Human
Resources. Computer programmers — techies and tech rms — should not be leading the
quest for human rights and justice. That is a legal matter. Human Resources divisions such as
DEI should not have veto power over matters of law. There is no court of public opinion, and if
there is, its bylaws must be explicated, which they cannot, so there is, thus, no court of public
opinion.

“I ain’t gonna work for Maggie’s ma no more,

No, I ain’t gonna work for Maggie’s ma no more,

Well, she talks to all the servants,

About man and God and law,

Everybody says,

ffi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
 She’s the brains behind pa,

She’s sixty-eight, but she says she’s twenty-four,

I ain’t gonna work for Maggie’s ma no more.”

- Bob Dylan, Maggie’s Farm

Before we can have a law — a legal order which we can presume is prerequisite our
economic order — we must rst question the very meaning of the word itself. Of course, a civil
and criminal type of law cannot be exactly like a law of physics, though that would be an
acceptable goal to work toward. Legal traditions in di erent regions and among di erent
people have many di erences, but there are commonalities. Wide and deep inquiries of
historical global legal systems show near-universal prohibition and condemnation of the three
Ks or the 3 /gaan/s as immoral acts; that is, malum in se and not merely malum in jure.

The 3 Ks or 3 /gaan/s:
การ า /gaan kaa/ killing

การ ม น /gaan komkun/ raping

การขโมย /gaan kumoi/ robbing

If only humans would stop committing these three acts, the world would be almost
unimaginably better. That is to say, one can only imagine how great the world would be if
people would only cease and desist committing these three heinous acts, but one can only
imagine since such a phenomenon has never been witnessed, that humans would simply not
rob, rape, or kill other humans. Ah, but the robbers, rapers, and killers have their compelling
reasons, some would say. There are circumstances and scenarios that lie outside the domain
of “rational” thought and behavior. Indeed, shit’s complicated. But what if people used their
words, and kept using their words in new and creative ways, letting verbal and written
communication be their light in a dark maze of possibilities through which people wish to nd
direction, safety, stability, comfort, certainty — good things rather than bad. Well, then if words
were the substance out of which changes could occur, and if language were the tool
supplanting the currently presumed-to-be necessary or unavoidable use of force, then shit gets
even more complicated. Complex can be good, though. Nice things are complex. Complex
things are expensive. Complex structures are strong and last. Maybe we can do this shit if we
try, and even if we can’t, we should.

If the law were a system of checks and balances over individuals and groups,
adequately preventing acquisition of power or property through coercion or fraud, and if
violations of others’ rights or of the common order were conceptualized as debts to be paid
and collected, then a rules-based system could have legs and teeth to support articulation of
disputes. As is the case with the international system, the honor system style of autonomous
self-regulation has its weaknesses when malefactors enter the picture. Just as voluntary
compliance with ICJ rulings has its hits and misses when the time comes to deliver awards, so
too do individual people sometimes choose not to comply. If we want laissez-faire, then we
must also have bona de cooperation among sovereign equals who willingly engage in lawful
behavior either because they subscribe to foundational beliefs validating deontological
elements of codes, or because they discovered some other bene t of the social order
emerging from and around the legal order. Since individual people must be willing participants
in any dispute resolution process through award, regardless of winners and losers in outcomes,
and since humans have freewill leading them in opposing directions, again it is di cult to
imagine what beautifully harmonic civilizations could exist if people could commit themselves
fully — without any in delity to their cause or shirking their responsibilities. All the same, it is
not a bad sounding idea, this world without killing, raping, or robbing. Baby steps, you know?
Step one, don’t kill, rape, or rob. In a later step, we will work on getting better customer
ข่
ฆ่
ขื
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ffi
ff
fi
 service; that is, any customer service that reasonably resembles what business college
textbooks and HBR case studies hold up on high.

Whereas the o cial processes of distributive justice as carried out daily in police
departments, prosecutors’ o ces, courtrooms, jails, and prisons have no sunset in sight, if an
endgame were an acceptable goal — to have a society free of these coercive and sometimes
abusive government powers — then individuals would need to be more active participants in
their lives as citizens, subjects, legal actors, and persons whose lives have legal signi cance
and impacts both at work and in private. There are virtually no places, and very few behaviors,
that are not subject to some legal guidelines, which is an excess but nonetheless until the
frothy head on that heaping pile of statutes gets chopped back, people are bound to comply or
face consequences to the extent practicable for enforcement agencies. Thus, individuals
citizen are best advised to learn and know where they are and with whom they are dealing.
Napoleon’s vision of the Civil Codes would su ce — the law could be something of a co ee
table book, where each home could have a copy of rights, privileges, and duties of citizens of
the realm, and those individuals in those homes could read, learn, reference and use those
Code provisions to protect themselves against both the government and other civilians. The
Code must be transparent, complete, and consistent for that to happen. Of course, until further
notice there must be militarized forces doing god knows what where and when, or at least
nobody with any sense can stop that from happening for now, but in the meantime until the
hotheads with guns galore calm down, the rest of us could be learning more about what it
means to be citizens, and directing our e orts toward doing better for ourselves and our
people at the same time; and as the law becomes more universal, “our people” becomes the
human population. One thing at a time, step by step, until it’s done.

“There comes a time when we heed a certain call,

When the world must come together as one.

There are people dying.

Oh, when it's time to lend a hand to life,

The greatest gift of all.

We can't go on pretending day by day

That someone somewhere will soon make a change.

We're all a part of God's great big family,

And the truth, you know,

Love is all we need.

We are the world.

We are the children.

We are the ones who make a brighter day.

So, let's start giving.

There's a choice we're making.

We're saving our own lives.

It's true we'll make a better day,

Just you and me.”

- USA for Africa, We Are the World

Statutes frequently include provisions levying joint and several liability for o enses.
Multilateral defense treaties require state parties to consider an attack against any member as
an attack against each member of the group. International law has theories of collective
responsibility, but there has not yet emerged any thorough scienti c de nition or understanding
of collectives are, or how liability can be assessed when large groups of individuals play part in
o enses. At a glance, there appears to be latent disagreement over whether individuals
compile continuously into groups at scale, or if individuals are discretely organized into
conglomerate subgroups which are themselves discrete or quasi-autonomous among other
ff
ffi
ffi
ff
ffi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
 groups. Presently, there exists no agreement on how more than a handful of individuals may be
held jointly liable for an o ense, and thus there is no legal mechanism for levying nes or other
penalties upon collectives not associated under a business or similar charter.

Are people discrete beings? Is all matter within the Earth’s atmosphere continuous?
How do we begin to draw borders when air and other matter are continuously owing into and
out of bodies and their surroundings? When the bodies have holes through which solids,
liquids, and gases may pass in and out, there is no hard border between internal and external.
In addition to this ambiguous physical border, electromagnetism ows through and around the
body resulting from electrical current throughout the nervous system. Relatively little is known
about the brain, its signals, the nervous system and its associated electromagnetism, or the
extent to which thoughts and feelings may be remotely observed. Neurologists and engineers
have made remarkable progress in developing technologies that interpret thoughts from brain
signals outside the cranium, but both the theoretical and applied sciences are still in edgling
stages. If we could time travel forward a few centuries, we would likely witness fundamental
di erences in how people understand the individual brain, thoughts, feelings, and their
relationship to other individual brain owner-operators.

“Nobody move, there’s blood on the oor,

And I can’t nd my heart,

Where did it go? Did I leave it in the cold?

So please give it back, ‘cause it’s not your to take.”

- Thundercat, Them Changes

If capitalism has intrinsic value, and if capitalism has permanence — and all signs point
to the conclusion that it does — then the legal order upon which that economic order is
founded must recognize and enforce individual rights, freedoms, and liberties. If property is
private, then that property must also extend to the individual mind and body which each
individual owns and operates independently — so long as they comply with certain minor
caveats, like do not rob, rape, or kill other individuals. Prohibition on robbing, raping, and killing
emerge from natural rights of individuals to have and maintain peace in and about their person,
considering that human life may not be owned or operated by persons other than those
physically within the living body. Economic rights are natural extensions of these basic
covenants on the rights of individuals. Enforcement and adjudication — both civil and criminal
— are justi ed and validated by and upon the premise that individuals are discrete in their
personal dealings but that individuals may overstep their boundaries and infringe upon others’
physical territory which includes the body. Since the brain is part of the body, and the mind is
at least partly attached to the brain, then private property rights can extend to thoughts and
feelings, but not all thoughts or feelings since there is no union between brain and mind. The
brain and the mind share space; they have an intersection, but they are not one per se.
Intellectual property may be intangible but is property nonetheless because of observable ties
between ideas xed in media and the creative mind/brain/body responsible for the innovation.

Of course, there are elements of socialism (publicly owned and operated), communism
(publicly owned and privately operated) and corporatism (privately owned and publicly
operated) mixed into economic structures in every jurisdiction, but the private property concept
is equally or more associated with individual human rights to movement, occupation, thought
and conscience. More broadly, each individual’s rights and responsibilities within scalable
collectives emerge from this distinctly human dual state bridging discreetness and continuity
across sums of individuals who form samples and populations. The fact that the brain and
mind control the body, and that each individuals both owns and operates their brain and
personal mind — that is, because locus of control is internal — it is implied that capitalism is
an irreplaceable element in our legal and economic orders.

ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fl
fl
fl
fi
fl
 Individual private ownership and operatorship of thine own body has implications in the
abortion debates continually raging around the globe. Whereas an unviable fetus is not
independent, it is legally considered as a distinct life separate from and in addition to that of
the mother. Evidence of legal recognition of the life of an unviable fetus is found in homicides of
pregnant women — cases where prosecutors and courts have successfully tried, convicted,
and sentenced assailants on multiple counts of homicide for loss of life of mother and unborn
child. The Mississippi case made it to the US Supreme Court, but there were various possible
cases to be made overturning Roe v. Wade. Expecting fathers could have made a case that the
fetus is composed of the father’s sperm cell, and that absent the father’s consent to terminate
his cell which the mother possesses through pregnancy, the mother alone does not have
controlling interest considering she only owns 50% of the cells out of which the new life was
created. Peripheral characters in the nuclear family could have also argued vicarious or direct
loss of family members in termination of pregnancies that, if carried to term, would have
resulted in new brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, cousins, grandchildren; though Anglo-
English culture may not value family to a great extent, perhaps Latin American culture would
have had a foothold on a di erent victory overturning Roe. Equal protection could have been
argued to either overturn Roe or nd criminal drug penalties unconstitutional, considering that
personal use and possession of substances, if inconspicuous and discrete at least, is a matter
of personal privacy whereas a woman having an abortion is not, because there are fewer
people involved in narcotics possession and use than are materially a ected by arti cial
termination of pregnancy. On the ip side, the Constitution shall guarantee equal protection of
all interested parties: mother, father, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, grandmother, grandfather,
cousins, society, fetus.

If individuals have rights and freedoms over their own bodies under condition that they
may not deprive or otherwise dampen others’ rights over their own bodies, in keeping with
capitalist ethos protecting private property rights, and also in parity with freedoms of
conscience, thought, occupation, religion, belief, and expression as per human rights doctrine,
then there may also arise con icting interests between individuals and collectives at scales.
Similar to bifurcation in physics (special relativity and quantum mechanics), human
understanding of social psychology has not yet reached a continuous stream from the deep
individual to the furthest extent of the human population. Occam’s Razor suggests the most
obvious fact about people — how they think, feel, and act — is that there must be some
common link, some fundamental logic, some controlling pattern that is continuously present
and observable from the foundations of self through voluntary, conscious unions and
partnerships of individuals in families and at work, on through to vicarious connections via
media and citizenship, all the way up to the abstract humankind species-level. In other words,
at some stage, in some way, from some angle, in some veri able way other than mere
biological processes, humans are fundamentally one and the same in that they exhibit, follow,
create, sustain, update, destroy, and maintain psychiatric traits observable in behavior and
cognition as expressed in speech, writing, and other media. Considering these prior
assumptions, there must then be a singular best path (or superhighway network), approach,
means, or direction for individuals and collectives to achieve certain goals like peace, harmony,
togetherness, understanding, prosperity, unity, etc. Interpreting and constructing such ideals at
scale is serious challenge, and hitherto inconsistencies and di erences of opinion have stalled,
misguided, and dulled movement toward such a best possible future.

In Common Good Constitutionalism Adrian Vermeule explained that even individualist

Western traditions include legal theories that individuals have certain social obligations:

“In the classical tradition, law is seen as – in Aquinas’ famous de nition – an ordinance
of reason for the common good, promulgated by a public authority who has charge of
ff
fl
fi
fl
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
 the community. Law is seen as intrinsically reasoned and also purposive, ordered to the
common good of the whole polity and that of mankind. Classical law treats enacted
texts as products of the reasoned deliberation of public authorities who give speci c
content to the law where background legal principles need speci city or leave relevant
issues to discretionary choice. Where at all possible, classical law reads the law of a
particular jurisdiction (the ius civile) in light of the ius gentium (the law of nations or
peoples) and the ius naturale (natural law), which the civil positive law is taken to
specify or “determine” within reasonable boundaries. General principles of law might,
for example, say that, at some point, peace and order require that potential defendants
should have repose from the risk of being sued; it would then be up to the civil law in
such an instance to determine a speci c statute of limitations and to resolve the many
questions that ow from it.”

Recall our economic order presupposes a legal order, and that economic turmoil
threatens individual, group, state and international security. One can then conclude both the
individual and the state have compelling interest to ensure individuals satisfy their obligations
to the group. Who owes what to whom remains largely unknown, but given the premises of
how things came to be this way, it is reasonable to have a discussion on creating more balance
which would have likely emerged naturally had there not been bad faith, fraud, and coercion in
foundational stages of a crooked, if sturdy, order.

Just as capitalism is here to stay, so are socialism and communism; that says nothing
of the militarism and adversarialism that most often accompany the Three Stooges (capitalism,
socialism, and communism). Any government is publicly owned, and governments spend
money, and that money is not publicly controlled per se; rather, the public elects private
citizens to operate the government. Politicians and public o cials are not public bodies per se;
each individual has private ownership and operatorship of his/her body and mind, and thus
may consent to defer to another but may not be compelled much beyond the 3-Ks (/gaan/s).
Hence, governments are essentially communist by economic standards. When Josef McCarthy
was leading Inquisitions on Communism, some proud capitalist economist in the
Congressional hall should have stood and o ered the alternative that all of those leading the
questioning and holding the hearings accept and embrace communism and socialism in that
they are private agents collecting public funds for activities that only a part of the public
supports.

“Outside and inside,

It’s all part of the same ride.”

- The String Cheese Incident, Outside and Inside

The communistic and socialistic nature of government is nowhere more pronounced

than in the military largesse, but since there is so much coverage on that issue, let us skip that
million words and summarize that governments experience the agency problem when private
actors do not do the public will, and by “public will” that means consensus beyond
supermajority. Dividing up the public into factions and serving those who are most convenient
or rewarding is not public service, and such dilemmas are how we arrived at our present
moment of extremely awed, cumbersome, ine ective and ine cient statutes, policies,
regulations, and practices. Government largesse occurred because individuals found capitalist
opportunity by exploiting an inherently socialist or communist institution — that is, publicly
owned regardless of who operates it. Unsurprisingly, Milton Friedman decided to ignore such
facts and become rich and famous instead by focusing on letting banks loose so he and his
compadres could milk the markets they made themselves with tools, materials, and designs
intended to serve their own purposes. That the world became hyper-focused on private sector
is unsurprising, at least in retrospect, because ideological superstitions and extremism relegate
fl
fl
ff
fi
ff
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
 deep discussions on linguistic semantics and pragmatics as if legal navel gazing were a funny
hobby, leaving di erent thinkers excluded if they just consistently o er other alternatives.
Public and private are sticky, complicated terms with varied applications depending on context
and other factors; it is clear that people hardly have time or energy to contemplate linguistic
semantics and pragmatics, and to arrive at moral conclusions about how individuals and
collectives interact, but at the same time, people have their complaints about their world, so
there may be some discomfort in manifesting changes leading to more acceptable conditions.
Buckle up, suck it up, put on those metaphorical suits of armor because the world is great, and
it is the greatest day ever, but things still want to eat and destroy every last bit of every human
body, mind, and spirit.

While adversarialism is something of a norm, especially in our litigious United States of

America, somehow simple disagreements are the substance of the most bitter ousters and
cancellations. Factions of the public have recently gone ultra vires the Constitution in their
summary quashing of di erentiated ontologies and epistemologies — ironically or hypocritically
failing to construct and apply diversity, equity, and inclusion that they simultaneously fought for
tooth and nail. Ah, but perhaps the woke revolution was manufactured in the very same
universities that became the subjects of Supreme Court cases on college admissions. There is
no evidence that Harvard and University of Carolina or other universities, their faculty, sta , or
administration were in any way involved in any kind of organized e ort to undermine the First
Amendment with the woke cancel culture; nor is there any such evidence that academies
participated in a plot to undermine the equal protection clause by ramping up DEI and
a rmative action public relations campaigns in the years leading up to expiration of the prior
Supreme Court case approving di erential treatment on the basis of race at the University of
Michigan. Ironically or hypocritically, universities and schools became the poster children for
anti-free speech and pro-racial-discrimination in the years prior to the landmark Supreme Court
ruling. The base is established, leaving remaining surrounding peripheral arguments over which
set of private citizens will join the subset of the public who operate the public machinery, and
as individuals almost always do, each subset of the population in control of the population’s
institutions will likely make decisions that bene t themselves, their benefactors, bene ciaries,
and peer group of glad-handing favor traders. These are hitherto unavoidable outcomes in the
muddle of capitalism, socialism, communism, and corporatism; that is, until the Stooges gure
out how to play nice or get o the stage, some problems are seemingly impossible. But we
must try.

“When the sun come shining, then I was strolling,

And the wheat elds waving and the dust clouds rolling,

The voice come a-chanting and the fog was lifting,

This land was made for you and me.”

- Woodie Guthrie, This Land is Your Land

Commons spaces and other areas of National Parks and public lands are socialist in
that they are publicly owned and operated, or not governed much at all and thus left for the
public to operate, giving de facto socialism. Corporations and especially nancial sectors
emerge as a fourth Stooge considering that they are “publicly traded” but that de nition of
public is not a representative sample of the population. Corporations and capital are also
operated by private individuals who lend and borrow from other private members of the public.
In a sense, corporate capital is a blend of capitalism, socialism, and communism; government
bail-outs and Treasury erasures of balances sheets with a click of a button are plenty evidence
enough to assert that multinationals, big businesses, and their cabbage-headed executives are
not fully committed to any speci c economic philosophy; if pressed, they advocate capitalism,
but when it comes time to pay for their mistakes, they remain silent and accept socialist and
ffi
fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
 communist payments all the same; the money is all good whether it comes from this regime or
that.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, folks is struggling to just make ends meet, others
desperate for relief turn to synthetic opioids while they are legally prohibited from cultivating
organic substances that would, at very least, be less lethal than Fent. That communist-socialist
air for militarism American conservatives stir up fear about shows up at home in police
interactions where so-called furtive movements could include anything or nothing so long as
the o cer makes up some plausible story in a report. Once some made up words went onto
the paper or screen, prosecutors and judges never gave a second look at millions of illegal
searches, seizures, and arrests. In schools, minors have likewise been subjects of
unconstitutional searches and seizures leading to juvenile and more serious criminal records.
All of this cannot occur in a capitalist system that holds nonintervention as virtuous in matters
of privacy and private property, which if constructed entirely includes the body and mind of
self.

These are the lesser-points of communism and socialism that never made the news:
that in those systems, there are widely held beliefs that the body of the individual is actually the
property of the collective, and then its operatorship or that of the mind residing in the body
may be delegated to the individual possessing said mind and body, or it may be assigned to
the collective to some degree. Failures are imminent with such unreasonably complex
arrangements pertaining to locus of control, ownership and operatorship of mind, body,
conscience, thought, occupation, belief, religion, and such intangibles relating to identity. The
millions of Americans who turned to Donald Trump, and their counterparts who turned hard
Right or Left worldwide in search of rapid comprehensive changes to their radically disturbed
situations, stand as evidence that vast segments of populations do not have exercisable
agency over their economic, social, cultural, political and civil lives. This does not suggest
freedoms nor opportunities were widespread, and it begs the question of whether individuals
have rights to do as they wish. Consequently, the children of marginalized, disenfranchised,
and otherwise forgotten adults often enough sour on schools, will have no truck indoctrination
insofar that too many families turn away from education entirely, possibly thinking it is a hoax
or more like a fraternity than something more transcendent and universal.

“I am he as you are he as you are me,

And we are all together.”

- The Beatles, I Am the Walrus

Proposition: that individuals are the owners and operators of their personal bodies and
minds; and that individuals may attempt to negotiate changes with others but each must
independently construct and enact behaviors and thoughts themselves, as behavior and
thought from and within each individual arises out of an internal locus of control; that external
factors are persuasive and in uential but absent clear and present coercion each individual is
solely responsible for his/her behavior and con rmed thoughts.

Considering this legal and economic axiom, we can arrive at the same conclusion as
expressed by John McWhorter on the Glenn Show, that there ought to be immediate and
inde nite cessation of police action against black and brown people with regard to illegal drug
behavior. Given embedded political climates and constitutional questions naturally following
race or ethnicity as a determining factor in decision-making, McWhorter’s pro er should simply
be extended to all people.

“The harder they come, the harder they fall, one and all.”

- Jimmy Cli , The Harder They Come

fl
fi
ffi
ff
fl
fi
ff
 Resolved: absent other criminal behavior (e.g. robbing, raping, killing, fraud, violence
yielding physical injury, signi cant property damage, rearms o enses), government agents
and civilians shall cease action against persons involved in drug markets, from farm to
consumption. In schools, resource o cers should con scate drugs and send kids back to
class where they belong; they will stop possessing on campus if they lose their drugs.

Further resolved: Criminal records shall be available to the general public for a limited
time, and following an expiration on public records — not more than 10 years — then
government agencies shall continue to have access but there shall be nothing available to
private sector individuals or entities. Unfortunately, not everybody understood that when a
sentence is complete, the debt to society is paid; that absent subsequent reo ense each
individual shall be treated as equally likely to o end in some manner; that absence of a record
does not imply absence of criminal history; that presence of a record implies nothing more than
having been arrested, arraigned, and adjudicated (and that the three stages are distinct). Given
the pragmatic construction of constitutional innocence and the culture of discrimination against
persons with criminal records for their entire work lives, the most appropriate remedy is to limit
access to records outside of systems of justice wherein trained professionals may more reliably
read, interpret, and use any records.

Rights without remedies are no rights at all

Fights bring out frenemies & together we stall
Voices too small to bend around the wall & down the hall
Call to prevent the fall
Of the remaining champion standing in the brawl
fi
ffi
ff
fi
fi
ff
ff
 About the Research

This one is o the deep end. When one’s navel is submersed in water, their vision of
their navel is distorted as viewed with their heads above water, due to the refraction of light
passing through water and air. English speakers use the word “liquid” to refer to cash money;
to keep one’s head above water is to survive economically, to be independent. Lawyers are
famously ush with cash; that is, they are submersed in liquid. Lawyers most certainly keep
their heads above water. Thus, for the average upper, upper-middle, or “middle” class Bar
Association member, navel gazing is probably a silly looking thing. Their own navels are
submerged, and their view is then either distorted by refraction from above or blurry if viewed
from under the water below. As such, navel gazing is all but outlawed; laughable; not t for a
courtroom. But lower the liquidity in the environment, and the navel may seem more
captivating.

Finally, readers (if there are any) may have noticed the Legal Navel Gazing series has not
included academic references or citations. The author felt that adhering to such formal
constraints could diminish the view of the navel upon whose gaze the series was constructed.
After considerable ponderance of his navel, the author began to understand that APA,
Bluebook, MLA, and other styles can be retro tted to this bit of research if the need arises.

About the Author

The author had the unique honor of attending Ramkhamhaeng University’s Doctor of
Laws English program. Ramkhamhaeng is one of the largest universities in the world by
enrollment. Doctorate programs are famously easy to start and more famously hard to nish.
Ramkhamhaeng is a world university, and like many others around the globe, it confers
degrees upon hardworking, intelligent, ambitious students given their successful completion of
curricula. Rankings give some insight into averages, but there are great students, degree
programs, professors, and content delivered at any and all institutions of higher learning.
Similarly, accreditation by organizations like the American Bar Association may provide some
information about a school, its students, professors, and graduates, but as time goes on and
truer reality is revealed in public conversation, one can reasonably conclude that the ABA
stamp does not mean anything more than just that: a law college has a stamp. There are
colleges without the stamp that satisfy ABA standards, and there are colleges with the stamp
that fail to execute and comply with ABA standards.

ABA accreditation is contingent upon the law school being within an English common
law country; that or someplace occupied and subjugated by the American military, like Manila,
Philippines. As such, any graduate from a law school in the vast majority of the world’s
countries, may not practice law in the United States without going back to law school in the
USA. The ABA put up that lter for many reasons, but it acts as an arti cial barrier to entry. One
could reasonable infer today that their leadership sought to exclude foreign cultural, linguistic,
religious, and other ontological, epistemological, and deontological methodologies from
a ecting American law. Some could call exclusion of litigants from non-English common law
nations “systemically racist”, but this author prefers to call the people what they are: not
racists, just assholes. This author’s mother instilled in this author the conviction that lawyers
are assholes, at least as she knew them through decades as a legal secretary. This author felt
compelled to earn an LLD in Thailand knowing he would not be able to sit the Bar exam in
either Thailand or the USA, and despite the author’s strong opposition to those asshole
policies, the author pursued knowledge at Ramkhamhaeng which was not available in the
United States or ABA accredited law schools. In order to sit the Bar, the author understands he
is expected to think Ramkhamhaeng’s knowledge is either false or irrelevant, which it is not.

ff
fl
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
 For the intrinsic value of knowledge rather than the monetary reward, or as Blu
Springs, MS, Baptist Church congregants may know as “by faith, not by works”, this author
has engaged in research since enrolling in Ramkhamhaeng’s Master of Business
Administration English program in 2008. Both MBA and LLD course maps at Ramkhamhaeng’s
Institution of International Studies featured “Knowledge and Morality”, a seminar workshop
dealing with, you guessed it, the intersection of knowledge and morality. In the author’s
experience, this course title and broader content is the perfect illustration of the di erence
between his Eastern (Thai) and Western (American) educations, not because American
universities are ignorant of the ethics of knowledge, but because they are ignorant of the
morality of knowledge, or the issue has been side-stepped with solipsistic commentary hinging
on the premise that morals are relative, that there are no absolutes or universals. The author
and at least half the population disagree.

According to Pamela Tanielian, Adam Richard Tanielian is named that instead of Richard
Adam Tanielian because the author’s initials were meant to spell ART instead of RAT. Adam has
always loved art. As a child, Adam was enamored with extended family member Diane Kangas,
then a student at Detroit’s Center for Creative Studies, later a big-shot advertising creative
executive. Diane’s in uence, and that in Farmington Public Schools in Michigan, helped Adam
maintain interest and activity in arts through formative years. Not great at painting or drawing
much other than geometry, maybe, and yet to get a music studio together, the ART settled into
the role of writer as artist. Research can be artistic. Although the author earned a BS in math,
many universities o er BA in math, suggesting there is art even in science. And if art can be
science, then certainly law should also be a science. For the better part of the rst decade after
graduating from Ramkhamhaeng with the LLD, Dr. T has been researching and thinking about
how to persuade litigators, jurists, barristers, members of the bench or bar, and others involved
in legal services to turn toward science and away from their current temporary, fallible,
unsubstantiated methodologies.

Adam has found it helpful to think of di cult life events as having some poetic or artistic
sense to them. For example, times were tough when future Dr. T slept the month of February
2005 in the front seat of his 1996 Pontiac Bonneville, in what was one of the coldest and
snowiest Februaries on record in metro Detroit; when family and friends turned their backs over
the war or unspoken issues as Mr. T packed up his things in preparation for his move around
the other side of the Earth. All was not hopeless, alas! ART had a gym membership with a
sauna, and he was working 14 hour shifts, 7 days per week at the ski shop, saving money to
move to Thailand, where he was to start his teaching career, and later…who knows what?

Sleeping on the marble stoop of some fancy building overnight in Bangkok, that’s what
was in store for Adam Tanielian. Having no cash for a room while waiting for the airline o ce to
open, where the author could obtain a refund for the return ticket, he slept for a few moments
on the steps, wandered to another place and got a couple more moments rest, then waited
around and got the refund. Couple months later, slept in the Arch in Vientiane, Laos. Same
story, no money for a room, waiting for a work visa on the way right back down the train line to
work at a Thai government school. Thai schools — where everybody has heard that the
faraway, nameless, faceless “system of education has failed”, and basically everybody accepts
it is a failure, but very few people bring that knowledge to their workplace and work with it in
mind as if the problem might be imminently present. I dunno about the one in Paris, France,
but the Arch d’ Triumph in Vientiane, Laos has bedbugs. Seriously. Itchiest free cot ever in that
pillar room. But who ever gets to sleep in that thing?

Worked in stanky places with and around stankier people. Made peanuts. Got groped
by men, most certainly without consent, at work. Hollered at, called names, refused service on
the basis of race, ethnicity, and perceived nationality. Wrote and said some goofy things at,
ff
fl
ffi
fi
ff
ff
ffi
around, about, and to a whole bunch of di erent people. Ate, prayed, loved. This path has
been for my steps alone, but I am lucky enough to share a trail with mi esposa, Sangthong,
who like a golden ray of sunshine shines on me and lights up my life without fail. Family nice
hill people too. Got loom weave clothes and bamboo and teak wood huts and things. So that is
a win that validates whatever else that came before.

ff