The Law of Rule
As viewers and listeners of The Corbett Report will know by now, it's official: Canada has criminalized dissent.
Yes, Paul Rouleau—the judge appointed by the Canadian government to lead the Public Order Emergency Commission examining the Canadian government's decision to invoke the Emergencies Act last year to crack down on the Freedom Convoy—has delivered his thoroughly unsurprising verdict: the Canadian government was completely justified in its actions!
So what does this all mean?
For starters, it means that government officials now have carte blanche to invoke the Emergencies Act whenever they want in order to squelch any protest movement they dislike before the protest has the chance to effect any significant change.
But beyond that, we are witnessing the apotheosis of that rule by emergency that I identified last year as the new governing paradigm for the erstwhile "liberal Western democracies."
And if that realization doesn't send a chill down your spine, then you're not paying attention.
Strap in, folks. We're going for a deeeeeep dive into the murky world of law, philosophy and government this week.
To access this week's edition of The Corbett Report Subscriber, please sign in and continue reading below.
Not a Corbett Report member yet? Sign up to BECOME A MEMBER of the website and read the full newsletter or CLICK HERE to access the editorial for free.
This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register here.
Filed in: Newsletter
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
“If I should object to force I will be arrested. If I object to arrest I will be clubbed. If I defend myself against clubbing I will be shot. These procedures are known as The Rule of Law.”
― Edward Abbey, The Fool’s Progress
They should put that quote on the sides of Canadian police cars.
What comes to mind immediately is a book I read in 2020 or early 2021 – Law Without Authority or Limits: Kelsen’s Dilemma by Daniel Gruber. The title perfectly summarizes the book, but the details make it well worth reading. The mental gymnastics of which legal philosophers are capable, to justify their positions and ideas, are astounding.
Sophistry and the management of perceptions is an art that goes back at least as far as ancient Greece.
“For as we have said, the art of the sophist is a money-making art which trades on apparent wisdom, and so sophists aim at apparent proof, for sophistry is an appearance of wisdom without reality.”
(Quoted from Aristotle’s On Sophistical Refutations, 171b32-7. Tr. E. S. Forster. Loeb Classical Library Vol. 400 (Harvard, 1955. P. 63)
It is the golden rule: He who has the gold rules and vice versa.
As to the Emergency Act, yes, this is another coordinated attack on the people by concentrating dictatorial powers within the executive branch, that is within so-called democracies.
Truth is much of the planet lives under one type of martial law or another.
You use the words “liberal democracy” and rightly should for it is the system aligned with neoliberalism and the nation state.
But this nation state is getting weaker, contrary to what we are told.
Weimar Joe represents the pinnacle of pillory, desperation and worsening conditions to come. His oligarchs will abandon him.
We saw this play out in Germany.
Liberal democracies are dead all over the world for liberalism as an ideology is itself dying, as you can see in the eyes of Biden.
And this is due to capitalism’s stupendous ineptitude and failure (a failure not born by their class), not to mention that democracy and capitalism can never co-exist.
Capitalism rushes towards monopolization, oligopolies at least, monopolies at best.
And no decision making within these realms of work allow for any democracy.
The whole thing has been a charade and if you just figured it out, don’t be saddened.
“The difference between democracy and dictatorship is that in a democracy you vote first, and take orders later; in a dictatorship, you don’t have to waste your time voting.”
Charles Bukowski
All man made law is, at best, redundant.
Belief in mad made law is moral relativism, at best.
The idea of democracy only serves to supplant the “divine right to rule” with “right of majority to rule”.
To abolish these ideas means, as Stefan Molyneux put it, to leave the farm. Heh, I wanted to link and re watch that video, but it appears it has been memory holed.
mkey
“…Belief in mad made law is moral relativism, at best….”
That can only make sense if Common Law comes from something OTHER then man.
The failure of the modern system of thinking has been a slow one, but at its core is due to the cutting off the Root of Divine Authority that gives life to the idea of Objective, rather the Subjective/Relative, Law and Morals.
The whole edifice of morality, law, and meaning in a Post-Religious world is trying to pull itself up into the air on its own shoe laces….as CS LEwis laid out with his “Tao” in “Abolition Of Man” in which he predicted Technocracy and most of what ails the modern world
Thanks for putting this together James.
You very sussinctly and poignantly described the significance of recent events and their implications for the future.
This provides people with the tools that can help empower them to win the war being waged on the battlefield between our ears.
Your concisely described perspectives and ideas serve to sow the prolific seeds of sedition, that like the amaranth seed, cannot be suppressed and will persist to stand the test of time.
Keep up the great work.
On “Have The Old Gods returned” Chris Knowles literally JUST DID a live stream going thru that document on his Patreon.
The Revolution has been rolling on for a long time, so long that most of us just think think Womens Suffrage and the Civil Rights Act were just ‘natural” popular progress rather then a long term program to lead us into the ultimate tyranny.
There is no voting your way out of it, no shooting your way out of it, no organizing a social counter-movement until you really see that this is mostly a centuries long Religious Project.
Man….. I would love Mr Corbett to interview Chris Knowles because its interesting to see two minds attack the problem from opposite sides
https://rwilson.substack.com/p/who-were-the-anti-suffragettes
This article really drives the point of “The Populist Delusion” home and explains why society has become so dangerous for its inhabitants.
There will always be a ‘normal’ way things run, be that codified laws or traditions and customs.
There will always come a time when those laws or customs do not work, and thus the ‘decider of exceptions’ must choose a path or an alteration.
Since you can not live in groups, esp. above Dunbars number, without such a structure these things will ALWAYS be true. They are a fact of life….. so the most important thing to your well being is making sure that the Sovereign, “the Decider of exceptions” DOES NOT HATE YOU.
Democracy is a great way to hide who actually rules, and maybe thats why people forgot. Maybe there was just so much swill in the trough that we all got lazy. In either case, normal people vacillate between thinking the Gov loves them and they can ignore politics and thinking that the Gov is utterly evil and they can ignore politics…..BOTH of these courses just let the ruling class keep on doing what it does.
Indeed democracy is a scam
enso
Yes, as “Academic Agent” has said over on Youtube, Democracy is favored by the Merchant Class because it hide the identity of the people who really have the power from the masses.
The reason why a state of exception works is because a live human contracted into “persons”, “citizen”, “driver” which created a trust, and that gives the State jurisdiction.
All of these things are fictional entities and until people understand trusts and contract law the State will continue doing this. Coming to a neighborhood near you.
Like James says,
“Regular viewers of my work will understand the importance of this observation: the tyrants can only function as tyrants if we acquiesce. We the people truly do hold the power, and political authoritarianism is indeed—as Étienne de La Boétie pointed out more than 500 years ago—a form of voluntary servitude.”
Its all a tacit contract we volunteer into.
“mediation of conflicting freedoms.”,
“freedoms that are usually unconstrained”
They really mean privilege. These are the overlapping word games that get you. Fictional entities have privelige (public). Private live human beings have natural rights.
Its all about the words. Stop giving them jurisdiction.
From blacks law 4th edition
FREEDOM. The state of being free; liberty;self-determination; absence of restraint; the opposite of slavery. The power of acting, in the character of a moral personality, according to the dictates of the will, without other check, hindrance, or prohibition than such as may be imposed by just and necessary laws and the duties of social life. The prevalence, in the government and constitution of a country, of such a system of laws and institutions as secure civil liberty to the individual citizen
CITIZEN. A member of a free city or jural society, (civitas,) possessing all the rights and privileges which can be enjoyed by any person under its constitution and government, and subject to the corresponding duties. “Citizens” are members of community inspired to common goal, who, in associated relations, submit themselves to rules of conduct for the promotion of general welfare and conservation of individual as well as collective rights. In re McIntosh, D.C.Wash., 12 F. Supp. 177. The term appears to have been used in the Roman government to designate a person who had the freedom of the city, and the right to exercise all political and civil privileges of the government. There was also, at Rome, a partial citizenship, including civil, but not political rights. Complete citizenship embraced both. Thomasson v. State, 15 Ind. 451; 17 L.Q.Rev. 270; 1 Sel.Essays in Anglo-Amer. L.H. 578. A member of a nation or body politic of the sovereign state or political society who owes allegiance, Luria v. U.S., 34 S.Ct. 10, 19, 231 U.S. 9, 58 L.Ed. 101; U. S. v. Polzin, D.C.Md., 48 F.Supp. 476, 479. A member of the civil state entitled to all its privileges. Cooley, Const.Lim. 77. One of the sovereign people. A constituent member of the sovereignty synonymous with the people. Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 404, 15 L.Ed. 691. In American Law One who, under the constitution and laws of the United States, or of a particular state, is a member of the political community, owing allegiance and being entitled to the enjoyment of full civil rights. Amy v. Smith, 1 Litt. (Ky.) 331; Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. Amend. XIV, Const.U.S.; Nyman v. Erickson, 100 Wash. 149, 170 P. 546, 547.
[SNIP – Please keep comments to 500 words or less. Please do not copy/paste lengthy and poorly-formatted text into the comment section. -JC]
mjcustom
“..The reason why a state of exception works is because a live human contracted into “persons”, “citizen”, “driver” which created a trust, and that gives the State jurisdiction…”
The state of exception exists in any group of people that are bound by a system of ordering their social behavior …unless you think that primitive Tribes invented the “trust” ???
Even a tribe of stone age hunter gatherers will have someone who settles disputes that are not clear cut according to the social norms of that tribe. He is the guy who decided the exceptions to the rules.
It its not “all about words” …. the idea of Word Magic is Occult Cabbalistic BS invented by some weirdo jews who thought they could do magci with the sacred names….words can change MINDS, not physics.
The government does not need Magic Words to put a bullet in someones head, the Words are just a tool of thinking that they use to build a Rationale AFTER the fact of what they have decided to do.
“The state of exception exists in any group of people that are bound by a system of ordering their social behavior”
I dont deny that. I said the reason that it works is by contract.(voluntary/unvoluntary)
Im the person who will tell people I cant stand language and words. So a part of me completely agrees to what(i think) you are trying to say you belive within the universe as true and words do not defne that. Etc.
Thats not what im talking about.
Its not all about words to you but it is to them (the tribal person that settles disputes involved in “ordering their social behavior”) It does require a contract regardless if it is voluntary or involuntary. All of these things ARE just words. Who defined them(the one who settles disputes or the one who wants disputes settled?, or?). Its not physics, the fiddle playing in your dreams, or the universal positive telepathic vibrational causational synchronicic “jew” energy.
Regardless if its a god(s), natural, universal fairy atoms, or whatever…we have choice naturally and they have taken advantage of that through deceptive language and words to condition societies…. as seen by your response here.
If you understand these things you can begin to break free from the part of it that is not just. Sometimes that doesnt work. As we have seen throughout history where people make a choice.
The thing is, its already been done. The framework is already laid out for most countries but they are attempting to remove that framework with this “new world order”. The only options are fight your belief with words(legal) or violence.
There IS an ENTIRE other matrix put around us using words, belief, and presumption….that creates “virtual machines” of our identity.
Yes. The definite against the indefinite. Definable against undefinable. Immutable against make belief and customary.
“The state of exception exists in any group of people that are bound by a system of ordering their social behavior”
I dont deny that. I said the reason that it works is by contract.(voluntary/unvoluntary)
Im the person who will tell people I cant stand language and words. So a part of me completely agrees to what(i think) you are trying to say you belive within the universe as true and words do not defne that. Etc.
Thats not what im talking about.
Its not all about words to you but it is to them (the tribal person that settles disputes involved in “ordering their social behavior”) It does require a contract regardless if it is voluntary or involuntary. All of these things ARE just words. Who defined them(the one who settles disputes or the one who wants disputes settled?, or?). Its not physics, the fiddle playing in your dreams, or the universal positive telepathic vibrational causational synchronicic “jew” energy.
Regardless if its a god(s), natural, universal fairy atoms, or whatever…we have choice naturally and they have taken advantage of that through deceptive language and words to condition societies…. as seen by your response here.
If you understand these things you can begin to break free from the part of it that is not just. Sometimes that doesnt work. As we have seen throughout history where people make a choice.
The thing is, its already been done. The framework is already laid out for most countries but they are attempting to remove that framework with this “new world order”. The only options are fight your belief with words(legal) or violence.
There IS an ENTIRE other matrix put around us using words, belief, and presumption….that creates “virtual machines” of our identity.(Trust)