Skip to main content

Posts

Poll Finds that a Third of Democratic Voters Now Identify as Democratic Socialists & RJ Shaw: Well, according to the Democratic Socialists, they would be in prison because they're oppressed peoples. 15:3715 minutes, 37 secondsThat's why you got to abolish the prisons. They're just being oppressed by a capitalist system. That's why they went to prison. No other reason. So, of course, give them back their full right 15:4515 minutes, 45 secondsto vote. Under the section, the next section, it is a real democracy. It says, "For the working class to govern, 15:5215 minutes, 52 secondswe need a new political system. End political corruption and legalized bribery. Get rid of lobbyists, dark 16:0216 minutes, 2 secondsmoney, and Citizens United, and publicly finance all elections." And oh, by the way, if you're thinking to yourself, 16:1016 minutes, 10 seconds"Well, that sounds good." How do they plan to do that? Well, that's what they say next. They plan to do that by abolishing the electoral college, 16:1816 minutes, 18 secondsreplacing the president and supreme court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress. 16:3016 minutes, 30 secondsThis is me reading what they're actually saying. I'm not paraphrasing here. 16:3316 minutes, 33 secondsAbolish the electoral college. Replace the president and the Supreme Court with an expanded Congress. And then they go on to talk about a Democratic Congress. 16:4216 minutes, 42 secondsThat's the next section. What does this new Congress look like? It says, "Replace the two-party system with a multi-party democracy, expand the House 16:5116 minutes, 51 secondsof Representatives, implement proportional representation and ranked choice voting in all elections, and 16:5916 minutes, 59 secondsabolish the Senate." So, what does this new democracy look like? Because remember, a little ways up, they said 17:0717 minutes, 7 secondsthey need to fundamentally change the entire system. This new system looks like getting rid of the president, getting rid of the Supreme Court, 17:1417 minutes, 14 secondsgetting rid of the Senate, and expanding the House of Representatives. So basically, all you have left is the House of Representatives. There are no 17:2117 minutes, 21 secondschecks and balances at all because that's what the tripart system is about. 17:2617 minutes, 26 secondsYou have Congress, which itself has a check and balance in itself from the House of Representatives and the Senate. 17:3417 minutes, 34 secondsBut Congress is checked by the president and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is checked by Congress and the president. The president is checked by 17:4217 minutes, 42 secondsCongress and the Supreme Court. I don't know. Maybe I'm just way off base here. 17:4617 minutes, 46 secondsMaybe I don't understand. But if you get rid of everything else besides the House of Representatives, what do you got? We got no checks and balances whatsoever. 17:5417 minutes, 54 secondsI'm not entirely sure how they plan to replace the two-party system with a multi-partied system because the two-party system was what the people 18:0318 minutes, 3 secondschose. There used to be a multi-party system. It was just people whittle down all the parties to two parties and if they want to choose other parties they 18:1018 minutes, 10 secondscan do so. So I'm assuming again this is me assuming here I'm assuming they're going to legislate it in some way which is to say oh that house of 18:1818 minutes, 18 secondsrepresentatives well the parties that you can vote for in that house of representatives will be chosen by the government. Gee that's going to work out 18:2718 minutes, 27 secondswell. What do you think looking at history? Can you see that working out so well in history especially you know the last century in I don't know USSR sure 18:3618 minutes, 36 secondsin China now sure that works out beautifully and again this was one of the parts which they covered on the news which they said you really want to do 18:4318 minutes, 43 secondsthis to get rid of the presidency to get rid of the Supreme Court to end the Senate the representative for the democratic socialist of America said yes

Poll Finds that a Third of Democratic Voters Now Identify as Democratic Socialists https://youtu.be/XSnLR5_Bnkg?is=F6ijygaTFW026HOr   Well, according to the Democratic Socialists, they would be in prison because they're oppressed peoples. 15:37 15 minutes, 37 seconds That's why you got to abolish the prisons. They're just being oppressed by a capitalist system. That's why they went to prison. No other reason. So, of course, give them back their full right 15:45 15 minutes, 45 seconds to vote. Under the section, the next section, it is a real democracy. It says, "For the working class to govern, 15:52 15 minutes, 52 seconds we need a new political system. End political corruption and legalized bribery. Get rid of lobbyists, dark 16:02 16 minutes, 2 seconds money, and Citizens United, and publicly finance all elections." And oh, by the way, if you're thinking to yourself, 16:10 16 minutes, 10 seconds "Well, that sounds good." How do they plan to do...
Post a Comment
Read more
Recent posts

Villey: ****rights claimed are ultimately based on subjective whim**** Villey is not content to criti­cize abuses. Rather, he presents the whole modern attempt to base a system of jurisprudence on an affirmation of individual rights as funda­ mentally misguided. He describes this modern enterprise as Utopian, arbitrary and sterile. It is Utopian because the supposed absolute rights are fictions; they usually do not exist in actual law or in real life. Rights theo­ ries are arbitrary because the rights claimed are ultimately based on subjective whim; they lead on to a debased understanding of justice as "nothing but a label you attach to your own subjective preferences." And modern rights theories are sterile because they cannot form the basis of a coherent jurisprudence. 33

https://dokumen.pub/idea-of-natural-rights-studies-on-natural-rights-natural-law-and-church-law-1150-1625-0788503553.html#:~:text=of%20medieval%20fe%2C(ts%20collected%20in%20a%20long,in%20the%20writings%20of%20the%20medieval%20glossators. Villey: ****rights claimed are ultimately based on subjective whim**** Villey is not content to criti­cize abuses. Rather, he presents the whole modern attempt to base a system of jurisprudence on an affirmation of individual rights as funda­ mentally misguided. He describes this modern enterprise as Utopian, arbitrary and sterile. It is Utopian because the supposed absolute rights are fictions; they usually do not exist in actual law or in real life. Rights theo­ ries are arbitrary because the rights claimed are ultimately based on subjective whim; they lead on to a debased understanding of justice as "nothing but a label you attach to your own subjective preferences." And modern rights theories are sterile because they cannot form the basi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Villey denounced "the religion of Human Rights," seeing it as an imposture—a profusion of excessive promises that are inevitably disappointing and ultimately contradictory and unjust: contradictory when these rights are considered together, and unjust when they are considered separately.⁶ Since rights are always correlated with a particular, situated legal system, it would be absurd to formulate universal rights. Villey may be described as an anti-modern thinker in the manner of Burke, whom he claimed as an influence, or rather, as Olivier Jouanjan observes, as "counter-modern," precisely because his position is grounded in a conception of modernity⁷ identified as a loss—the loss of a reconstructed Roman law purged of its Stoic elements, stripped of any role in the emergence of the legal subject, and tied to Aristotle's conception of law. Although Villey's critique of human rights echoes older criticisms and more recent ones that denounce the proliferation of rights as a factor in social and political erosion,⁸ one must examine the formation of three concepts to understand his account of the genesis of modern law and human rights: the legal subject, legal voluntarism, and the combination of these two in contractualism.

 https://chatgpt.com/translate/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=paid_search&c_id=23527963163&c_agid=193616260518&c_crid=795995986975&c_kwid=kwd-738008411&c_ims=&c_pms=9031934&c_nw=g&c_dvc=c&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23527963163&gbraid=0AAAAA-I0E5dUgctTkj185x6JQuoEWB--C&gclid=Cj0KCQjw-MDTBhCgARIsAKAkdlQdC1jT8zKpiEtC9Etjl1JyxGOfl48Zp4jfCDWwVIY5OqbhGgKOswMaAhKjEALw_wcB Michel Villey, Law and Philosophy   Julie Saada pp. 599–610 Detailed outline   Full text It may seem surprising to pay tribute to Pierre-François Moreau with a contribution on Michel Villey, given how far apart their respective intellectual and political positions are.¹ Yet it was through Pierre-François that I first discovered Michel Villey's work when I was a doctoral student, and I learned so much from it about the history of law and philosophy. Pierre-François himself also recounted how he came to know of Villey's work: when "law and politics" be...
Post a Comment
Read more