Foundations - Cvac

7/25/2019 Foundations - Cvac

1/11

Foundationsfor the New Age

Whereas the New Age of liberty and accountability, with organic government, is generally considered to be apath never trodden, and that light should illuminate this new spiritual, moral, and intellectual path, this documentquestions and proffers what the foundation of that government might be, if indeed such should result.

What does the New Age portend in societal and/or governmental (peace keeping) structures and on what basiswill such be founded?

Assistance has been requested

Heather from the One People Public Trust (OPPT) has solicited involvement by all people knowledgeable aboutthe matters raised by that website, indeed all people interested in freedom and the demise of corporate / facistcontrol worldwide. Recently she wrote....

so, whoever would like to take their shoes off and jump in the water with some DO!in so that we canfinalize the people!s systems as they chooseWe would be so grateful for the experience to BE and DOwith all of you.

I accept her request wholeheartedly.

Clues can be found

An article entitled Democracy Without Leadershipincludes the following:

Governments are usually winner-takes-all affairs. For one term the majority lords it over the opposition.Since those who voted for the opposition often get screwed in the process, the next time they win, theywill try to screw the former majority in their turn. Wild swings of policy may result, often with detrimentaleffects on anything from the public debt to the educational system.

So much for the powers that were. Continuing ....

Imagine a state about the size of Maryland. Give it slightly more people than Michigan. Divide it intothree federal regions. Spice it up with three official languages (make sure these don!t coincide with theregions! borders). Ensure it is run by variable coalitions of 10 political parties operating through 7parliaments. Chop it into 10 provinces and, for good measure, 589 local councils. Mix well and let stew fora few decades. What do you get? Welcome to Belgium.

It!s so confusing that many Belgians have given up trying to understand how their country is supposed towork. Yet work it does.

What if that policy were extended to infinity? Might it work even better if there were so many !government"bodies not one citizen was excluded? A free people!

Philosophy is key.

Before getting further into this topic I am indebted to the work of novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand1whom I studiedprivately for 30 years and read all I could get my hands on, other like minded authors included. Her legacy liveson and still grows, and though she has her critics, her contribution to the idea of liberty and sovereignty was

among the world's best. Her algebraic description of the word 'concept' remains without parallel in my view andher ability to use that formula to perfection was truly remarkable.

Rand identified the chink in the US Constitution that has allowed it fade almost into oblivion as far as relevancegoes, and she pointed to its remedy. Did anyone else?

On the subject of philosophy she wrote ....

As a human being, you have no choice about the fact that you need a philosophy. Your only choice iswhether you define your philosophy by a conscious, rational, disciplined process of thought andscrupulously logical deliberationor let your subconscious accumulate a junk heap of unwarrantedconclusions, false generalizations, undefined contradictions, undigested slogans, unidentified wishes,doubts and fears, thrown together by chance, but integrated by your subconscious into a kind of mongrelphilosophy and fused into a single, solid weight: self-doubt, like a ball and chain in the place where yourmind!s wings should have grown.

Philosophy explicitly asks and answers fundamental, inescapable questions such as "How can I knowsomething?" and "What should I do?" Without some answer to these questions, no knowledge or action is

Foundations for a New Age Page 1 of 11
http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Epistemology_Main.htmlhttp://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Ethics_Main.htmlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceg6NQKHd70http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceg6NQKHd70http://www.google.com.au/http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Ethics_Main.htmlhttp://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Ethics_Main.htmlhttp://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Epistemology_Main.htmlhttp://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Epistemology_Main.htmlhttp://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Epistemology_Main.htmlhttp://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Epistemology_Main.htmlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceg6NQKHd70http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceg6NQKHd70http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceg6NQKHd70http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceg6NQKHd70http://www.google.com.au/http://www.google.com.au/


2/11

possible. The only choice is to explicitly examine the underlying assumptions or principles involved or to be atthe mercy of the random flotsam picked up throughout life.

Democracy is Dead

First question in examining the Belgium example, is, what is democracy? Rand answered as follows

Democratic in its original meaning [refers to] unlimited majority rule ... a social system in which one!swork, one!s property, one!s mind, and one!s life are at the mercy of any gang that may muster the vote of

a majority at any moment for any purpose.

Hardly a textbook definition, or was it? Perhaps that"s how textbooks should be written.

Peikoff, Rands intellectual heir 2and successor adds:

Democracy, in short, is a form of collectivism, which denies individual rights: the majority can dowhatever it wants with no restrictions. In principle, the democratic government is all-powerful. Democracyis a totalitarian manifestation; it is not a form of freedom ....

Clues leaps from the page. Democracy thrives not from an objective ideal, or even a moral base, but becausewhatsoever the majority agree the rest must oblige their wishes. Two part tyranny; them and us.

If most wish to be lazy then let "s have a nanny state to take care of us. Who cares who pays, or in what form?The minority who disagree will have to fall into line.

What choice do we have today?

Simple!

If we"re done with all-powerful governments then democracy is dead; let it rot in history.

Govern - meant what exactly?

What does the word !govern"mean?

From the dictionary:

Govern - conduct the policy, actions, and affairs of (a state, organization, or people)

What does the word !government"mean?

From the dictionary:

Government - the action or manner of controlling or regulating a nation, organization, or people

Rand describes government thus:A government is an institution that holds the exclusive power to enforce certain rules of social conduct ina given geographical area.

While those definitions loosely describe !what"government is, nothing in those definitions allude to its purposeor justification. We must look further.

What is the nature of government?

What ideology founds its structure?

What ideology identifies and/or codifies its purpose?

What underlying principle defines its core philosophy?

Answers to those questions would fill the Vatican library given your opinion is as valid as mine, my teacher andmy mother.

Clearly a government cannot function based on opinion.

How can any individual know where they stand on any issue, unless a core philosophy describes and underpinsevery rule with unshakable consistency. How would a judge know what verdict is applicable?

Universal law

Control must be given back to the ultimate source of power, and a central government is not that source.That is not how things are designed. Universal Law is predicated upon free will. Harm not your neighborand you will enjoy freedom. And your neighbor includes all of the individuals around you, not just theowners of the corporations which have placed themselves above you. Indeed, there is nothing above you.You are the above.

As channeled by Ron Head January 21, 2013

How much simpler can the solution be expressed?

Universal Law is predicated upon free will. Harm not your neighbor and you will enjoy freedom.

Harm not your neighbor and your accountability is unquestioned.

http://www.peikoff.com/http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/democracy.htmlhttp://www.peikoff.com/http://www.peikoff.com/http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/democracy.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/democracy.html


3/11

The real essence here is that !government"is NOT for !control".

That is not how things are designed.

Universal Law is predicated upon free will.

Who and for what?

Whom is government to serve? Man, every human, - ---- or itself as a body?

To rule itself, its ruling criteria must apply internally, ie only to its own staff or shareholders.To properly institute a government one begins by identifying every aspect of those served and structuring theentity to serve their interests without exception.

If government is to serve man, the same method applies.

One studies the nature of man and prescribes according to what preserves and protects man; serves mankind'sinterests.

Majority rule has no application and no morality since all are equal. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is out of thequestion.

No !right"can violate another right!

No !rights"can violate any one"s rights!

The nature of manFrom Rand"s book Atlas Shrugged ...

Man!s life, as required by his nature, is not the life of a mindless brute, of a looting thug or a moochingmystic, but the life of a thinking beingnot life by means of force or fraud, but life by means ofachievementnot survival at any price, since there!s only one price that pays for man!s survival: reason.

Every history book written is testament to that statement.

That which you call your soul or spirit is your consciousness, and that which you call free will is yourmind!s freedom to think or not, the only will you have, your only freedom, the choice that controls all thechoices you make and determines your life and your character.

Just as it"s possible to divide a meal amongst many but not digest it in a collective stomach, so it is possible toshare an idea amongst many, yet it cannot be digested in a collective consciousness. As with the meal, each is

free to accept or reject what is offered. Free will is a fundamental of man"s nature as an individual BEing.

Observe the matter of choice.

Thinking is not an automatic function. In any hour and issue of his life, man is free to think or to evadethat effort. Thinking requires a state of full, focused awareness. The act of focusing one!s consciousnessis volitional.

Thinking is a matter of choice.

Thinking is man!s only basic virtue, from which all the others proceed. And his basic vice, the source ofall his evils, is that nameless act which all of you practice, but struggle never to admit: the act of blankingout, the willful suspension of one!s consciousness, the refusal to thinknot blindness, but the refusal tosee; not ignorance, but the refusal to know. It is the act of unfocusing your mind!and inducing an innerfog to escape the responsibility of judgmenton the unstated premise that a thing will not exist if only yourefuse to identify it, that A will not be A so long as you do not pronounce the verdict It is. Non-thinking is

an act of annihilation, a wish to negate existence, an attempt to wipe out reality.

But existence exists; reality is not to be wiped out, it will merely wipe out the wiper. By refusing to say Itis, you are refusing to say I am.

By suspending your judgment, you are negating your person. When a man declares: $Who am I toknow?!he is declaring: Who am I to live?

How often have we been told recently to discover who we really are? Yet that passage was published in 1952.

The most fundamentally important pre-requisite of government, whatever its name, is to study the nature ofman.

Man cannot survive on the perceptual level of his consciousness; his senses do not provide him with anautomatic guidance, they do not give him the knowledge he needs, only the material of knowledge, whichhis mind has to integrate. Man is the only living species who has to perceive realitywhich means: to be

consciousby choice. But he shares with other species the penalty of unconsciousness: destruction. Foran animal, the question of survival is primarily physical; for man, primarily epistemological.



4/11

Man!s unique reward, however, is that while animals survive by adjusting themselves to their background,man survives by adjusting his background to himself. If a drought strikes them, animals perishmanbuilds irrigation canals; if a flood strikes them, animals perishman builds dams; if a carnivorous packattacks them animals perishman writes the Constitution of the United States. But one does not obtainfood, safety or freedomby instinct.

Contemporary thought and expression, including from channelled messages, speaks about the raising of ourconsciousness, that some refer to as !ascension".

The basic vice, Rand points out, is willful suspension of one"s consciousness. Could the choice be any clearer.

I think not, yet the choice that controls all the choices you make and determines your life and your character,being the willful choice to use your consciousness, is precisely what !nanny state" governments frustrate atevery opportunity.

I am

Look again at all the woes you will meet by refusing to say I am".

Observe in the passages above how I am is linked to existence. Do you see what OPPT has done for yourexistence through your I am, and not just in political or commerce terms?

Do you see the morality in what OPPT has done, really, deep down, at the core of your spiritual self?

If you conclude as I do that that the phrase I AM embraces the whole of your spiritual and physical nature,

your whole and complete embodiment, fully integrated, then the nature, role and task of government (if we mustuse that word) is to ensure that your sovereignty is maintained, upheld, honored, revered and protected.

That"s it!

That"s all!

Practicalities

We enlightened ones know what we want to move from, but what practical form of !new system"do we want tomove to?

1. What will be its moral basis?

2. What will be its Intellectual basis?

3. What will be its spiritual basis?

4. What will be its financial basis - if any?

5. What will be its governmental basis if any? (Societal relationships)

Is there need for government?

This is the first question.

Rand answered this way.

If physical force is to be barred from social relationships, men need an institution charged with the task ofprotecting their rights under an objective code of rules.

This is the task of a governmentof a proper governmentits basic task, its only moral justification andthe reason why men do need a government.

A government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective controli.e.,

under objectively defined laws.

Elsewhere...

The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man!s rights, which means: to protect him fromphysical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man!s self-defense,and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functionsof a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreigninvaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settledisputes by rational rules, according to objective law.

I submit, that Rand has already answered 4 of the 5 questions I asked prior. (Finance is a separate issue.)

Is there a need for government to expand - Part 1?

Given the three aspects of government above, what need or business does government have in runningtransport, schools, hospitals or !public services"of any kind? Since all these services have been run by a groupof people in the past after all, why cannot a group of people do the same in a free society?



5/11

There are two fundamental differences between public service by government, and what these ideas propose;financing and monopoly.

From Rands book Capitalism the Unknown ideal...

The necessary precondition of a coercive monopoly is closed entrythe barring of all competingproducers from a given field. This can be accomplished only by an act of government intervention, in theform of special regulations, subsidies, or franchises.

Without government assistance, it is impossible for a would-be monopolist to set and maintain his pricesand production policies independent of the rest of the economy. For if he attempted to set his prices andproduction at a level that would yield profits to new entrants significantly above those available in otherfields, competitors would be sure to invade his industry.

A closer link between financing and monopoly is nigh impossible to find. The answer is very simple. Ifgovernment is to run / operate a public service, then by its organic nature as I"ve described previously, itmust never forbid others to offer similar services.

It cannot forbid opportunity. A monopoly is antithesis to an organic governments moral base.

It!s not competition

I did not say government public services would compete with private enterprise in an open market, thoughperhaps many would argue that"s what I meant.

It has long been ventured that Capitalism is a wild ogre running rampant through the halls of commerce slayingeverything in sight through unregulated !competition"; such competitive violence demanding penalty (remedies)like Anti-trust laws.

Shame for this gross misunderstanding; falsity.

Capitalism was the product of the free society (as best it was) in America, that from its foundations, grew itsfreedoms, economy, and individual pursuits of happiness like no other country has done before or since. As willbe explained, this web page describes Laissez-faire (let us alone) capitalism a little differently, commonly asmost people understand it.

Laissez-faire capitalism is an economic system. Capitalism involves the ownership of property byindividuals. The individual's goal is to use this property, or capital (buildings, machines, and otherequipment used to produce goods and services), to create income. Individuals and companies competewith one another to earn money. This competition between companies determines the amount of goodsproduced and the prices company owners may demand for these goods. The French term laissez-faireliterally means "to let people do as they wish." Thus, supporters of laissez-faire capitalism do not want thegovernment to interfere in business matters, or if governments do involve themselves in businessmatters, to keep government influence to a minimum. Although the economies of the United States andmany other industrialized nations are highly capitalistic, there is no pure capitalist system becausenational governments regulate business to some degree.

That last is true.

Now observe that while this explanation is fundamentally true, as commonly understood today, their exists avery fundamental misunderstanding, that, like rot in wood, undermines its strength. It lies in this statement,competition between companies determines the amount of goods produced and the prices company ownersmay demand for these goods.

Not so. Capitalism is NOT competition between companies fundamentally. It depends on and thrives on co-operation and collaboration between producers and consumers. Scrupulous market research and meticulousattention to consumer demand determines the amount of goods produced, the prices company owners maydemand for these goods, and the prices people are willing to pay. That some do it better and win a biggermarket share is not a debilitating factor, even to companies that struggle, it is testament to the fundamental ideabeing a win-win business concept.

A better, more satisfactory method of uniting company policies with consumer preferences has never beenfound. That commercial foothold is precisely what founded America"s economic wealth and standing as a greatnation. How did it happen? Because free society allowed it. No one stood in the way.

And that"s exactly what a free society will welcome back.

What caused its demise? Third party interjection, at times by unions but mainly government, broke the chain.Cooperative ventures bit the dust and (dog eat dog) competition found refuge as the only defensive weapon.

The rest is history as Rand described.

But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, theemployment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to

http://www.enotes.com/history/q-and-a/what-laissez-faire-capitalism-286202http://www.enotes.com/history/q-and-a/what-laissez-faire-capitalism-286202http://www.enotes.com/history/q-and-a/what-laissez-faire-capitalism-286202


6/11

annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role ofprotector to the role of man!s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a criminal vestedwith the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such agovernment substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you pleaseto your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his.

Democracy springs to mind instantly, but that aside, now do you understand what real competition is?

Capitalism is not company against company in vicious competitive combat. Capitalism is cooperation. Contraryto the opening sentence above, Laissez-faire capitalism is a moral system.

Legitimate commerce of today is companies working their butts off consulting and researching with consumersto give customers products they want, but horribly forced into self preservation combat by corporate governmentwho write competition rules (e.g. anti-trust rules). Inferior products often result.

Companies are now forced to fight tooth and claw to stay alive in this hostile environment. It "s their onlyrecourse, the only thing left that might, hopefully, protect from the thieving of consumer cooperation, research,instruction, creativity, enterprise, liberty, wealth, welfare and the pursuit of happiness.

That"s not competition.

That"s NOT Capitalism!

That"s warfare!

Does that explain why capitalism has earned such a bad name; thrown in the pit with fascism, socialism, andcommunism; by those who choose not to think.

Is there a need for government to expand Part 2?

If government were to offer a public service having no monopolistic clout whatsoever, no financial or otheradvantage, obliged to operate on an equal footing with any other, which, of two or more services, would peoplechoose to support?

You know the answer as well as I. The service that best answered and served their needs. It "s called mutualfree will, first on the part of the service provider and second, their customers.

No added benefit is gained by a moral and organic government offering a public service that cannot be done aswell, or better, by a different group of people. Thus no justification.

All the government must do is protect any public service that seizes a market opportunity against any and all

who might violate that opportunity; self included.Once understood that winners in commerce (free from government and third part intervention of any kind) arethose who best serve consumer interests, focus switches to learning, research, diligence, honesty, and so thelist goes on.

Freedom is freedom of thought, speech and action, not a free (or subsidised) outcome, service or product.

Creation!s Value Asset Centers (CVAC)

Whilst OPPT have given very real and pertinent clues concerning the philosophical makeup, or intellectualfoundation of CVAC"s (as interim governments), practical aspects concerning the nuts and bolts of Systemsare yet to be voiced. ( See Park K of UCC Doc No. 2012128325, OATH AND BOND CONTRACT for CVACBranch Office. )

Moreover, if CVAC Government is only intended as interim, what might take Its place eventually?

Thought needs to be given to these matters now in my view. Philosophy and core principles are equally asnecessary as the protections offered by OPPT, vitally applicable regardless of constructs.

We can and should begin planning and laying that foundation without delay. This document is my initial effort tothat end.

Work in progress

This document is work in progress; unfinished. The following pages are offered for your consideration and yourcomments are very welcome. I wish to pursue this line of thinking and incorporate your comments perhaps as areference manual for those who eventually become humanity"s figureheads; dare I say spiritually mindedGovernment in a form never yet experienced.

(Because the word !government" has been prostituted beyond reclaim, i believe, a new word would be most

helpful. CVAC may be it? Comments please, but whatever results, people will take convincing before theyaccept that no government does not mean anarchy.

__________________________________________________



7/11

Ken Bartle 23 January 2013

Footnotes:

1 Ayn Rand - Rand!s staunch advocacy of reason (as against faith and whim), self-interest (as againstself-sacrifice), individualism and individual rights (as against collectivism and group rights), and capitalism (as

against all forms of statism) make her both the most controversial and most important philosopher of the 20thcentury.Describing Objectivism, Rand wrote: My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, withhis own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, andreason as his only absolute.For a brief presentation of the principles of Objectivism, see What is Objectivism? Read more..

2 Dr. Leonard Peikoff, a philosopher, is Ayn Rand's legal and intellectual heir. He was a close associate ofAyn Rand for thirty years, and today is the preeminent spokesman for her philosophy of Objectivism. He isauthor of Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand and The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom inAmerica. His most recent book, The DIM Hypothesis: Why the Lights of the West Are Going Out, (2012)develops an hypothesis explaining the major trends in philosophy, literature, physics, education and politics

throughout Western history.

Other writers on these subjects include...

Frederic Bastait. see http://bastiat.org/

Henry Hazlitt see (Economics in one lesson) http://www.fee.org/library/detail/economics-in-one-lesson-pdf-doc-audio#axzz2IrsZCdZt

The Mises institute http://mises.org/

Capitalism http://capitalism.org/

Nathanial Branden http://www.nathanielbranden.com/discussions/objectivism/the-objectivist-ethics-in-an-information-age-economy/

Importanceof Philosophy http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Now for a change of pace ....

Topics for consideration

I"ve included in pages that follow some excerpts from the Ayn Rand Lexicon compiled by Harry Biswanger. Thismini-encyclopedia of Objectivist philosophy is compiled from statements on some 400 topics in philosophy,economics, psychology and history. The website is one of the most thorough examinations of the principles ofliberty and individual rights available anywhere.

For each sample topic I"ve included a short excerpt from that page as representative of that page subjectmatter.

I invite you to follow the link and open each page in turn and read the several excerpts concerning that topic,Other page links are included at the bottom of each page that you open.

I"ve included a mix of topics, some concerning government, some concerning rights, and others aboutphilosophical subjects. Some statements will shock ardent believers in a variety of arenas but do not bedeterred. Please approach these topics with two questions in mind.

1. Is what I'm reading consistent with what I foresee for the future of humankind,

2. and are the various topics cohesively consistent in thought and principle?

As previously mentioned your thoughts and ideas are welcome. Please submit your comments.

http://capitalism.org/http://capitalism.org/http://www.fee.org/library/detail/economics-in-one-lesson-pdf-doc-audio%23axzz2IrsZCdZthttp://www.theobjectivestandard.com/ayn-rand/objectivism.asphttp://aynrandlexicon.com/http://aynrandlexicon.com/http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/http://www.google.com.au/http://www.google.com.au/http://capitalism.org/http://capitalism.org/http://mises.org/http://mises.org/http://www.fee.org/library/detail/economics-in-one-lesson-pdf-doc-audio%23axzz2IrsZCdZthttp://www.fee.org/library/detail/economics-in-one-lesson-pdf-doc-audio%23axzz2IrsZCdZthttp://www.fee.org/library/detail/economics-in-one-lesson-pdf-doc-audio%23axzz2IrsZCdZthttp://www.fee.org/library/detail/economics-in-one-lesson-pdf-doc-audio%23axzz2IrsZCdZthttp://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_ayn_rand_aynrand_biographyhttp://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_ayn_rand_aynrand_biographyhttp://www.theobjectivestandard.com/ayn-rand/objectivism.asphttp://www.theobjectivestandard.com/ayn-rand/objectivism.asp


8/11

Thought starters

Individual RightsThe concept of a right pertains only to actionspecifically, to freedom of action. It means freedom fromphysical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men.Thus, for every individual, a right is the moral sanction of a positiveof his freedom to act on his own judgment,for his own goals, by his own voluntary, uncoerced choice. As to his neighbors, his rights impose no obligationson them except of a negative kind: to abstain from violating his rights.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/individual_rights.html

FreedomA rational mind does not work under compulsion; it does not subordinate its grasp of reality to anyone!s orders,directives, or controls; it does not sacrifice its knowledge, its view of the truth, to anyone!s opinions, threats,wishes, plans, or welfare.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/freedom.html

Physical ForceWhatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may not, the act that no man may commitagainst others and no man may sanction or forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiatedo you hear me? no man may startthe use of physical force against others.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/physical_force.html

MoralityMan has been called a rational being, but rationality is a matter of choiceand the alternative his nature offershim is: rational being or suicidal animal. Man has to be manby choice; he has to hold his life as a valuebychoice; he has to learn to sustain itby choice; he has to discover the values it requires and practice his virtuesby choice. A code of values accepted bychoice is a code of morality.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.html

Crime:A crime is a violation of the right(s) of other men by force (or fraud). It is only the initiation of physical forceagainst othersi.e., the recourse to violencethat can be classified as a crime in a free society (asdistinguished from a civil wrong).http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/crime.html

SocietyA great deal may be learned about society by studying man; but this process cannot be reversed: nothing canbe learned about man by studying societyby studying the inter-relationships of entities one has neveridentified or defined.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/society.html

Common GoodThe tribal notion of the common good has served as the moral justification of most social systemsand of alltyranniesin history. The degree of a society!s enslavement or freedom corresponded to the degree to whichthat tribal slogan was invoked or ignored.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/common_good.html

DemocracyDemocratic in its original meaning [refers to] unlimited majority rule . . . a social system in which one!s work,one!s property, one!s mind, and one!s life are at the mercy of any gang that may muster the vote of a majority atany moment for any purpose.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/democracy.html

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/common_good.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/society.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/crime.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/crime.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/physical_force.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/physical_force.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/democracy.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/democracy.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/common_good.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/common_good.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/society.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/society.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/crime.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/crime.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/physical_force.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/physical_force.html


9/11

Representative GovernmentThe theory of representative government rests on the principle that man is a rational being, i.e., that he is ableto perceive the facts of reality, to evaluate them, to form rational judgments, to make his own choices, and tobear responsibility for the course of his life.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/representative_government.html

ConstitutionToday, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that theConstitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individualsthat it does not prescribe the conductof private individuals, only the conduct of the governmentthat it is not a charter for government power, but acharter of the citizens!protection against the government.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/constitution.html

Founding FathersThe Founding Fathers were neither passive, death-worshipping mystics nor mindless, power-seeking looters; asa political group, they were a phenomenon unprecedented in history: they were thinkers who were also men ofaction. They had rejected the soul-body dichotomy, with its two corollaries: the impotence of man!s mind and thedamnation of this earth; they had rejected the doctrine of suffering as man!s metaphysical fate, they proclaimed

man!s right to the pursuit of happiness and were determined to establish on earth the conditions required forman!s proper existence, by the unaided power of their intellect.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/founding_fathers.html

AmericaAmerica!s founding ideal was the principle of individual rights. Nothing moreand nothing less. The resteverything that America achieved, everything she became, everything noble and just, and heroic, and great,and unprecedented in human historywas the logical consequence of fidelity to that one principle. The firstconsequence was the principle of political freedom, i.e., an individual!s freedom from physical compulsion,coercion or interference by the government.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/america.html

Age of enlightenmentJust as there are no limits to man!s knowledge, many [Enlightenment era] thinkers held, so there are no limits toman!s moral improvement. If man is not yet perfect, they held, he is at least perfectible. Just as there areobjective, natural laws in science, so there are objective, natural laws in ethics; and man is capable ofdiscovering such laws and of acting in accordance with them. He is capable not only of developing his intellect,but also of living by its guidance. (This, at least, was the Enlightenment!s ethical program and promise.)http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/enlightenment,_age_of.html

Dark ages:Every period ruled by mystics was an era of stagnation and want, when most men were on strike against

existence, working for less than their barest survival, leaving nothing but scraps for their rulers to loot, refusingto think, to venture, to produce, when the ultimate collector of their profits and the final authority on truth or errorwas the whim of some gilded degenerate sanctioned as superior to reason by divine right and by grace of aclub.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/dark_ages.html

LifeOnly a living entity can have goals or can originate them. And it is only a living organism that has the capacityfor self-generated, goal-directed action. On the physical level, the functions of all living organisms, from thesimplest to the most complexfrom the nutritive function in the single cell of an amoeba to the blood circulationin the body of a manare actions generated by the organism itself and directed to a single goal: themaintenance of the organism!s life.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/life.html

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/life.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/dark_ages.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/enlightenment,_age_of.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/enlightenment,_age_of.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/enlightenment,_age_of.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/america.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/founding_fathers.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/constitution.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/representative_government.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/life.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/life.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/dark_ages.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/dark_ages.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/enlightenment,_age_of.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/enlightenment,_age_of.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/america.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/america.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/founding_fathers.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/founding_fathers.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/constitution.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/constitution.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/representative_government.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/representative_government.html


10/11

Pursuit of Happiness, Right toObserve, in this context, the intellectual precision of the Founding Fathers: they spoke of the right to the pursuitof happinessnot of the right to happiness. It means that a man has the right to take the actions he deemsnecessary to achieve his happiness; it does not mean that others must make him happy.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/pursuit_of_happiness,_right_to.html

(Similarly, free speech does not mean beinggifted a radio station or newspaper.)

Free SpeechThe rights of those who seek pornography would not be infringed by rules protecting the rights of those who findpornography offensivee.g., sexually explicit posters may properly be forbidden in public places; warning signs,such as For Adults Only, may properly be required of private places which are open to the public. This protectsthe unconsenting, and has nothing to do with censorship, i.e., with prohibiting thought or speech.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_speech.html

Property rightsThe right to life is the source of all rightsand the right to property is their only implementation. Withoutproperty rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has

no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others disposeof his product, is a slave.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/property_rights.html

ContractsIn a free society, men are not forced to deal with one another. They do so only by voluntary agreement and,when a time element is involved, bycontract. If a contract is broken by the arbitrary decision of one man, it maycause a disastrous financial injury to the other .... This leads to one of the most important and most complexfunctions of the government: to the function of an arbiter who settles disputes among men according toobjective laws.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/contracts.html

CooperationWhen men are united by ideas, i.e., by explicit principles, there is no room for favors, whims, or arbitrary power:the principles serve as anobjectivecriterion for determining actions and forjudgingmen, whether leaders ormembers. This requires a high degree of conceptual development and independence .... But this is the onlyway men can work together justly, benevolently and safely.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/cooperation.html

ObjectivityThe concept of objectivity contains the reason why the question Who decides what is right or wrong? is wrong.Nobody decides. Nature does notdecideit merelyis; man does notdecide, in issues of knowledge, hemerelyobservesthat which is. When it comes to applying his knowledge, man decides what he chooses to do,according to what he has learned, remembering that the basic principle of rational action inallaspects of human

existence, is: Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. This means that man does notcreatereality andcan achieve his values only by making his decisions consonant with the facts of reality.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/objectivity.html

RationalityRationality is man!s basic virtue, the source of all his other virtues. Man!s basic vice, the source of all his evils, isthe act of unfocusing his mind, the suspension of his consciousness, which is not blindness, but the refusal tosee, not ignorance, but the refusal to know. Irrationality is the rejection of man!s means of survival and,therefore, a commitment to a course of blind destruction; that which is anti-mind, is anti-life.http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/rationality.html

Ken Bartle 23 January 2013

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/rationality.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/objectivity.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/contracts.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_speech.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/rationality.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/rationality.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/objectivity.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/objectivity.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/cooperation.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/cooperation.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/contracts.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/contracts.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/property_rights.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/property_rights.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_speech.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/free_speech.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/pursuit_of_happiness,_right_to.htmlhttp://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/pursuit_of_happiness,_right_to.html


11/11

A New Constitution - Liberty for Australians

The Nature of Government

The US constitution was based on a very fundamental premise.

It cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private

individualsthat it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government

that it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizens protection against the government 1

Those two points cannot be overemphasised:

1. A constitution limits government

2. A constitution does not limit the people

They are the backbone, and moral foundation of a Constitution for Liberty, without which it fails.

Another essential point arrises.

A complex legal system, based on objectively valid principles, is required to make a society free and to keep it free

a system that does not depend on the motives, the moral character or the intentions of any given official, a system

that leaves no opportunity, no legal loophole for the development of tyranny.

The American system of checks and balances was just such an achievement. And although certain contradictions inthe Constitution did leave a loophole for the growth of statism, the incomparable achievement was the concept of a

constitution as a means of limiting and restricting the power of the government. 2

Recent attempts to draft a new constitution for Australia appear to fail this simple test on all three points; more reason to

give the matter top priority.

Thus a 3 part litmus test for writing a Constitution for Liberty is established.

1 Whatsoever clause or text limits or prescribes the conduct of private individuals does not belong.

2 Whatsoever limits government and forbids it to violate individual rights does belong.

3

A Constitution for Liberty (including amendments) must be sufficiently definitive in all respects as to leave no

opportunity, no legal loophole for the development of tyranny.

Does the clause limit orprescribe the conduct of

private individuals ?

Yes

No

Does the clause or text limitgovernment, the conduct of the

government, and forbid it to violateindividual rights or to act on whim?

Trash

Yes

No

Is the draft Constitutionsufficiently

definitive in all respects as to leave no

opportunity or legal loophole for the

development of tyranny. Yes

No

A draft constitution for Liberty exists for consideration.


Documents

Foundations - Cvac