J.A.I.L. News
Journal
______________________________________________________
Los
Angeles,
California
February 10, 2023
______________________________________________________
The Inherent Right of ALL People to Alter
or Reform Abusive Government.
The Right Upon Which All Other Rights
Depend
The Torchbearer for J.A.I.L. Nationally - Support Them!
P.O. Box 412, Tea, S.D. 57064 - (605)
231-1418
Will J.A.I.L. Lead To
Anarchy?
To the contrary, J.A.I.L. will
restore our Constitutional Government!
Another frivolous argument posed by opponents to
Amendment E, the Judicial Accountability Amendment on this year's ballot in
South Dakota, is that the Amendment will throw the system into anarchy. To quote
Mr. Chet Brokaw of the Associated Press in the January 20th edition of the
Aberdeen American Press: "Lawyers opposing the
proposed amendment have said it would undermine the independence of South Dakota
judges and would plunge the court system into anarchy."
"Anarchy" applies to society, to the People --not to a
court system which is intended to be the core of the judicial branch of
government. "Anarchy" is defined in Black's Law Dictionary, Rev.4th Ed. at page
110: "Absence of government; state of society where
there is no law or supreme power; lawlessness or political disorder; destructive
of and confusion in government." [citation
omitted]
The best description of "anarchy" I have found in my
research is in "The Second Treatise of Civil Government" (1690) by John
Locke, at Chapter XIX "Of the Dissolution of Government" Sec. 218, which reads:
Sec. 218. Why, in such a constitution as this, the
dissolution of the government in these cases is to be imputed to the prince, is
evident; because he, having the force, treasure and offices of the state to
employ, and often persuading himself, or being flattered by others, that as
supreme magistrate he is uncapable of controul; he alone is in a condition to
make great advances toward such changes, under pretence of lawful authority, and
has it in his hands to terrify or suppress opposers, as factious, seditious, and
enemies to the government: whereas no other part of the legislative, or people,
is capable by themselves to attempt any alteration of the legislative, without
open and visible rebellion, apt enough to be taken notice of, which, when it
prevails, produces effects very little different from foreign conquest. Besides,
the prince in such a form of government, having the power of dissolving the
other parts of the legislative, and thereby rendering them private persons, they
can never in opposition to him, or without his concurrence, alter the
legislative by a law, his conse power, neglects and abandons that charge, so
that the laws already made can no longer be put in execution. This is
demonstratively to reduce all to anarchy, and so effectually to dissolve the
government: for laws not being made for themselves, but to be, by
their execution, the bonds of the society, to keep every part of the body
politic in its due place and function; when that totally ceases, the government
visibly ceases, and the people become a confused multitude, without order or
connexion. Where there is no longer the administration of justice, for the
securing of men's rights, nor any remaining power within the community to direct
the force, or provide for the necessities of the public, there certainly is no
government left. Where the laws cannot be executed, it is all one as if there
were no laws; and a government without laws is, I suppose, a mystery in
politics, unconceivable to human capacity, and inconsistent with human society.
[Emph. added]
Anarchy happens when "there is no longer the
administration of justice for the securing of men's rights, nor any remaining
power within the community to direct the force, [i.e., no provision by which
the People can enforce the Constitution] or provide for the necessities of
the public" resulting in the absence of government and the people becoming "a
confused multitude, without order or connexion." (Supra.)
Anarchy results from the effectual
dissolution of government by its failure and refusal
to protect the People's rights. See the emphasized portion above.
Another way anarchy is brought about to society is by breach of the public trust
as explained in Sec. 221 of the same treatise:
Sec. 221. There is therefore, secondly, another way
whereby governments are dissolved, and that is, when the legislative, or the
prince, either of them, act contrary to their trust. First, The legislative acts
against the trust reposed in them, when they endeavour to invade the property of
the subject, and to make themselves, or any part of the community, masters, or
arbitrary disposers of the lives, liberties, or fortunes of the people.
(Id.)
And one more way anarchy is created is by usurpation of power:
Sec. 219. There is one way more whereby such a
government may be dissolved, and that is: When he who has the supreme executive
power neglects and abandons that charge, so that the laws already made can no
longer be put in execution [e.g., Constitution suspended
and replaced by "emergency powers" --Executive Orders]; this is
demonstratively to reduce all to anarchy, and so effectively to dissolve the
government. (Id.)
Thomas Jefferson defined the purpose of government as follows:
"The purpose of government," as Thomas Jefferson said,
"is to allow for the preservation of life and liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness."
[Emph. added]
"The Theory of Government" by Peter Landry
John Locke has described the purpose of government in Chapter IX, Sec. 124
thusly:
Sec. 124. The great and chief end, therefore, of men's
uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is
the preservation of their property. ... [Emph. added]
When the purpose of government ceases, i.e., when
the preservation of the People's life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness --the
preservation of their property-- ceases, then government visibly
ceases.
...for laws not being made for themselves [government], but to be, by their execution, the bonds
of the society, to keep every part of the body politic in its due place and
function; when that totally ceases, the government visibly
ceases, [Emph.
added]
Locke, Chapter XIX, Sec.218 (supra.)
Government is the "common force" which acts as a substitute for the
collective right of individuals, and its reason for existing is based on
individual right, further explained as follows:
"If every person has the right to defend - even by
force - his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group
of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these
rights constantly. This principle of collective right - its reason for existing,
its lawfulness - is based on individual right. And the common force that
protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any
other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an
individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of
another individual, then the common force - for the same reason - cannot
lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or
groups."
(Bastiat, The
Law, 1850.)
"The Theory of Government" by Peter Landry, (supra)
The problem with government power is corruption.
The most serious problem with power, to which Lord
Acton referred, and which is quite separate from the
aggravation of dealing with besotted magistrates: is that it corrupts. ... [T]he
best thing, as Thomas Jefferson pointed out, is to "guard against corruption and
tyranny ... before they shall have gotten hold of us. It is better to
keep the wolf out of the fold than to trust to drawing
his teeth and talons after he shall have entered."
(Id.)
J.A.I.L. (Amendment E) will "keep the wolf out of the fold."
Because of government's propensity for corruption, the People must force
its obedience by treating it as a trained guard dog, restraining it
by the tight leash of J.A.I.L.
Government cannot give life, it cannot give liberty,
and it cannot give happiness; it can only take such things away.
Liberty, or freedom, is a topic which arises in
any discussion concerning government; and it arises, not because government can
contribute to freedom, in any way, but rather because government
invariably, due to its very nature, encroaches on freedom. Government is to be
treated as a trained guard dog, to be led out into the crowd by its handlers
under strict control and sharp command. Usually the mere presence
of Government power is enough to remind people to leave the liberty of others
alone so that each person, unfettered in any way except by proper law, through
individual choice, might create wealth; and to use it or preserve it, as they
should choose.
"The Theory of Government" by Peter Landry, (supra)
Anarchy, the state of nature of mankind, which results in inconvenience and
confusion in society, causes the People to form a government as a remedy for the
disorganization of mankind in the state of nature. Therefore, the court system
functioning properly according to law, is a remedy for
anarchy and would not be a victim of anarchy as "lawyers opposing the proposed
amendment have said" according to the news article mentioned above. J.A.I.L.
(Amendment E) will assure that the court system does
function properly according to law which will indeed restore the
existence and function of government and eliminate the state of
anarchy that naturally exists in the absence of government and under the current
foreign power causing chaos and frustration to the People. Locke describes this
remedy in Chapter II, Of the State of Nature, Sec. 13:
Sec. 13. To this strange doctrine, viz. That in the state
of nature every one has the executive power of the law of nature, I doubt not
but it will be objected, that it is unreasonable for men to be judges in their
own cases, that selflove will make men partial to themselves and their friends:
and on the other side, that ill nature, passion and revenge will carry them too
far in punishing others; and hence nothing but confusion and disorder will
follow, and that therefore God hath certainly appointed government to restrain
the partiality and violence of men. I easily grant, that civil
government is the proper remedy for the inconveniencies of the state of
nature, which must certainly be great, where men may be judges in
their own case, since it is easy to be imagined, that he who was so unjust as to
do his brother an injury, will scarce be so just as to condemn himself for it:
but I shall desire those who make this objection, to remember, that absolute
monarchs are but men; and if government is to be the remedy of those evils,
which necessarily follow from men's being judges in their own cases, and the
state of nature is therefore not to be endured, I desire to know what kind of
government that is, and how much better it is than the state of nature, where
one man, commanding a multitude, has the liberty to be judge in his own case,
and may do to all his subjects whatever he pleases, without the least liberty to
any one to question or controul those who execute his pleasure and in whatsoever
he doth, whether led by reason, mistake or passion, must be submitted to. Much
better it is in the state of nature, wherein men are not bound to submit to the
unjust will of another. And if he that judges, judges amiss in his
own, or any other case, he is answerable for it to the rest of
mankind. [Emphasis
added]http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtr02.htm
As can be seen by the last sentence above, a judiciary
accountable to the People is necessary "if government is to be the remedy of
those evils" making it much better in the state of nature "wherein men are not
bound to submit to the unjust will of another." And it is the
People to whom the judiciary must be held accountable:
Sec. 240 ... Who shall be judge, whether the
prince or legislative act contrary to their trust? ... To this I reply,
The people shall be judge; for who shall be judge
whether his trustee or deputy acts well, and according to the trust reposed in
him, but he who deputes him, and must, by having deputed him, have still a power
to discard him, when he fails in his trust? If this be reasonable in particular
cases of private men, why should it be otherwise in that of the greatest moment,
where the welfare of millions is concerned, and also where the evil, if not
prevented, is greater, and the redress very difficult, dear, and
dangerous?
John Locke, at Chapter XIX "Of the Dissolution of Government"
(supra.)
When the government has ceased protecting the rights of
the People and thereby has ceased to exist as government, the People are at
liberty to provide for themselves by reforming and restoring government to what
it was meant to be when originally instituted for their safety and
happiness:
Sec. 220. In these and the like cases, when the
government is dissolved, the people are at liberty to provide for themselves, by
erecting a new legislative, differing from the other, by the change of persons,
or form, or both, as they shall find it most for their safety and good: for the
society can never, by the fault of another, lose the native and original right
it has to preserve itself, which can only be done by a settled legislative, and
a fair and impartial execution of the laws made by it. But the state of mankind
is not so miserable that they are not capable of using this remedy, till it be
too late to look for any. To tell people they may provide for themselves, by
erecting a new legislative, when by oppression, artifice, or being delivered
over to a foreign power, their old one is gone, is only to tell them, they may
expect relief when it is too late, and the evil is past cure. This is in effect
no more than to bid them first be slaves, and then to take care of their
liberty; and when their chains are on, tell them, they may act like freemen.
This, if barely so, is rather mockery than relief; and men can never be secure
from tyranny, if there be no means to escape it till they are perfectly under
it: and therefore it is, that they have not only a right to get out of it, but
to prevent it. (Id.)
As stated above, the People (society) can never, by a despotic power, lose
their inherent right to preserve themselves against such despotism which can be
done only by re-establising a righteous government where
laws under the original Constitution are faithfully executed in a fair and
impartial manner. And re-establishing a righteous government, through an
accountable judiciary, can be done only by J.A.I.L., "Amendment E" in South
Dakota.
For the current power structure of the state of South Dakota,
operating under color of office, to tell the South
Dakotans that Amendment E should not be passed; that their liberty is assured
under the current system despite their slave status under the despotic state, is
actually telling them to pursue their life, liberty, and happiness
while being slaves to the state, and while their "chains
are on" the South Dakotans may "act like freemen." As stated by Locke, such a
representation by the government imposters in South Dakota "is rather mockery
than relief" and the South Dakotans "can never be secure from tyranny if there
be no means to escape it till they are perfectly under it." Therefore, the
People of South Dakota (or any state) "have not only the right to get out of
[tyranny], but to prevent it." (See Sec. 220, supra.) And
this they MUST do, by passing Amendment E this November.
Furthermore, as the inherent right of the People to preserve themselves
against absolute despotism, the Declaration of Independence
acknowledges this right as THE DUTY of the People to abolish the tyranny,
and prevent it by replacing it with a righteous government. Passing
Amendment E in November is the DUTY of all South Dakotans.
People: Don't be
fooled!!
-Barbie-
ACIC, National J.A.I.L. Admin.