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.