Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Self-Sufficiency and Preparedness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-03-2024, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,012 posts, read 14,191,607 times
Reputation: 16731

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBear View Post
Don't argue any of that, however, the definition of a republic is:

A republic is a form of government in which:
Political power rests with the public through their representatives
The social and political affairs of the country are considered a “public matter”
Representatives of the citizen body hold the power to rule
The supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote
It is usually governed by elected representatives of the people and a president

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

Per this definition, a just, moral, and virtuous people can have the greatest country on earth, at least until the socialist/communist types start trying to destroy the "moral and virtuous" part.
Ironically, a republic is not synonymous with a republican form of government.
REPUBLIC - A commonwealth; That form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. In another sense, it signifies the state, independent of its form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 1302
A republic is not synonymous with a republican form of government.
The Peoples Republic of China is a republic but not a republican form.
Voting and holding public office is a privilege granted to subject citizens, not exercised by sovereign people.

AMERICANS are promised a republican form in Art. 4, Sec. 4, USCON. But the constitution is NOT the source of the republican form. IT existed BEFORE the USCON.
GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people... directly...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695
This is a bit vague and misleading. (Intentionally?)
What IS a republican form?
One in which the people are born equal (before the law - none higher) and have Creator endowed rights that governments were instituted to secure - not tax, regulate, nor restrict.
-BUT-
Those who consent to be governed, surrender their endowments in exchange for political and civil liberties (aka “constitutional rights”) that come with mandatory civic duties that abrogate endowed rights.

In simpler terms, the people are sovereigns (none higher), but the citizens are subjects of their “sovereign” (the government that they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to obey).

HOW DO WE KNOW THIS?
"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's CONSENT. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Abraham_lincoln
All state constitutions repeat or rephrase the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence, the foundation of all law in these united States.

SOVEREIGNS
". . . at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the [American] people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves. . ."
- - - Justice John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...CR_0002_0419_Z

Restating: American people are sovereigns under the republican form. They retain all their endowed rights.
The government is their agent, helping secure their endowed rights - and nothing more without consent.
HOWEVER, those who consented to the democracy, have mandatory civic duties in exchange for political "rights" (voting, holding public office). This has been part of the law since day one.
“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”
- - - George Washington; "Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289.
Original prerequisites for citizenship were strenuous. One had to be a property owner, a tax payer, a militiaman, and held to a higher standard of behavior. The net result was that only a small percentage of Americans were to be citizens / electors voting and holding office, while the vast bulk of sovereigns were to be left alone in liberty.
(Or one might say that the 3% who fought and won the revolution didn’t want the sideliners suddenly stepping up and taking control over the government they instituted.)
That’s why citizens have mandatory militia duty (“Selective Service”), owe a portion of their property (via taxes), and are held to a higher standard of behavior - or at least should be.

That's why "We, the People of the United States" didn't mean the people of the united States of America, since the majority could not vote nor ratify the USCON. The USCON was an "inside job," which is why Patrick Henry didn't want to attend the convention. He "smelt a rat."

There is only one country on Earth with a republican form, and not 1 in 100,000 Americans can accurately define it, its source and origin. Kudos to the world's greatest propaganda ministry.

All the facts are available in any county courthouse law library. But few Americans bother to read the law. Sigh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-03-2024, 04:26 PM
 
Location: SE corner of the Ozark Redoubt
8,920 posts, read 4,636,248 times
Reputation: 9232
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Ironically, ...
...
All the facts are available in any county courthouse law library. But few Americans bother to read the law. Sigh.
You don't even have to go to a law library.
Few Americans bother to read the law, because they have other things to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2024, 05:25 PM
 
Location: Florida
14,964 posts, read 9,794,276 times
Reputation: 12053
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Simplified system of rules:
What's yours is yours,
What's mine is mine,

Don't trespass.
The End.


Addendum :

Be considerate of others.
So if my horses or cattle get out into my neighbors pasture... how do we handle that? That won't work with neighbors. Sure you can say "well they shouldn't get out", but they do and they will.

The end game the way I see it... is a better way to network when things happen, and if they and when they happen... knowing there's a plan "B" and a plan "C" and people willing to help.

I've said it before and I'll say it again... 'only independent people can choose dependency'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2024, 01:15 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,012 posts, read 14,191,607 times
Reputation: 16731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_n_Tenn View Post
So if my horses or cattle get out into my neighbors pasture... how do we handle that?
Compensate for accidental damage.
Forgive trespasses.
. . .
Or instigate a blood feud, wipe out several generations...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2024, 07:08 AM
 
Location: Florida
14,964 posts, read 9,794,276 times
Reputation: 12053
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Compensate for accidental damage.
Forgive trespasses.
. . .
Or instigate a blood feud, wipe out several generations...
So... it's conditional, as it should be with neighbors. I just expect to be treated the way I treat others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-04-2024, 04:29 PM
 
Location: North Alabama
1,561 posts, read 2,793,470 times
Reputation: 2228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_n_Tenn View Post
Well... if the product (like raw milk and farm fresh eggs) are sold without FDA oversight it has to be sold as "not for human consumption". I eat a lot of fresh eggs of various fowl...quail, duck and chickens. I get my meat and dairy from local people... mostly. When the farmers market sells farm fresh it has to labeled as such.

Does that make sense?
Yes. Thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:53 AM
 
2,628 posts, read 1,173,205 times
Reputation: 3348
I'm curious as to why people do this?

having a prepper community would mean everyone has access to what is stored? or and most likely the neighbors know what who has. That to me is a bit dangerous since they know who to rob if anything happens to their stored SHTF food, etc etc.

Why do this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 05:15 PM
 
455 posts, read 305,795 times
Reputation: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by staystill View Post
I'm curious as to why people do this?

having a prepper community would mean everyone has access to what is stored? or and most likely the neighbors know what who has. That to me is a bit dangerous since they know who to rob if anything happens to their stored SHTF food, etc etc.

Why do this?
If you have a community of people all prepping, there is a larger pool of available resources and skills for trade or assistance in an emergency so all have a better chance of survival.
When you have only one prepper in a community of non preppers, then if the others know about the preps, that one prepper individual/family is definitely in danger of looting in an emergency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:08 AM
 
7,323 posts, read 4,118,369 times
Reputation: 16783
Quote:
Originally Posted by staystill View Post
I'm curious as to why people do this?

having a prepper community would mean everyone has access to what is stored? or and most likely the neighbors know what who has. That to me is a bit dangerous since they know who to rob if anything happens to their stored SHTF food, etc etc.

Why do this?
It's like when a patriarch dies. Nothing tears a family apart like when the will is read. Emotions are amplified. All the fault lines in family comes out - favors done are tallied up & past hurts are exaggerated. If a family is going to break apart, it usually does so then.

You don't know how people will react until the end.

However, I think the whole prepper community idea comes from the covered wagons traveling to midwest. People in a hostile terrain working together to survive. Although, those people had similar northern European and religious roots - German, Scandinavian and Protestant immigrants - which helped to hold groups together. It's why the midwest is still known as having community or a neighborhood spirit.

This spirit was not developed on the Atlantic seaboard. For the most part, people walked off the boats into small towns or cities with a rule of law. They lived with their ex-pats in Italian, Irish, German, Dutch, Polish, etc. ghettos. Their languages where spoken in the streets and printed in local newspapers. It was their children educated in public schools who learned English and became Americans. This bypassed the idea of a new community spirit. It was more like rugged individualism fighting for a piece of an established pie.

So I think you would need a prepper group where the idea of a group effort/spirit is natural. Frankly, as a lifelong New Yorker, it's not me.

Last edited by YorktownGal; Today at 09:17 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:07 AM
 
Location: rural south west UK
5,406 posts, read 3,597,111 times
Reputation: 6644
I have been involved with several prepper groups but they all collapse long before SHTF, people move house, or move jobs, or family commitments or just lose interest in their "hobby", we are all spread out across the country and most of us have to live alongside non preppers, even family are sheeple and dont want to know.
so its lone wolf(+1) for me, I cannot be responsible for people that cant be bothered to look after themselves in an emergency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Self-Sufficiency and Preparedness
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top