Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Elites engage in commerce by proxy

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Within the confines of my own skin.
    Posts
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    That was not a freeman, at least as defined.
    If one is without and working for another, that's servitude. Not freedom.

    I offer you to further investigate definitions in greater detail;


    Freedom does not mean everything is without labor, freedom is not free.
    Boyd K. Packer, a prominent religious educator, said: "Freedom is not a self-preserving gift. It has to be earned, and it has to be protected."
    Agreeing to work to take care of ones self and his family is not enslavement.

    ------

    "Freedom" was earned after an allotted time, or until the person demanding "payment" was satisfied – this was known as indentured servitude, and was not originally intended as a stigma or embarrassment for the person involved since many of the sons and daughters of the wealthy and famous of the time found themselves forced into such temporary servitude.

    An indentured servant would sign a contract agreeing to serve for a specific number of years, typically five or seven. Many immigrants to the colonies came as indentured servants, with someone else paying their passage to the Colonies in return for a promise of service. At the end of his service, according to the contract, the indentured servant (male or female) usually would be granted a sum of money, a new suit of clothes, land, or perhaps passage back to England. An indentured servant was not the same as an apprentice or a child who was "placed out."


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_%28Colonial%29

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by motla68 View Post

    I offer you to further investigate definitions in greater detail;


    Freedom does not mean everything is without labor, freedom is not free.
    Boyd K. Packer, a prominent religious educator, said: "Freedom is not a self-preserving gift. It has to be earned, and it has to be protected."
    Let's begin. Shall we?
    I did not imply that freedom was without labor.
    If some strongman is deriving usufructus from you as some sort of tribute or is directing your labor that is a form of servitude, not freedom.

    Besides, we are talking about the status and title of freeman.

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    Agreeing to work to take care of ones self and his family is not enslavement.
    The kind of work one does is available to them is often determined by class.


    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    "Freedom" was earned after an allotted time, or until the person demanding "payment" was satisfied – this was known as indentured servitude, and was not originally intended as a stigma or embarrassment for the person involved since many of the sons and daughters of the wealthy and famous of the time found themselves forced into such temporary servitude.

    An indentured servant would sign a contract agreeing to serve for a specific number of years, typically five or seven. Many immigrants to the colonies came as indentured servants, with someone else paying their passage to the Colonies in return for a promise of service. At the end of his service, according to the contract, the indentured servant (male or female) usually would be granted a sum of money, a new suit of clothes, land, or perhaps passage back to England. An indentured servant was not the same as an apprentice or a child who was "placed out."[/I]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_%28Colonial%29
    Thank-you for the cite. However, if you believe indentured servitude makes one free or a freeman, I need to take you back to basics so that you can clearly distinguish servitude from liberty.

    Let's look at how some of your ancestors defined free man:

    Hannah Arendt traces the origins of the concept of freedom to the practice of politics in ancient Greece. According to her study, the concept of freedom was historically inseparable from political action. Politics could only be practiced by those who had freed themselves from the necessities of life, so that they could attend to the realm of political affairs (political freedom)
    Roman law also embraced certain limited forms of liberty, even under the rule of the Roman Emperors. However, these liberties were accorded only to Roman citizens. Still, the Roman citizen enjoyed a combination of positive liberty (the right to a trial, a right of appeal, law and contract enforcement) and negative liberty (unhindered right to contract and the right to not be tortured). Many of the liberties enjoyed under Roman law endured through the Middle Ages, but were enjoyed solely by the nobility, never by the common man. The idea of unalienable and universal liberties had to wait until the Age of Enlightenment. (Liberty)
    Baron is a title of nobility. The word baron comes from Old French baron, itself from Old High German and Latin (liber) baro meaning "(free) man, (free) warrior"; it merged with cognate Old English beorn meaning "nobleman".[1] The mediaeval Latin word baro, baronis, was used originally to denote a tenant-in-chief of the early Norman kings, which class developed into feudal barons who held their lands from the king by the feudal tenure per baroniam and were entitled to attend parliament. (Baron)
    FRANK c.1300, "free, liberal, generous," from O.Fr. franc "free (not servile), sincere, genuine, open, gracious; worthy" (12c.), from M.L. Franc "a freeman, a Frank" (see Frank). The connection is that only Franks, as the conquering class, had the status of freemen. Sense of "outspoken" first recorded in English 1540s. (Source)
    LIBERTY late 14c., from O.Fr. liberté "freedom," from L. libertatem (nom. libertas) "freedom, condition of a freeman," from liber "free" (see liberal)

    The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure it is right. [Learned Hand, 1944]

    Nautical sense of "leave of absence" is from 1758. To take liberties "go beyond the bounds of propriety" is from 1620s. Sense of "privileges" led to sense of "a person's private land" (mid-15c.), which yielded sense in 18c. England and America of "a district within a county but having its own justice of the peace," and also "a district adjacent to a city and in some degree under its municipal jurisdiction" (e.g. Northern Liberties of Philadelphia). (Source)
    LIBERAL late 14c., from O.Fr. liberal "befitting free men, noble, generous," from L. liberalis "noble, generous," lit. "pertaining to a free man," from liber "free," from PIE base *leudheros (cf. Gk. eleutheros "free"), probably originally "belonging to the people" (though the precise semantic development is obscure), from *leudho- "people" (cf. O.C.S. ljudu, Lith. liaudis, O.E. leod, Ger. Leute "nation, people"). Earliest reference in English is to the liberal arts. Sense of "free in bestowing" is from late 14c. With a meaning "free from restraint in speech or action" (late 15c.) liberal was used 16c.-17c. as a term of reproach. It revived in a positive sense in the Enlightenment, with a meaning "free from prejudice, tolerant," which emerged 1776-88. Purely in reference to political opinion, "tending in favor of freedom and democracy" it dates from c.1801, from Fr. libéral, originally applied in English by its opponents (often in French form and with suggestions of foreign lawlessness) to the party favorable to individual political freedoms. But also (especially in U.S. politics) tending to mean "favorable to government action to effect social change," which seems at times to draw more from the religious sense of "free from prejudice in favor of traditional opinions and established institutions" (and thus open to new ideas and plans of reform), which dates from 1823.

    Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. [Ambrose Bierce, "Devil's Dictionary," 1911]

    The noun meaning "member of the Liberal party of Great Britain" is from 1820. (Source)
    Given the definitions above, you can see that a freeman was associated with the elite, nobility, the organic class and their posterity (sound familiar??), or the warrior/conquering class.
    Their members were freemen. Everyone else was subject with a disability of one sort or another.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 10-08-11 at 11:39 AM.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Within the confines of my own skin.
    Posts
    752
    Class? Enslavement starts in ones mind when one thinks in terms of living in boxes.

    Freeman is one that is free to choose to contract or not contract, restrain himself or not restrain. It goes beyond just not being imprisoned or jailed.

    Strong's Exhaustive concordance:
    Liberty = Freedom

    This is not 1540 or 1944, we live in 2011.

    Name:  stevej.jpg
Views: 96
Size:  13.0 KB
    Last edited by motla68; 10-08-11 at 03:58 PM.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    That's some way of looking at things .

    I'll have to chew on that.

    What I was seeking to convey was that a person should engage in commerce through a corporation or trust and not as a sole proprietor.
    Proprietor is awfully similar to the word propraetor ain't it? Propraetor pretty much means for (pro) the praetor. If a birth certificate is a corporate charter document then there is your corporation. William BLACKSTONE apparently regarded states to be corporations.

    Latin, from prō praetōre one who acts for a praetor
    Last edited by allodial; 10-08-11 at 04:35 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by motla68 View Post
    Class? Enslavement starts in ones mind when one thinks in terms of living in boxes.
    Class. If you prefer, try the term ESTATE.
    Start with Bouvier's Law Dictionary (1856) concerning the term ESTATE.

    And you make a classical mistake concerning SERVITUDE.
    Slavery is A form of SERVITUDE, not the form.
    There are a wide variety of forms of servitude of which slavery is but one.

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    Freeman is one that is free to choose to contract or not contract, restrain himself or not restrain. It goes beyond just not being imprisoned or jailed.
    And you miss the boat yet again.
    The name of the game is SERVITUDE in ALL its forms both great and small.

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    Strong's Exhaustive concordance:
    Liberty = Freedom
    Another error.
    Ask a seamen on shore leave if he has freedom or liberty and if the terms are synonymous.

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    This is not 1540 or 1944, we live in 2011.
    It's your prerogative to remain in ignorance of the etymology of terms if you so chose.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 10-08-11 at 06:10 PM.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post
    Proprietor is awfully similar to the word propraetor ain't it? Propraetor pretty much means for (pro) the praetor. If a birth certificate is a corporate charter document then there is your corporation. William BLACKSTONE apparently regarded states to be corporations.
    Interesting ....

    Here is what Etymonline has concerning various terms:

    proprietor 1630s, "owner, by royal grant, of an American colony," probably from proprietary (n.) in sense "property owner" (late 15c., see proprietary). In general sense of "one who holds something as property" it is attested from 1640s.

    proprietary mid-15c., "possessing worldly goods in excess of a cleric's needs," from M.L. proprietarius "owner of property," noun use of L.L. adj. proprietarius "of a property holder," from L. proprietas "owner" (see property). Meaning "held in private ownership" is first attested 1580s.

    praetor magistrate in ancient Rome (next in rank to consuls), early 15c., from L. praetor "one who goes before, a consul as leader of an army," from prae "before" (see pre-) + root of ire "to go" (see ion).

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Within the confines of my own skin.
    Posts
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    Class. If you prefer, try the term ESTATE.
    Start with Bouvier's Law Dictionary (1856) concerning the term ESTATE.
    And you make a classical mistake concerning SERVITUDE.
    Slavery is A form of SERVITUDE, not the form.
    There are a wide variety of forms of servitude of which slavery is but one.
    And you miss the boat yet again.
    The name of the game is SERVITUDE in ALL its forms both great and small.
    Another error.
    Ask a seamen on shore leave if he has freedom or liberty and if the terms are synonymous.
    It's your prerogative to remain in ignorance of the etymology of terms if you so chose.
    To me you are in error, Freemen can choose to serve or not to serve and how long to serve, free will to devise his own contracts.

    Cookie cutter thoughts, boxes , absolutes, ok i get it, you are all about compartmentalization. To which I disagree about things, so guess will have to agree to disagree on that too. I cannot live that way, whenever I make a motion to do a thing usually have a backup plan in hand ready to go in case changes ever need to be made. Everything is relative. Start at the 3:27 mark on the following video: http://youtu.be/sj3wEoA0AsQ

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by motla68 View Post
    To me you are in error, Freemen can choose to serve or not to serve and how long to serve, free will to devise his own contracts.
    You need more precision in your writings.
    If this is your personal definition of a TERM, state so.

    In most instances, no they can't.
    Most "freemen" waive their rights through contract.
    Most "freemen" couldn't guide their rights and suit through a brown paper sleeve let alone a court.
    Most "freemen" know not the "King's English".
    Most "freemen" hang themselves with their own speech, actions, or deeds.
    Most "freemen" claim to be free then accept the benefits from that which they are seeking to be free of.
    Most "freemen" want to use terms when they don't know anything about the history, origin, or development of the terms which they use.
    Most "freemen" have done no substantive research whether historical or legal that would enable them to become free.
    The above is my opinion and observations over the years.

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    Cookie cutter thoughts, boxes , absolutes, ok i get it, you are all about compartmentalization.
    You error again.
    What have you against inquiry?

    If you were smart you would learn to develop multidimensional vision.
    Can you see the sub-atomic particles, atoms, the whole, and the different time shifts of the aforementioned at the same time?

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    To which I disagree about things, so guess will have to agree to disagree on that too. I cannot live that way, whenever I make a motion to do a thing usually have a backup plan in hand ready to go in case changes ever need to be made. Everything is relative. Start at the 3:27 mark on the following video: http://youtu.be/sj3wEoA0AsQ
    Here is an idea:
    Try citing more scholarly research such as treatises or archive documents and less on the YouTube videos.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 10-09-11 at 11:55 AM.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Within the confines of my own skin.
    Posts
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    You need more precision in your writings.
    If this is your personal definition of a TERM, state so.

    In most instances, no they can't.
    Most "freemen" waive their rights through contract.
    Most "freemen" couldn't guide their rights and suit through a brown paper sleeve let alone a court.
    Most "freemen" know not the "King's English".
    Most "freemen" hang themselves with their own speech, actions, or deeds.
    Most "freemen" claim to be free then accept the benefits from that which they are seeking to be free of.
    Most "freemen" want to use terms when they don't know anything about the history, origin, or development of the terms which they use.
    Most "freemen" have done no substantive research whether historical or legal that would enable them to become free.
    The above is my opinion and observations over the years.



    You error again.
    What have you against inquiry?

    If you were smart you would learn to develop multidimensional vision.
    Can you see the sub-atomic particles, atoms, the whole, and the different time shifts of the aforementioned at the same time?



    Here is an idea:
    Try citing more scholarly research such as treatises or archive documents and less on the YouTube videos.
    Philosophy is just as important as scholarly research if not more so. Just like a judge makes opinions in court so is scholarly research, just look how far alternative medicines have come and the scholarly researchers who try to stop it.
    If you cannot develop a thought without using a book as a crutch then you are going to have a really difficult time when they take them all away.
    It has done me very well to approach situations in an informal manner unlike the cattle drive going on in society today.
    Were you born with a book in hand, will you die with a book in hand, if not then you might need to look at what your doing wrong in between.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by motla68 View Post
    Philosophy is just as important as scholarly research if not more so. Just like a judge makes opinions in court so is scholarly research, just look how far alternative medicines have come and the scholarly researchers who try to stop it.
    What do you think the term jurisprudence means?

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    If you cannot develop a thought without using a book as a crutch then you are going to have a really difficult time when they take them all away.
    However, the words, terms, ideas, and concepts you use are not your own. They were created antecedent to your existence.
    Again, if you want to ignore the history prior to your existence, that is your prerogative.

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    It has done me very well to approach situations in an informal manner unlike the cattle drive going on in society today.
    That's great. Glad it works for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by motla68
    Were you born with a book in hand, will you die with a book in hand, if not then you might need to look at what your doing wrong in between.
    That depends. Were you born speaking English? Were you born with your philosophy?
    If not, you may want to reconsider the absurdity of your statement above.
    Last edited by shikamaru; 05-17-14 at 10:56 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •