True Left
Politics => Issues => Topic started by: 90sRetroFan on August 11, 2020, 11:55:36 pm
-
(https://i0.wp.com/harvestingnature.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Constitutional_Amendments_Map.png?resize=800%2C570&ssl=1)
-
Stating the obvious about the absurdity of Western law:
https://x.com/eveningbtc/status/2004132351803347221
https://x.com/nofucksmagee/status/2004242884124725659
-
Western colonialism led to illegalization of **** worldwide (2:50-2:57):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP6tgqG0TUM
Legal **** is negatively correlated with nuclear families, and nuclear families are positively correlated with machinism, therefore legal **** is negatively correlated with machinism (7:34-8:01, 9:10-9:36). This is the real reason why Western civilization, and in particular Yahwism (as explicitly mentioned in the video), is opposed to legal ****.
Decolonization should include re-legalizing **** in all non-Western countries where **** was formerly legal. I personally have zero interest in the industry (and despise both prostitutes and their customers*), but it does not initiate violence (I would of course legally require all prostitutes to have their reproductive organs removed first unless they have already reached menopause) and therefore should be legal (and taxable ;D ).
(* I view people who marry with gaining money in mind or who offer money to facilitate marriage no differently than I view prostitutes and their customers respectively.)
-
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/more-3200-serving-life-without-parole-nonviolent-offenses-finds-aclu
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_India_Act_1935
The Government of India Act 1935 (25 & 26 Geo. 5. c. 42) was an act passed by the British Parliament that originally received royal assent in August 1935. It was the longest act that the British Parliament ever enacted until the Greater London Authority Act 1999 surpassed it.[citation needed] Because of its length, the act was retroactively split by the Government of India (Reprinting) Act 1935 (26 Geo. 5. & 1 Edw. 8. c. 1) into two separate acts:
The Government of India Act 1935 (26 Geo. 5. & 1 Edw. 8. c. 2), having 321 sections and 10 schedules.
The Government of Burma Act 1935 (26 Geo. 5. & 1 Edw. 8. c. 3), having 159 sections and 6 schedules
-
https://x.com/hindookissinger/status/1878008040877654254?t=-k0iO1hjpKm1GGwlMHTndg&s=19
Even days: Indian Constitution was copied from American, British, etc.
Odd days: Indian Constitution was authored by BN Rau.
Biradar, the Constitution is mostly Government of India Act, 1935 with some inputs from the committee, that included both Rau and Ambedkar.
-
Another legal practice that reveals Western ethical depravity:
https://us.yahoo.com/news/last-supper-death-row-america-100049799.html
Hours before convicted murderer Jamie Mills became the latest man to be executed in America, he was granted a special last request: What would he like to eat on his final day on Earth?
The man convicted in the beating deaths of an elderly couple in told Alabama prison officials he wanted a seafood buffet of sorts, with three large shrimp, two catfish filets, three oysters, three onion rings and one stuffed crab.
Mills got that meal before he was taken to the death chamber to die by lethal injection. But the choice of a last meal is no guarantee in U.S. prisons. The age-old tradition is shrouded in controversy, ethical disagreement and even concern over how much the meal may cost taxpayers.
...
The special meal also is a recognition of a person’s humanity before their end, Denno said, and a means to assuage the guilt of bystanders.
Though even the most lavish final feasts ultimately amount to a pittance when compared with the overall cost of convicting and executing a death row prisoner, the idea that taxpayer dollars could be spent on their pleasure is "horrifying to even think about" for the victims, Denno said.
...
Lawrence Brewer, who along with two co-defendants were convicted of torturing and killing a 49-year old disabled Black man in Jasper County in 1998.
Brewer requested for his last meal:
Two chicken-fried steaks with gravy and sliced onions
A triple-patty bacon cheeseburger
A cheese omelet with ground beef, tomatoes, onions, bell peppers and jalapeños
A bowl of fried okra with ketchup
One pound of barbecued meat with half a loaf of white bread
Three fajitas
A meat lover’s pizza
One pint of Blue Bell Ice Cream
A slab of peanut butter fudge with crushed peanuts
Three root beers
Woke comments:
I wonder if these criminals gave their victims a choice of a last meal?????
no they shouldnt gett a big last meal. they didnt give the people they killed a last meal.
we give them extra years to live which is a big mistake that's enough.
Don't waste the food.
So the people they murdered didn't get a last meal, why should they? Death penalty should be slow and agonizing
Yes, this is indeed a uniquely Western ritual:
https://www.thetakeout.com/history-of-the-last-meal-on-death-row-1848470453/
A faculty publication from the Mercer University School of Law titled "Cold (Comfort?) Food: A Systematic Examination of the Rituals and Rights of the Last Meal" cites ancient Greece as the origin of this tradition.
...
In the paper, author Sarah Gerwig-Moore and her colleagues also write that in 18th-century Germany, a "Hangman's Meal" was often held: Lawyers, judges, clergy, local dignitaries, and even the executioner would attend what was essentially a feast for the condemned. In Nuremberg, providing an entire roasted goose to the person set to be executed was an established part of this tradition. During the Hangman's Meal, the condemned would participate in a scripted exchange in which they were told to seek forgiveness for their actions. The sharing of a meal between the condemned and those who had condemned them was symbolic, representing both forgiveness and acceptance.
In the same time period, in London, prisoners were allowed to hold a similar celebration with outside guests. On the day of the execution, the procession would stop at a pub for a customary "last refreshment in life." These traditions could be seen both as a bittersweet celebration of life and an attempt to comfort someone facing death.
When will we get rid of this absurdity, especially in former Western colonies which never had such a practice prior to the colonial era?
-
If jury trials were not in use in the first place, all this could be avoided:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-tGFvrNZhc
-
"Kids should be spending 85% of their time outside in physical education and 15% in the classroom"
Kids should choose for themselves as individuals how to spend their time. Maintaining compulsory schooling but merely altering the distribution of activities does not reduce the violence initiated.
"I used to think that stoning was a harsh punishment for adultery, but more and more I'm understanding the wisdom behind it."
Death penalty for adultery is a must. The method of execution can vary by culture.
-
- The rational mind has reached it's maximum level of development and now mankind is being pushed in the opposite more musical direction.
Kids should be spending 85% of their time outside in physical education and 15% in the classroom, unfortunately it's the opposite that is happening in the school's today.
-Alot of the problems in society is due to its accepting attitude of fornication and adulterous behaviors. I used to think that stoning was a harsh punishment for adultery, but more and more I'm understanding the wisdom behind it. The age of stoning needs to be reintroduced into the world, maybe not in a literal sense but metaphysically speaking.
-Of course, western civilization is the one which most lacks awareness and appreciation of the divine feminine, which is probably why it is the one which has oppressed and mistreated it the most.
-
"schooling being legal (though not compulsory) leaves a potential avenue for parents to initiate violence by forcing children to attend school, but here too the correct response should be an additional law prohibiting parents from doing so."
In the case with schooling, if we are referring to Western education specifically, it should be noted that such instiutions didn't exist in non-Western countries prior to colonialism. Parents in non-Western countries force their children to attend school because (in the case of daughters) they feel it is a burden to take care of them and want to marry them off, but can't do so without educating them as the propsective husband almost always demands a college degree.
-
"So forcing children to get married is not ok, but forcing them to go to school is?"
Child marriage being legal does not imply it is compulsory, whereas compulsory schooling is exactly that. We are comparing between a law that allows children to get married (no violence initiated by the state) and another law that forces children to attend school (violence initiated by the state). Clearly the latter is worse.
If anything, child marriage being made illegal (apparently what the poster wants) is in effect a law that forces children to be unmarried (violence initiated by the state). So in both cases it is the Western law which directly involves the state initiating violence.
(Of course I understand that child marriage being legal (though not compulsory) opens a potential avenue for parents to initiate violence by forcing children to get married, but the correct response should be an additional law prohibiting parents from doing so. Similarly, schooling being legal (though not compulsory) leaves a potential avenue for parents to initiate violence by forcing children to attend school, but here too the correct response should be an additional law prohibiting parents from doing so. But at least the state itself is not directly initiating violence in either case.)
-
Western hypocrisy:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GGSneUxX0AAU2is?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
So forcing children to get married is not ok, but forcing them to go to school is?
-
https://twitter.com/Times4India/status/1746540279073804490
Pagan-Wing
@Times4India
Vishwaguru is probably the only spineless country in the whole map. Without either a moral principle or might of State. Just the lengthiest document for peak virtue signalling.
Ravi Kant 🪔
@Ravi3pathi
Should #polygamy be legal?
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GDzVz1rWYAAEXow?format=jpg&name=medium)
Polygamy should be legal regardless of religion.
-
Continuing from:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/childcare-issues/msg23499/#msg23499
This same ethical principle also applies elsewhere. If a new machine is invented, the inventors and those who voluntarily funded them are the only ones who chose to put themselves (and everyone else) into a world where that machine exists, while everyone else is put into that world not by their own choice. Therefore, everyone except the inventors/funders should be the ones who get to decide what happens with that machine. This is the opposite of what we currently have:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent
It goes without saying that patent law is uniquely Western:
Although there is some evidence that some form of patent rights was recognized in Ancient Greece in the Greek city of Sybaris,[9][10] the first statutory patent system is generally regarded to be the Venetian Patent Statute of 1474. However, recent historical research has suggested that the Venetian Patent Statute of 1474 was inspired by laws in the Kingdom of Jerusalem that granted monopolies to developers of novel silk-making techniques.[11] Patents were systematically granted in Venice as of 1474, where they issued a decree by which new and inventive devices had to be communicated to the Republic in order to obtain legal protection against potential infringers. The period of protection was 10 years.[12] As Venetians emigrated, they sought similar patent protection in their new homes. This led to the diffusion of patent systems to other countries.[13]
The English patent system evolved from its early medieval origins into the first modern patent system that recognised intellectual property in order to stimulate invention; this was the crucial legal foundation upon which the Industrial Revolution could emerge and flourish.[14]
If my principle were used instead, machinism would be disincentivized: what country would invest in machinism if inventing a machine meant every other country would possess it except the inventing country?
-
"ancient custom of many ancient Germanic tribes"
Why are we following the customs of savage barbarians?
-
Continuing from:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/trump-disapproval/msg22416/#msg22416
In an extraordinary and rare move, a New York judge found that Donald Trump committed fraud without even needing a trial and a jury to weigh in on the evidence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnNG5CuvcvQ&t=90s
From the comments section:
A summary judgment motion is a way of avoiding trial on issues that are so factually clear that they don't deserve to be determined by a jury because the facts are such that no reasonable jury needs to consider them. The burden of proof is always on the party bringing the motion, in this case the State of New York. ANY doubts of significant fact means that the motion MUST be denied. Any uncertainties of fact are construed against the moving party and in favor of the non-moving party. What that means in this case is that this judge determined that the facts were so clear that Trump committed fraud that no reasonable jury could find otherwise and no trial on that issue was necessary. In cases like this, that is an incredible ruling and NO JUDGE would have done it absent evidence which was just plain overwhelming. Summary judgment is not granted lightly because all benefit of doubt goes to the defendant. This result speaks volumes about the audacity of Trump's business conduct.
This is what we need to get back to as the norm. It would have been standard practice in non-Western courts. Juries are a uniquely Western idea:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury#Historical_roots
The modern jury evolved out of the ancient custom of many ancient Germanic tribes whereby a group of men of good character was used to investigate crimes and judge the accused. The same custom evolved into the vehmic court system in medieval Germany. In Anglo-Saxon England, juries investigated crimes. After the Norman Conquest, some parts of the country preserved juries as the means of investigating crimes. The use of ordinary members of the community to consider crimes was unusual in ancient cultures, but was nonetheless also found in ancient Greece.
The modern jury trial evolved out of this custom in the mid-12th century during the reign of Henry II.[5] Juries, usually 6 or 12 men, were an "ancient institution" even then in some parts of England
-
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/election-2023-maori-party-want-to-abolish-prisons-by-2040-separate-tikanga-justice-system-to-address-inequities/2OEWB6NBPVCG3GY56HIJ4VRYWQ/
Te Pāti Māori is challenging Labour to abolish prisons by 2040 and introduce a tikanga-based justice system to address the enormous inequities facing this country’s indigenous peoples.
Co-leader Rawiri Waititi launched what he called a “revolutionary plan to reform the justice system in Aotearoa” that would tackle the institutional racism that has “traumatised and failed Māori communities at every level”.
...
“We are asserting our tino rangatiratanga to oversee our own tikanga-based models of restorative justice.”
...
Te Pāti Māori is also pledging to reform drug laws to treat drug use as a health issue, not a criminal one, and to wipe criminal convictions for drug use and possession.
...
The most likely governing scenario for Te Pāti Māori would be to work with Labour and the Greens, if they gain enough support after the election, with National ruling out working with them.
However, I disagree with this part:
“Our tipuna did not sign Te Tiriti o Waitangi for whānau to be in care, incarcerated, and continually traumatised. The time for change is well overdue. This is a by Māori, for Māori, according to Māori solution and we will not compromise.”
Why for Maori only? Why not for everyone? How do you intend to get your country back so long as you intend to allow your colonizers to remain above your laws? When they first arrived, the colonizers did not allow you to remain above their laws:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81ori_people#Contact_with_Europeans
the colonial government confiscating tracts of Māori land as punishment for what were called "rebellions". Pākehā (European) settlers would occupy the confiscated land.[74] Several minor conflicts also arose after the wars, including the incident at Parihaka in 1881 and the Dog Tax War from 1897 to 1898. The Native Land Court was also established to transfer Māori land from communal ownership into individual title as a means to assimilation and to facilitate greater sales to European settlers.[75]
...
From the late 19th to the mid-20th century various laws, policies, and practices were instituted in New Zealand society with the effect of inducing Māori to conform to Pākehā norms; notable among these are the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907 and the suppression of the Māori language by schools,[77] often enforced with corporal punishment.[78]
-
Support Latif!
https://apnews.com/article/wilders-threat-netherlands-pakistan-latif-pakistan-cricketer-3653d89bef8f57522bf4929ecb4f3a4d
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Dutch prosecutors demanded a 12-year prison sentence Tuesday for a former Pakistani cricketer accused of incitement to murder firebrand anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders.
The suspect, identified by Wilders as Khalid Latif, is accused of offering a bounty of some 21,000 euros ($23,000) to anybody who killed Wilders.
Latif did not appear in the high-security courtroom near Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport for the trial. He is believed to be in Pakistan.
...
The prosecution office said that killing Wilders would not just have “caused unbearable pain to his loved ones. It would also have been an attack on the rule of law itself.”
Did the Dutch respect the laws of the countries they colonized?
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/netherlands's-colonial-brutality-which-rarely-known-by-people-scholars-and-histo/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/kieft's-war/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/surinam/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/east-timor/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/barbados/
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/formosa/
So why should we respect Dutch laws?
Wilders said in court that a conviction would send a “powerful signal to all other others who issue threats: we won’t accept it.”
And in comments he addressed directly to Latif, he added: “As long as I’m living and breathing, you won’t stop me. Your call to kill me and pay money for it is abject and will not silence me.”
Will anyone prove Wilders wrong?
An international warrant has been issued for Latif’s arrest. Dutch prosecutors said they had been trying to contact him since 2018, first as a witness and then to answer the charges. However, they said they hadn’t received any reply from the Pakistani authorities.
(https://i0.wp.com/www.opindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/pakistan-flag-sixteen_nine-1.jpeg?resize=696%2C398&ssl=1)
-
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/11/india-to-overhaul-colonial-era-criminal-laws-repeal-penal-code
India to overhaul colonial-era criminal laws, repeal penal code
India’s government has moved three bills in the lower house of parliament aimed at overhauling some colonial-era criminal laws, ranging from the controversial sedition law to strengthening laws that protect women and minors.
On the last day of the monsoon session of the parliament on Friday, federal Home Minister Amit Shah presented bills to repeal and replace the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Indian Evidence Act, many implemented by the British before the country’s independence in 1947.
The new legislation “will aim to give justice, not punishment,” said Shah, adding that the overhaul was imperative as the colonial laws have been at the core of the criminal justice system for over a century.
The bill seeks to replace the colonial-era sedition law which was mainly used against Indian political leaders seeking independence from British rule.
However, in modern India, it has frequently been used since 1947 as a tool of suppression by successive democratically elected governments to intimidate people who protest against authority. The bill seeks to replace it with a section on acts seen as endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.
-
https://us.yahoo.com/news/no-glory-bullies-south-koreas-021918438.html
In education-obsessed South Korea, where children can spend up to 16 hours a day studying at schools and in private academies, bullying is widespread, experts say, despite official efforts to stamp it out.
The problem, activists say, is that bullying often goes unpunished in real-time at schools, and the statute of limitations on such crimes makes it hard for victims to bring charges years later.
Pyo said she suffered from years of insomnia and depression as a result of her treatment at school, before deciding to stop hiding and go public with her accusations -- resulting in one of her bullies being fired from their job.
But Pyo is lobbying for real legal change, demanding South Korea suspend the statute of limitations affecting school violence and change the defamation law to better protect victims.
...
Pyo and other victims say South Korea should remove the statute of limitations on school violence so bullies can be held accountable even decades later.
I hardly need to tell you which one and only one civilization is to blame for such a blatantly anti-justice idea as statute of limitations (hint: the same one which is to blame for compulsory schooling):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations
In Classical Athens, a five-year statute of limitations was established for almost all cases, exceptions being such as the prosecution of non-constitutional laws (which had no limitation). Demosthenes wrote that these statutes of limitations were adopted to control "sycophants" (professional accusers).[8]
A statute of limitations, known in civil law systems as a prescriptive period, is a law passed by a legislative body to set the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings may be initiated.[1][2]
...
In civil law systems, such provisions are typically part of their civil and criminal codes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_(legal_system)
Civil law is a legal system originating in mainland Europe and adopted in much of the world.
But back to the first link, observe how a colonized person talks:
But there are huge practical issues with legally punishing adults for crimes committed as a juvenile, Noh said, which could give people lasting criminal records for teenage misdeeds.
How is this a problem?
-
We've entered a new era, the Imagination Age, so why are we still schooling kids like we did in the 19th Century?
I strongly dislike the progressive tone of this False Left article, which does not argue that (as we insist) compulsory schooling was wrong even when it was first implemented, but makes it sound like (the way progressives make everything sound like) it was understandable at the time but merely outdated now.
Enclosing children in increasingly restrictive schooling environments for most of their formative years, and drilling them with a standardized, test-driven curriculum is woefully inadequate for the Imagination Age.
Its whole line of thinking is progressive Yahwist (ie. compulsory schooling is bad because it leads to sub-maximal innovativeness):
65 percent of children now entering elementary school will work at jobs in the future that have not yet been invented.
...
While the past belonged to assembly line workers, the future belongs to creative thinkers, experimental doers, and inventive makers.
...
coercive schooling structure that values conformity over creativity, compliance over-exuberance.
The author is still a Westerner! The future she looks forward to (and for which, ironically, she believes compulsory schooling is slowing down progress towards) is the very one we are trying to prevent!
She is also the author of Unschooled: Raising Curious, Well-Educated Children Outside the Conventional Classroom
As I keep saying over and over again, problems created by Western civilization cannot be solved by more Western civilization.
See also:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/progressive-yahwism/msg9778/#msg9778
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/childcare-issues/msg6195/#msg6195
-
The description on the map is disgusting and makes no sense. Why do they need to violently FORCE people to attend school? What does that have to do with it being a universal “right”? Can they even name any other “right” that the state violently forces people to make use of? Because I sure can’t. The only reason why the “right to education” is treated as any different, is because the powers that be want their human capital. It’s not enough for them to involve THEMSELVES and relish in endless competition with others. They have to drag everyone else into it as well, once the competition reaches a statewide or national level. They don’t give a **** about children. They just want their pawns
Indeed...
Why did schooling become widespread after the Industrial Revolution?
Our current compulsory schooling model was created at the dawn of the Industrial Age. As factories replaced farm work and production moved swiftly outside of homes and into the larger marketplace, 19th century American schooling mirrored the factories that most students would ultimately join.
Schooling Was for the Industrial Era, Unschooling Is for the Future
We've entered a new era, the Imagination Age, so why are we still schooling kids like we did in the 19th Century?
[...]The Imagination Age
The trouble is that we have left the Industrial Era for the Imagination Age, but our mass education system remains fully entrenched in factory-style schooling. By many accounts, mass schooling has become even more restrictive than it was a century ago, consuming more of childhood and adolescence than at any time in our history. The first compulsory schooling statute, passed in Massachusetts in 1852, required eight to 14-year-olds to attend school a mere 12 weeks a year, six of which were to be consecutive. This seems almost laughable compared to the childhood behemoth that mass schooling has now become...
https://fee.org/articles/schooling-was-for-the-industrial-era-unschooling-is-for-the-future/
-
The description on the map is disgusting and makes no sense. Why do they need to violently FORCE people to attend school? What does that have to do with it being a universal “right”? Can they even name any other “right” that the state violently forces people to make use of? Because I sure can’t. The only reason why the “right to education” is treated as any different, is because the powers that be want their human capital. It’s not enough for them to involve THEMSELVES and relish in endless competition with others. They have to drag everyone else into it as well, once the competition reaches a statewide or national level. They don’t give a **** about children. They just want their pawns
-
Our aim is to turn the whole map dark red:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/450/19691901369_a1999e3e8a_o.jpg)
which is how it used to be until relatively recently:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_education#Timeline_of_introduction
Timeline of introduction
1700s
1739: Denmark[35]
1763: Prussia[36]
1774: Austria
1800s
1805: Liechtenstein[37]
1814: Denmark[36]
1817: Travancore[38]
1824: Turkey,[39]
1834: Greece[36]
1841: Hawaii[40]
1842: Sweden[36]
1844: Portugal[36]
1852: Massachusetts[40]
1857: Spain[41]
1864: Washington, D.C.,[40] Romania
1867: Vermont[40]
1868: Montenegro
1869: Slovenia, Italy,[42] Costa Rica[43]
1870: Colombia[44]
1871: Michigan, New Hampshire, Washington,[40] Ontario,[45] Western Australia[46]
1872: Japan, Scotland[47] Connecticut (de facto unenforceable),[40] Victoria[46]
1873: Nevada,[40] British Columbia[45]
1874: Switzerland,[36] Kansas, New York, California[40]
1875: New Jersey, Maine,[40] South Australia[46]
1876: Wyoming,[40] Guyana, Suriname[48]
1877: New Zealand, Uruguay,[44] Ohio,[40] Prince Edward Island[45]
1878: Bulgaria
1879: Wisconsin[49]
1880: England,[36] Wales,[36] New South Wales,[46] Venezuela[50]
1882: France,[36] Serbia[51]
1883: Montana, Illinois, North Dakota, South Dakota, Rhode Island,[40] Nova Scotia[45]
1884: Argentina[44]
1885: Minnesota[40]
1886: Colombia (abolished)[44]
1887: Idaho, Nebraska[40]
1889: Norway,[52] Oregon, Colorado[40]
1890: Barbados,[53] Utah[40]
1891: New Mexico[40]
1892: Ireland[36]
1895: Pennsylvania[40]
1896: Kentucky, Hawaii[40]
1897: Ecuador,[44] Indiana, West Virginia[40]
1899: Arizona,[40] Puerto Rico
1900s
1900: Netherlands,[36] Queensland[46]
1902: Iowa, Maryland[40]
1904: Guam[54]
1905: Peru, Tennessee, Missouri,[40] New Brunswick[45]
1906: Namibia (white children with less than 4 km to nearest school only)[55]
1907: Iceland,[56] Delaware, North Carolina, Oklahoma[40]
1908: Virginia[40]
1909: Paraguay,[44] Arkansas,[40] Saskatchewan[45]
1910: Louisiana,[40] Alberta[45]
1912: Luxembourg[36]
1913: Albania[57]
1915: Alabama, South Carolina, Florida, Texas[40]
1916: Georgia (U.S. state),[40] Manitoba,[45] Tasmania[46]
1917: Mexico,[58] Gibraltar[59]
1918: Mississippi[40]
1919: Belgium,[36] Poland (only for children with less than 3 km to nearest school),[60] Latvia
1920: Chile,[44] Estonia,[61] Eswatini (white children only)
1921: Finland,[62] Thailand[63]
1923: Nauru[64]
1924: Ukrainian SSR[65]
1925: Mongolia[66]
1926: Byelorussian SSR[65]
1927: Colombia (reintroduced)[44]
1929: Alaska[40]
1930: India, Soviet Union[65]
1935: Afghanistan[67]
1942: Newfoundland[45]
1943: Quebec,[45] Iran[68]
1946: Malta[69]
1949: Israel[42]
1951: Libya[70]
1952: Jordan[71]
1953: Egypt,[72] South Korea[73]
1956: Poland (all children)[60]
1960: Chad
1961: Ghana[74]
1962: Cyprus,[75] Mali
1963: Algeria,[76] Morocco[77]
1964: Mozambique (children with less than three miles to nearest school)
1965: Kuwait[78]
1968: Republic of China[79][80][81]
1971: United Arab Emirates[82]
1973: Indonesia
1975: Somalia[83]
1976: Iraq,
1981: Seychelles,[84] Syria[85]
1986: People's Republic of China[86]
1988: Brazil,[87] Philippines[88]
1990: Bangladesh,[89] Yemen, Namibia (all children)
1991: Tunisia[90]
1994: Samoa
1996: Laos,[91] Afghanistan (abolished for women)[67]
1998: Lebanon,[92] Sudan[93]
2000s
2000: Singapore[94]
2001: Afghanistan (reintroduced for women),[67] Mauritania[95]
2003: Liberia,[96] Malaysia,[97] Sierra Leone[98]
2005: Bahrain[99]
2007: Brunei[100]
2008: Uganda,[101] Oman[102]
2009: Connecticut (enforceable misdemeanor, unenforceable prior to 2009)
2010: Lesotho[103]
2021: Afghanistan (secondary school abolished for women)[104]
Countries without compulsory education
Bhutan[105]
Papua New Guinea[106]
Solomon Islands[107]
Vatican City
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_education#Criticism
Critics of compulsory schooling argue that such education violates the freedom of children
It does!
-
Technically speaking I have seen some "trad" Turanist Hindus who are homophobic, but these are almost all invariably Westerners.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhLqKwQ64IM
Best comment:
British rule in India made These things difficult bz they imported victorian laws India...it was not an issue in pre colonial era
Exactly. Homophobes/transphobes in India are not Hindus:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_India#History
Hinduism acknowledges a third gender; there are certain characters in the Mahabharata who, according to some versions of the epic, change genders, such as Shikhandi, who is sometimes said to be born as a female but identifies as male and eventually marries a woman.
...
The Hindu Khajuraho temples, famous for their erotic sculptures, contain several depictions of homosexual activity. Historians have long argued that pre-colonial Indian society did not criminalise same-sex relationships, nor did it view such relations as immoral or sinful.
but actually Westerners:
The Dutch traveler Johan Stavorinus reported about male homosexuality among Mughals living in Bengal, "The sin of Sodom is not only universal in practice among them, but extends to a bestial communication with brutes, and in particular, sheep. Women even abandon themselves to the commission of unnatural crimes."[7][8]
...
Homosexuality was first criminalized in India under the British Raj through Section 377 which was imposed in 1862. [16]The law stated: "Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation: Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offense described in the section."[17] The law was drafted by Thomas Babington Macaulay, who based it on anti-sodomy laws that already existed in Britain[16]."
...
One of the first sodomy-related cases to be prosecuted under British rule in India was the case of Khairati vs Queen Empress in 1884.[19] Khairati was first called on by the police when he was seen cross-dressing and singing with a group of women in Moradabad.[20] The case was brought to the Allahabad high court, where Khairati was forced to undergo a medical examination and it was found that he had an 'extended anal orifice' which was the sign of a 'habitual catamite'.[20] Cross-dressing was, again, used as evidence to support this argument. Cross-dressing was normal in indigenous culture in India, but since this did not fit the moral standards of sexuality of Britishers and the ambiguity of Section 377, Khairati was arrested and prosecuted in court.[19]
-
The turanian molding force in western occupied "North America" needs to be destroyed. A manifestation of this is the stupid no loitering laws, only in the west would it be illegal simply to stand somewhere. In western occupied "North America" you always have to be moving from point a to point b.
I'm sure if more people in the west where to loiter among themselves then a unity could grow to alleviate the divisions, classism/rascism, and inappropriate distancing that currently plagues it.
-
Victory:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/pakistan-president-repeals-colonial-era-101554783.html
Pakistani president repeals colonial-era law against suicide
...
Under the previous legislation — a vestige of colonial times from before the 1947 partition that carved out India and Pakistan from the former British Empire — attempted suicide was punishable by up to one year in prison, a fine or both in Pakistan.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/10/19/81/101981fadfbcafbbc7acb9b3feabb955.png)
Of course the British colonialists discouraged suicides, as fewer people meant less tax paid.
In general, any state that prohibits suicide cares more about you as a taxpayer than about you as an individual.
With that said, under current circumstances, the best method for anyone in Pakistan who wants to commit suicide would be to try to eliminate at least one Western colonialist bloodline along with themselves.
-
Bali governor insists sex ban no risk to tourists
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/12/12/indonesian-governor-claims-bali-bonk-ban-no-risk-to-tourists
Bali Governor Wayan Koster says authorities will not check the marital status of those checking in at tourist accommodations.
Bali’s governor has insisted visitors should not worry about a controversial ban on sex outside of marriage, dismissing concerns Indonesia’s revised criminal code will throttle the recovery of the resort island’s lucrative tourism industry.
Bali Governor Wayan Koster said in a statement on Sunday that people can only be prosecuted for sex outside of marriage following a complaint by a parent, spouse or child, a provision added to a stricter draft of the legislation to ensure “everyone’s privacy and comfortableness”.
Wayan said foreign tourists and residents “would not need to worry” about the revised laws and authorities would not check the marital status of people checking in at tourist accommodations.
The governor also criticised what he said were “hoax” reports of travellers cancelling flights and hotel bookings and cautioned against “misleading statements that would stir up the situation”, saying that data from travel agents and airlines indicates that the number of visitors is set to increase next year.
The governor’s remarks come as Bali, a predominately Hindu island in the world’s most populous Muslim-majority nation, seeks to attract back tourists after the COVID-19 pandemic caused arrivals to plunge from 6.3 million in 2019 to just dozens in 2021.
Tourism groups, including the Association of The Indonesian Tours and Travel Agencies and the Indonesian Hotel & Restaurant Association, have expressed concerns about the law, while Australia, the biggest source of foreign tourists, has said it is “seeking further clarity” about how its citizens could be affected.
Gary Bowerman, director of Kuala Lumpur-based travel and tourism research firm Check-in Asia, said despite authorities’ assurances, tourism is heavily dependent on perceptions.
“That’s why destinations spend millions of dollars on campaigns to promote their attractiveness and uniqueness to visitors. The new criminal code could instil a negative perception, not only for fear of personal safety but also for travellers concerned about the rights of local people,” Bowerman told Al Jazeera.
“The important thing to remember is that tourists have choices. If they feel that the new criminal code provides reasons not to visit Indonesia, they can book to go elsewhere. This is not a luxury shared by local people affected by the new criminal code.”
The sex ban follows a sweeping overhaul of Indonesia’s criminal code approved last week by its parliament.
Officials have hailed the passage of the code, which had stalled for decades, as a step to bring the country’s colonial-era laws “in line with Indonesian values”.
The United Nations, human rights groups and press freedom advocates have criticised the code, arguing it violates basic human rights and will disproportionately harm women, religious minorities and LGBTQ people.
In addition to outlawing sex outside of marriage, the code also bans apostasy and makes it a crime to insult the president, state institutions, the national flag and the state philosophy of Pancasila.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/news/indonesias-sex-laws-could-mean-212802595.html
Tourism operators in Indonesia are still trying to recover from the devastating impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic. Now the country's parliament has passed new laws that some fear could turn tourists away once again - because having sex out of wedlock is set to be outlawed.
The controversial laws, which critics have labelled a "disaster" for human rights, also ban unmarried couples from living together and restrict political and religious freedoms. There were protests in Jakarta this week, and the laws are expected to be challenged in court.
The new criminal codes are set to take effect in three years and apply to Indonesians and foreigners living in the country, as well as visitors.
...
Under the new law, unmarried couples caught having sex can be jailed for up to a year and those found living together could be jailed for up to six months.
And that is how absurd the Western notion of "human rights" are.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/2348/2503224501_9ed421f755_b.jpg)
Critics say holiday-makers could also become ensnared.
"Let's say an Australian tourist has a boyfriend or a girlfriend who is a local," Andreas Harsono, a senior researcher at Human Rights Watch told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).
"Then the local parents or the local brother or sister reported the tourist to the police. It will be a problem."
All locals who dislike this law should emigrate to Australia.
Visitors have been told not to worry too much, because police will only investigate if a family member makes a complaint - such as a parent, spouse or child of the suspected offenders.
But that is dangerous in itself, Mr Harsono said, as it opens the door to "selective law enforcement".
"It means that it will only be implemented against certain targets," he told ABC radio.
Always file complaints when "whites" are involved. Otherwise it proves you are still too intimidated by your colonizers to hold them to the same standards.
And of course it is not just tourists from Australia who could be affected.
Canadian travel blogger Melissa Giroux, who moved to Bali for 18 months in 2017, told the BBC she was "shocked" the law actually came through, after years of talk.
"Many tourists will prefer to go elsewhere instead of risking going to jail once the law is enforced," said Ms Giroux, who pens the blog A Broken Backpack.
"And I'm not even thinking about the single people who come to Bali to party or the ones who fall in love during their travels."
It is possible to fall in love (or to party, for that matter) and not have sex, you Westerner.
Indeed, note how almost the entire article is about how the new law will inconvenience (implicitly Western) tourists. This is how Westerners think the entire non-Western world should revolve around pleasing Western tourists. This is in itself one reason why laws such as the above are so refreshing: it sends the message that at least parts of the non-Western world still exist that does not prioritize the pleasure of Western tourists.
See also:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/anti-gentrification/msg15225/#msg15225
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/anti-gentrification/msg15738/#msg15738
-
Victory:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/singapore-decriminalize-sex-between-men-153034019.html
LGBTQ groups welcomed Lee's decision to repeal Section 377A of the penal code, a colonial-era law that criminalizes sex between men
(https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1562300735-b1f7f50e774b?ixlib=rb-1.2.1&ixid=MnwxMjA3fDB8MHxzZWFyY2h8Mnx8c2luZ2Fwb3JlJTIwZmxhZ3xlbnwwfHwwfHw%3D&w=1000&q=80)
As we keep emphasizing, homophobia is Western:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history_in_Singapore
traditional Malay culture did not contain the idea or the figure of the modern gay individual. However, Malay society did acknowledge the reality and existence of alternatives to heterosexual practices. ‘Third gender’ or transgender individuals, who are called mak nyah, were socially recognised, tolerated and even incorporated into community life.
...
Bret Hinsch in chapter 6 of his book 'Passions of the Cut Sleeve: the Male Homosexual Tradition in China' has detailed evidence, derived from the works of literati Li Yu and Shen De Fu, of institutionalised gay marriage practices amongst Hokkien men in Ming dynasty China.[3][4] The subculture was exported along with the human tide into Singapore and practised discreetly in an alien environment which officially espoused Victorian values.
...
As with other British colonies, Singapore acquired a legal system and law modelled after Britain. Victorian values were codified into strict laws governing sexual behaviour in the United Kingdom, and these were brought to the colonies. The colonial legal system criminalised sodomy (see section 377 of the Singapore Penal Code). These laws reinforced the values of the ruling British elite, which set the tone for other classes and ethnicities to emulate, at least on the surface. Over time, and to appear equally 'civilised' many Asians disavowed their longstanding cultural tolerance of sexual minorities.
...
When the Japanese invaded Singapore in February 1942, Japanese laws replaced previous colonial laws. Gay sex was never criminalised in Japan and would now have been technically legal in Singapore.
...
The growing popularity of travel to Thailand and Japan in the late 1970s also introduced Singaporeans to traditional Asian societies that were more accepting of homosexuals.
The problem is that illiterates were in power, and they inverted reality:
Singapore's rapid economic growth had been attributed by its leaders to 'Asian values'. The promotion of these ideas by Singaporean leaders fostered a climate of social conservatism. Against this backdrop, gays were perceived as a threat to Asian values and a sign of the emergence of decadent Western liberalism and individualism.
This truth is the exact opposite! It was Western civilization which perceived "gays" as a threat to its values! Then again, what can we expect from anyone who uses the Eurocentric term "Asian" (itself a colonial-era Western concept) to describe themselves? Maybe they are correct: if "Asian values" means perceiving oneself as a servile imitator of Western civilization, then of course you would perceive "gays" as a threat to your West-worship.....
See also:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/social-decolonization/msg7480/#msg7480
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/social-decolonization/msg14795/#msg14795
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/inspired-by-muhammad/msg13353/#msg13353
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/homophobia-is-not-american/msg671/#msg671
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/homophobia-is-not-american/msg6187/#msg6187
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/homophobia-is-not-american/msg9187/#msg9187
Bonus song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lQICEOGtdQ
-
Continuing from:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/legal-decolonization/msg7280/?topicseen#msg7280
now:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hong-kong-denies-democracy-advocates-042608391.html
(Bloomberg) -- Hong Kong has denied a jury trial to dozens of democracy advocates facing life in prison under a China-imposed national security law, according to local media, raising concerns over the rule of law in the former British colony.
Justice Secretary Paul Lam ordered the city’s largest national security case to be held before a panel of three handpicked judges in a document dated last Saturday, the South China Morning Post reported Wednesday.
His decision upholds a break with Hong Kong’s common law judicial tradition in such cases -- so far, no national security law defendant has been granted a jury.
Keep it up! Juries never existed in any non-Western civilization; this is something that all non-Westerners should be proud of!
Lam wrote that a jury trial carried “a real risk that the due administration of justice might be impaired,” according to the newspaper, which saw the document. He named “involvement of foreign factors” and the “personal safety of jurors” as reasons for the decision, citing provisions in the law for mandating a trial by judge.
Thank you. But if so, why not eliminate juries altogether?
Some 30 of the defendants, who include organizers of the 2019 anti-government protests and already jailed activist Joshua Wong, have been held without bail for more than a year
...
Three former leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China have been denied bail since being charged with subversion last September, with only basic details being reported from their court appearances.
Bail should also be eliminated, as previously discussed:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/legal-decolonization/msg752/?topicseen#msg752
-
The pushback against compulsory schooling (a uniquely Western institution) begins!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FZwa4ccWIAEI-15?format=jpg&name=900x900)
-
Finally some American radicalism:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/constitution-literally-written-slaveowners-why-203000305.html
The Constitution Was Literally Written By Slaveowners. Why Is America Obsessed With Upholding It?
Last week, the Supreme Court eviscerated a woman’s right to abortion, undermined Miranda rights, expanded gun rights and allowed border patrol agents to operate with even further impunity. Today, it ruled that a former Washington state high school football coach can pray on the field immediately after games—regardless of the religious backgrounds of the students.
...
The primary authors consisted of: John Adams, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison. The last two men on that list owned slaves. How can this set of laws still guide a nation when it was concocted by white men who looked at Black people as property and not as human?
...
It’s clear that the right will continue to twist and contort anything they can to carry out their agenda—an agenda that has and will always harm this country’s most marginalized and vulnerable populations. And honestly, the Constitution will always be a hell of an excuse to oppress Black folks on behalf of white supremacy.
-
Excellent!
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hong-kong-lawyers-next-target-210000651.html
(Bloomberg) -- Veteran human rights lawyer Michael Vidler decided it was too dangerous to work in Hong Kong the moment a judge designated to handle national security law cases implied offering legal support to democracy activists could be a crime.
...
“It was deeply disturbing for me as a lawyer to be, in essence, accused of inciting a crime because a potential client had a piece of paper on him which listed my firm as a source of legal advice and assistance,” said Vidler, who previously defended now-jailed democracy activist Joshua Wong and won a landmark appeal that recognized spousal visas for same sex couples.
...
Vidler left Hong Kong in May after almost two decades working in the former British colony, and closed his law firm shortly after. His experience reflects growing concern that Hong Kong’s rule of law, for decades a foundational pillar of its standing as an international financial center, is becoming more influenced by the mainland where the Communist Party controls the courts.
Now will someone track down this Western colonialist and finish him off?
Authorities have ramped up pressure on lawyers who’ve defended some of the 10,000 protesters arrested during the 2019 unrest. Prominent barrister Margaret Ng was arrested over her work with a fund providing financial aid to activists, with police reporting other lawyers to their professional bodies for misconduct unearthed in that investigation. She has denied the charges and a court hearing is set for Sept. 19.
Former Hong Kong Bar Association chief and human rights lawyer Paul Harris left the city in March after being questioned by national security police.
And hopefully the same for this Western colonialist?
“Any degradation of Hong Kong’s strong rule-of-law tradition by hollowing out rule-of-law-related institutions will not be favorable to the security of international investments and finance,” said Michael Davis, a professor of law and international affairs at O.P. Jindal Global University in India, and former law professor at the University of Hong Kong.
That's what we want! (And hopefully the same treatment as above for this Western colonialist?)
Keith Richburg, head of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club, Hong Kong, said the board suspended its longstanding Human Rights Press Awards earlier this year after lawyers advised him the police would probably investigate the organization for “aiding, promoting or celebrating sedition,” according to a recording of a meeting with local journalists to explain the decision.
This Western colonialist apparently hasn't left, so the government should hang him in public!
Perhaps most significantly, it changed the rules for bail by removing the presumption of innocence, a precedent that’s seen scores of defendants jailed for more than a year without a trial and has since been expanded to other crimes with a security element.
Thank you! The unethicality of bail was previously explained here:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/legal-decolonization/msg752/#msg752
Continuing:
So far, all four security law cases that have come to trial have resulted in guilty verdicts, with the sole defendant who fought charges denied a reduction in sentence in part because he chose not to plead guilty.
I dislike the practice of guilty pleas leading to reduced sentences, though. A guilty plea does not reduce the initial crime, therefore should not reduce the sentence for that crime. Reducing the sentence on account of a guilty plea amounts to reducing the sentence in in exchange for less work for the judge, which in an honourable world would be interpreted as the judge accepting a bribe from the criminal.
Despite fears for the legal protection of civil liberties, four lawyers who either currently practice or recently worked in Hong Kong said there appears to be an expectation in the business community that other areas of law won’t be eroded, which they considered to be misguided. All four spoke on the condition of anonymity.
“Commercial law won’t be interfered with because that’s one of the pillars of Hong Kong being an international center for business, trade, and finance,” said George Cautherley, vice chairman of the International Chamber of Commerce in the city.
This Western colonialist (who apparently also hasn't left) should also be hanged in public.
(https://newsdiaryonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Hong-Kong-and-China.png)
-
Bankruptcy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy
Bankruptcy is a legal process through which people or other entities who cannot repay debts to creditors may seek relief from some or all of their debts. In most jurisdictions, bankruptcy is imposed by a court order, often initiated by the debtor.
is another Western institution spread around the world during the colonial era that has been thoughtlessly continued, but which we need to get rid of. It is an institution that favours people who take risks with money, since if it goes well they keep the profits, but if it goes badly they are insulated from the consequences:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjMDhBAXgAIjq35.jpg)
It is strategically sensible for capitalism to support bankruptcy as capitalism wants more people to take risks with money (so that some succeed). By eliminating bankruptcy, we would also weaken capitalism as a whole, as people would become more cautious with money.
So where does bankruptcy come from?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_bankruptcy_law
In Judaism and the Torah, or Old Testament, every seventh year is decreed by Mosaic Law as a Sabbatical year wherein the release of all debts that are owed by members of the Jewish community is mandated, but not of "gentiles".[1] The seventh Sabbatical year, or forty-ninth year, is then followed by another Sabbatical year known as the Year of Jubilee wherein the release of all debts is mandated, for fellow community members and foreigners alike, and the release of all debt-slaves is also mandated.[2] The Year of Jubilee is announced in advance on the Day of Atonement, or the tenth day of the seventh Biblical month, in the forty-ninth year by the blowing of trumpets throughout the land of Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy_Act_1705
Under the Act, the Lord Chancellor was given power to discharge bankrupts, once disclosure of all assets and various procedures had been fulfilled.
Discharge from debt was introduced for those who cooperated with creditors.
I heard from that in some non-Western countries, borrowers would commit suicide out of honor if they defaulted on their loans. It seems that this honor based code has all but vanished now, with the predominance of guiltless Western culture.
-
This is what decolonization is about:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/taliban-detain-afghan-fashion-model-120330348.html
ISLAMABAD (AP) — The Taliban have arrested a well-known Afghan fashion model and three of his colleagues, accusing them of disrespecting Islam and the Quran, the Muslim holy book, according to videos released by Afghanistan's new rulers.
Ajmal Haqiqi — known for his fashion shows, YouTube clips and modeling events — appeared handcuffed in videos posted on Twitter by the Taliban intelligence agency on Tuesday.
In one widely circulated and contentious video, Haqiqi is seen laughing as his colleague Ghulam Sakhi — who is known to have a speech impediment that he uses for humor — recites verses of the Quran in Arabic, in a comical voice.
This is Haqiqi:
(https://scontent.fhkg4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/142926542_100958718688273_7743388172018750314_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=973b4a&_nc_ohc=3XUIXweiLZAAX9TksQp&_nc_ht=scontent.fhkg4-1.fna&oh=00_AT8AoBevHbr7XI4CU7SVt2KlgV6KrZYNi4MedZ2Hcq0nHQ&oe=62C50B9C)
Later Wednesday, Amnesty International released a statement, urging the Taliban to “immediately and unconditionally” release Haqiqi and his colleagues.
No, cut off their tongues one slice at a time!
-
We see the contrast in the (non-Western) autocratic approach versus the (Western) democratic approach.
-
If we look at the history of policing in ancient non-Western civilizations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#History
China
Law enforcement in ancient China was carried out by "prefects" for thousands of years since it developed in both the Chu and Jin kingdoms of the Spring and Autumn period. In Jin, dozens of prefects were spread across the state, each having limited authority and employment period. They were appointed by local magistrates, who reported to higher authorities such as governors, who in turn were appointed by the emperor, and they oversaw the civil administration of their "prefecture", or jurisdiction. Under each prefect were "subprefects" who helped collectively with law enforcement in the area. Some prefects were responsible for handling investigations, much like modern police detectives. Prefects could also be women.[13] Local citizens could report minor judicial offenses against them such as robberies at a local prefectural office. The concept of the "prefecture system" spread to other cultures such as Korea and Japan.
Babylonia
In Babylonia, law enforcement tasks were initially entrusted to individuals with military backgrounds or imperial magnates during the Old Babylonian period, but eventually, law enforcement was delegated to officers known as paqūdus, who were present in both cities and rural settlements. A paqūdu was responsible for investigating petty crimes and carrying out arrests.[14][15]
Egypt
In ancient Egypt evidence of law enforcement exists as far back as the Old Kingdom period. There are records of an office known as "Judge Commandant of the Police" dating to the fourth dynasty.[16] During the fifth dynasty at the end of the Old Kingdom period, officers armed with wooden sticks were tasked with guarding public places such as markets, temples, and parks, and apprehending criminals. They are known to have made use of trained monkeys, baboons, and dogs in guard duties and catching criminals. After the Old Kingdom collapsed, ushering in the First Intermediate Period, it is thought that the same model applied. During this period, Bedouins were hired to guard the borders and protect trade caravans. During the Middle Kingdom period, a professional police force was created with a specific focus on enforcing the law, as opposed to the previous informal arrangement of using warriors as police. The police force was further reformed during the New Kingdom period. Police officers served as interrogators, prosecutors, and court bailiffs, and were responsible for administering punishments handed down by judges.
...
India
Law enforcement systems existed in the various kingdoms and empires of ancient India. The Apastamba Dharmasutra prescribes that kings should appoint officers and subordinates in the towns and villages to protect their subjects from crime. Various inscriptions and literature from ancient India suggest that a variety of roles existed for law enforcement officials such as those of a constable, thief catcher, watchman, and detective.[23] In ancient India up to medieval and early modern times, kotwals were in charge of local law enforcement.[24]
Persian Empire
The Persian Empire had well-organized police forces. A police force existed in every place of importance. In the cities, each ward was under the command of a Superintendent of Police, known as a Kuipan, who was expected to command implicit obedience in his subordinates. Police officers also acted as prosecutors and carried out punishments imposed by the courts. They were required to know the court procedure for prosecuting cases and advancing accusations.[25]
...
The Americas
Pre-Columbian civilizations in the Americas also had organized law enforcement. The city-states of the Maya civilization had constables known as tupils, as well as bailiffs.[29] In the Aztec Empire, judges had officers serving under them who were empowered to perform arrests, even of dignitaries.[30] In the Inca Empire, officials called curaca enforced the law among the households they were assigned to oversee, with inspectors known as tokoyrikoq (lit. 'he who sees all') also stationed throughout the provinces to keep order.[31][32]
a common feature is a top-down approach. In contrast:
The English system of maintaining public order since the Norman conquest was a private system of tithings known as the mutual pledge system. This system was introduced under Alfred the Great. Communities were divided into groups of ten families called tithings, each of which was overseen by a chief tithingman. Every household head was responsible for the good behavior of his own family and the good behavior of other members of his tithing. Every male aged 12 and over was required to participate in a tithing. Members of tithings were responsible for raising "hue and cry" upon witnessing or learning of a crime, and the men of his tithing were responsible for capturing the criminal.
...
Following the Norman conquest of England in 1066, the tithing system was tightened with the frankpledge system. By the end of the 13th century, the office of constable developed. Constables had the same responsibilities as chief tithingmen and additionally as royal officers. The constable was elected by his parish every year.
...
From about 1500, private watchmen were funded by private individuals and organisations to carry out police functions. They were later nicknamed 'Charlies', probably after the reigning monarch King Charles II. Thief-takers were also rewarded for catching thieves and returning the stolen property. They were private individuals usually hired by crime victims.
...
Up to the early 18th century, the level of state involvement in law enforcement in Britain was low. Although some law enforcement officials existed in the form of constables and watchmen, there was no organized police force.
...
Law enforcement was mostly up to the private citizens, who had the right and duty to prosecute crimes in which they were involved or in which they were not.
...
Thief-takers became infamously known not so much for what they were supposed to do, catching real criminals and prosecuting them, as for "setting themselves up as intermediaries between victims and their attackers, extracting payments for the return of stolen goods and using the threat of prosecution to keep offenders in thrall". Some of them, such as Jonathan Wild, became infamous at the time for staging robberies in order to receive the reward.[46][47]
Thus the rightist feeling as presented in the article you linked to:
Policing is best accomplished as a uniquely local endeavor. The police are a part of the communities they serve, and centralizing them in Washington would change that for the worse.
is in line with the latter approach.
-
If only!:
https://twitter.com/JacobHeaton96/status/1423318822040178689
Democrats don’t want to defund the police, they want to nationalize the Capitol police and turn them into a Nazi style SS.
-
This is worrying our enemies:
Why the Left Could Push For a National Police Force
https://www.texaspolicy.com/why-the-left-could-push-for-a-national-police-force/
I'm all for a Gestsapo style secret police force hunting down barbarians and executing them on the spot.
-
On the issue of the court system, I am in favor of abolishing the state court system and replacing it with the Federal court system. I believe this could help us gain control over states with rightist judges/courts. In addition, this would also strengthen autocracy, as federal judges are appointed (albeit by a democratically elected president, but in the future that shouldn't be a problem due to demographic blue shift), in contrast to state judges, most of whom are elected (by rightist untermensch/Atlantic Gentiles, I might add).
Remember, it took the federal government to stamp out the segregationism of the individual states. What do you think?
-
They should have been hanged as the colonialists they are instead of being allowed to resign:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/uk-judges-quit-hong-kong-082839506.html
LONDON/HONG KONG (Reuters) - Two senior British judges, including the president of the UK Supreme Court, resigned from Hong Kong's highest court on Wednesday because of a sweeping national security law imposed by China cracking down on dissent in the former British colony.
Robert Reed, who heads Britain's top judicial body, said that he and colleague Patrick Hodge would relinquish their roles with immediate effect as non-permanent judges on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal (CFA).
...
Local lawyers said the resignations would likely put pressure on the 10 other foreign Court of Final Appeal judges to quit. Six of these are British.
Those judges, also from Canada and Australia, are mostly retired senior jurists in their home countries, unlike Reed and Hodge, who were still serving.
Two other foreign judges, Britain's Brenda Hale and Australia's James Spigelman, have also stepped down from the city's highest court since 2020.
Yet many remain psychologically colonized:
"It is a big blow to the local fraternity and the grand tradition of Hong Kong's rule of law," one veteran barrister told Reuters. "For all the pressures ahead, we really needed them and I fear what comes next."
In a statement on Wednesday, Hong Kong Law Society president Chan Chak Ming urged Reed and Hodge to reconsider their moves, expressing "deep regret" and saying that the decision "disappointingly falls short" of the support among the public and legal community for the continued role of overseas judges.
If there existed genuine benefits to having overseas judges, Britain would also invite judges from China to sit on courts in Britain. It doesn't.
-
This area of decolonization is gradually receiving more attention:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/opinions-colonial-legacies-endure-in-africas-legal-systems-%e2%80%94-undermining-rule-of-law/ar-AAVe4ok
Recently there was a huge controversy in Zimbabwe over the alleged purchase of British horsehair wigs for Zimbabwean judges. Given the financial challenges faced by ordinary Zimbabweans, it was not surprising that the issue manifested in a larger debate over government financial mismanagement and its failure to provide adequate legal services for regular citizens.
More poignantly, in the larger African context the debate was also about the continued influence of European metropoles over their former African colonies in many aspects of life. That the Zimbabwean judges needed to purchase British horsehair wigs — which are no longer required even in many British legal contexts — is a telling relic of the colonial legacy foisted by Britain on its African colonies. Not only must Zimbabweans pay Britain for the wigs, but they do so to fuel a legal system rooted in the colonial era, when Britain systematically created and maintained legal systems, constitutions and other institutions patterned after its own. While in recent decades those colonial-era legal systems and institutions are being replaced by many African nations, they continue to hold such influence that a formerly colonized African nation’s adherence to the “rule of law” cannot be evaluated without considering the impact of its subjugated past.
As Britain established its colonial rule in Africa, it brought with it ideas about the rule of law, with the two becoming inseparable.
In 1844, the legal system in what was then the Gold Coast colony became attached to the British legal system. Before 1821 several European powers held claims in this region and established commercial settlements and forts to facilitate the trans-Atlantic enslaved person trade. The British consolidated control gradually over the 19th century. Local groups gradually submitted to British “protection” in an ongoing conflict with the Asante state to the north. Finally in 1844, some Indigenous Ghanaian chiefdoms accepted British sovereignty over them in exchange for protection from their warring neighbors. While conceding to British sovereignty, the chiefdoms also agreed to the British adjudicating serious crimes and to a long-term plan of adapting their customs and practices in conformity with British law.
When the British formally colonized the chiefdoms, they agreed to accept Indigenous law as part of the dual legal system. But they also added “repugnancy clauses” that excluded aspects of the Ghanaian customs or cultures that the British considered “appalling,” “ridiculous” or “unhelpful to maintaining Christian ideals.”
Hence, during the colonial era, customary Ghanaian courts led by Indigenous judges were allowed to adjudicate matters deemed to be part of the Indigenous customs on issues such as marriage and inheritance. But besides being subject to the repugnancy clauses, the legal system’s ultimate decision-maker, the supreme court, had a British official at the helm.
This system endured and became even more complete after the British consolidated rule over the entire Gold Coast territory by the turn of the 20th century. The British metropole introduced the 1925 constitution that empowered it to legally rule over Ghanaians as well as control the colony’s financial interests, including Ghana’s vast gold deposits and cocoa, which during that era was fast becoming a global cash crop. Notwithstanding the British introduction of new constitutions in 1946 and 1954 to appease Ghanaians by granting them some legislative powers, the metropole retained full powers over the colony’s legal systems, police and defense systems, and external affairs.
The metropole specifically created the police force in 1876 to protect the railways and gold mines, which generated significant financial benefits to it. While the colonial government tasked police with generally maintaining order, their primary responsibility was to protect Britain’s property interests and the colonialists’ personal safety. Policing was used as part of the empire’s tools for the larger commercial enterprise of colonization, to maximally generate funds for the mother nation and minimize its costs.
Eventually as the nationalist movement gained power, Ghanaians demanded full independence, which they achieved in 1957.
And yet, many parts of the colonial legal system endured.
Like other former British African colonies, Ghana has a pluralist legal system that includes the British common law, customary law and religious law. The current Ghanaian constitution, established in 1992, specifically identifies that the “common law of Ghana shall comprise the rules of law generally known as the common law, the rules generally known as the doctrines of equity and the rules of customary law including those determined by the Superior Court of Judicature.”
Notably, Ghanaian legislators eliminated the repugnancy clauses right after independence between 1958 and 1960, because they were insulted that their own laws were somehow “repugnant.” Even so many provisions of Ghana’s criminal code and supreme court decisions closely tracked British law and influenced judicial administration in a post-colonial Ghana. For example, Ghana’s current Criminal Code specifically criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual acts between males. This law is a relic of British colonial era when the metropole transported its anti-sodomy laws to its colonies.
Until 1993, Ghana utilized the British-created magistrate and circuit courts to administer its judicial system. With the 1993 Courts Act, Ghana finally created regional, circuit and community tribunals that replaced the British-instituted courts and were placed under the Judicial Service headed by Ghana’s chief justice.
Some legal commentators note that despite relatively recent changes to the Ghanaian constitution and its overall legal systems, the influence of the British colonial order persists even in the current constitution, evident by the subordination of customary law — “the rules of law which by custom are applicable to particular communities in Ghana” — to other sources of law. Customary courts have jurisdiction on issues such as marriage, divorce, child custody and guardianship. For example, a customary court may determine alimony and other marital benefits.
Besides the colonial legacy shaping Ghana’s legal system and constitution, colonial relics can also be discerned in other institutional structures driving the rule of law in today’s Ghana. For example, successive Ghanaian political and ruling classes since 1957 have used the police as their tool to oppress ordinary Ghanaians. For instance, the first Ghanaian president, Kwame Nkrumah, used the police to spy on his political opponents, and the police leadership was actively involved in the military coup that toppled Nkrumah in 1966.
Various constitutions introduced by successive post-independent Ghanaian governments retained the British Westminster-style government structure until the 1979 constitution, which adopted the U.S. presidential-style government. And similar colonial-era legacies and influences can easily be identified in other Ghanaian institutions such as the military (which was also established by the British) and the judiciary.
Similar to Zimbabwean judges’ tradition of wearing British horsehair wigs and judicial robes, Ghanaian lawyers and judges engage in the same behavior of wearing British-styled wigs and robes despite disdain and indignation by the general public who consider it a relic of a painful colonial past.
Ghana is not the only African nation struggling to rid itself of its colonial legacies. Kenyans are having the same conversation about the continued influence of the colonial past. They are questioning local governmental laws that prohibit making noise on the streets, committing acts deemed contrary to public decency, washing or repairing vehicles in non-designated areas, and loitering at night, all traceable to laws instituted during the colonial era. The #EndSARS movement against dismantling the SARS (Special Anti-Robbery Squad) unit of the Nigerian police was in large part a protest of overall police brutality common in Nigeria since the institution was created during the colonial era. And in my recent book on the rule of law, I systematically show how colonial legacy continues to manifest in five British-colonized nations (Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Zimbabwe) and how it undermines each nation’s adherence to the rule of law.
While the leaders and people of African countries have gradually made changes to these institutional structures to limit the influence of colonial legacies, many ordinary African citizens are still suffering colonialization’s ill effects when subjected to contexts involving the rule of law.
Those who prefer living under British law should emigrate to Britain. It is that simple.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTbaHTUslF4
The real question should be: do formerly colonized countries prefer an incompetent legal system? If not, why have juries at all?
-
Awareness is finally rising:
https://us.yahoo.com/news/dont-blame-sharia-islamic-extremism-212108996.html
Don't blame Sharia for Islamic extremism -- blame colonialism
...
In the 1950s and 1960s, when Great Britain, France and other European powers relinquished their colonies in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, leaders of newly sovereign Muslim-majority countries faced a decision of enormous consequence: Should they build their governments on Islamic religious values or embrace the European laws inherited from colonial rule?
...
Invariably, my historical research shows, political leaders of these young countries chose to keep their colonial justice systems rather than impose religious law.
Newly independent Sudan, Nigeria, Pakistan and Somalia, among other places, all confined the application of Sharia to marital and inheritance disputes within Muslim families, just as their colonial administrators had done. The remainder of their legal systems would continue to be based on European law.
...
My research uncovers how today’s instability across the Middle East and North Africa is, in part, a consequence of these post-colonial decisions to reject Sharia.
In maintaining colonial legal systems, Sudan and other Muslim-majority countries that followed a similar path appeased Western world powers, which were pushing their former colonies toward secularism.
...
In the long run, that disconnect helped fuel unrest among some citizens of deep faith
I agree so far. But then the author exposes himself as just another False Leftist after all:
In other words, Muslim-majority countries stunted the democratic potential of Sharia by rejecting it as a mainstream legal concept in the 1950s and 1960s, leaving Sharia in the hands of extremists.
...
For the Muslim world, finding a system of government that reflects Islamic values while promoting democracy will not be easy after more than 50 years of failed secular rule.
Why should we want democracy, which itself is Western? Do False Leftists even bother to read their own writing before publishing?
-
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/taliban-says-strict-punishment-and-executions-will-return-to-afghanistan-01632413451
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — One of the founders of the Taliban and the chief enforcer of its harsh interpretation of Islamic law when the group last ruled Afghanistan said the hardline movement will once again carry out executions and amputations of hands, though perhaps not in public.
Why not in public? Not only must justice be done, justice must be seen to be done. The Taliban are getting soft!
Even as Kabul residents express fear over their new Taliban rulers, some acknowledge grudgingly that the capital has become safer in just the past month. Before the Taliban takeover, bands of thieves roamed the streets, and relentless crime had driven most people off the streets after dark.
“It’s not a good thing to see these people being shamed in public, but it stops the criminals because, when people see it, they think, ‘I don’t want that to be me,’ ” said Amaan, a storeowner in the center of Kabul. He asked to be identified by just one name.
Another shopkeeper said that such punishments represented a violation of human rights but that he was happy he could now open his store after dark.
"Human rights" are a Western notion. The sooner we discard it the better:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/ancient-world/antropocentricism-the-most-dangerous-ideology-in-the-world/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cvOAeOQu7U
Senior Taliban commander Waheedullah Hashimi told Reuters that Afghanistan would not be a democracy and the new government may take the form of a ruling council, with the group’s supreme leader Haibatullah Akhundzada in overall charge
This is merely what was considered normal all over the world before Western civilization came along. Hopefully all laws will be de-Westernized over time.
By our standards, the Taliban actually has a reputation for being soft:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-adultery-idUSKCN0R13UE20150901
KABUL (Reuters) - An Afghan man and woman found guilty of adultery received 100 lashes on Monday in front of a crowd who filmed their punishment, TV footage showed.
No executions?? Let's hope the Taliban get their act together in future.
-
Finally!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hong-kongs-first-trial-under-023636416.html
Hong Kong's first trial under its harsh national security law began on Wednesday in a trial without a jury.
...
Why is there no jury?
The trial without jury is seen as a landmark moment for Hong Kong's fast-changing legal traditions.
The defendant's legal team has been pushing for the case to be heard by a jury, arguing it was Mr Tong's right given that he potentially faces a life sentence if found guilty.
But Hong Kong's justice secretary argued that a jury trial in this case would put jurors' safety at risk given the city's tense political situation.
Bad argument. The correct reason for why there should be no jury is because juries were introduced by Western colonialism, therefore to continue to use juries is to fail to decolonize.
Tong Ying-kit faces life in jail
Screw imprisonment! (Why should tax money be spent on keeping criminals - especially Westerners such as Tong- alive?) Bring back the dog head guillotine!
(https://resource01-proxy.ulifestyle.com.hk/res/v3/image/content/1975000/1978885/171228_Figure_06_600.jpg)
-
Here comes our chance!
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/u-needs-constitution-address-fundamental-110000829.html
The U.S. Needs a New Constitution to Address the Fundamental Wrong of Slavery
Persecution based on race is one of the grounds on which people from other countries can seek asylum in the United States. To be successful under the Immigration and Nationality Act, asylum seekers must show they have been persecuted or have a well-founded fear of persecution because of grounds like their political views, religion, or nationality, and that the perpetrator is the government (which includes the police) or a group the government can’t or won’t control. Black Americans experience persecution based on race and reasonably fear such persecution by the American government, and if they lived in another country, it stands to reason America would grant them asylum. The extent of America’s oppression of Black people means that to dismantle systemic racism, America must begin by replacing the U.S. Constitution with one based on equality and human rights like South Africa did after the end of apartheid — a system of racial discrimination and segregation that has been compared to America’s Jim Crow laws.
I agree that a new constitution would be a good step, but disagree that it should be based on "equality and human rights". If there is to be a new constitution, it should be based on duty to never initiate violence and duty to engage in retaliatory violence against all initiated violence (what we usually call Ahimsa, though for an American document we should use an American name for it). A complete legal system can be derived from this principle alone.
While this may seem like a radical proposal, the U.S. Constitution is actually the world’s oldest written charter of government still in use today. The vast majority of countries have rewritten their constitutions to account for changing historical circumstances. And other suggested remedies to address systemic racism, like the House’s recently passed bill to create a commission to study providing reparations to Black Americans, may be necessary steps, but are not enough on their own. The many crimes America has committed against its Black citizens are not just economic. For decades, the U.S. government has systematically and intentionally persecuted Black Americans because of their race.
Again, let’s take the example of an asylum seeker from another country. An applicant who is pursuing asylum on the basis of racial discrimination must show a direct connection between their race and the persecution they have experienced or have a reasonable fear of experiencing. For example, a Black man would have to demonstrate he was repeatedly arrested and beaten by the police because he is Black, or that he received a harsher punishment for the same crime a white man committed because he is Black. In its Asylum Manual, Immigration Equality, an LGBTQ immigrants’ rights organization, explains that “courts have held that a ‘threat to life or freedom on account of race…is always persecution.’” Courts have held that serious physical harm, coercive medical or psychological treatment, invidious prosecution or disproportionate punishment for a criminal offense, severe discrimination, economic persecution, and severe criminal extortion or robbery are forms of abuse that may be considered persecution. Various types of harm that may not amount to persecution on their own may become persecution when evaluated as a whole, such as “enforced social or civil inactivity; economic harm; or constant surveillance,” according to the National Immigrant Justice Center.
In America, police are far more likely to kill Black people. Black men are approximately 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police than white men, and Black women are 1.4 times more likely to be killed by police than white women, with Black men and boys facing the highest risk of being killed by the police when compared with other groups of people. Recent examples include the police killings of Ma’Khia Bryant, Daunte Wright, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Elijah McClain. Moreover, the police rarely face repercussions for killing people on the job. From 2013 to 2020, 98.3% of police killings have not resulted in officers being charged with a crime, according to the Mapping Police Violence project. These higher and disproportionate rates of death at the hands of the police are an example of serious physical harm by a government actor. The lack of consequences for police who kill Black people is further evidence of the state’s failure to protect Black citizens.
Police violence, harassment and over-policing is not limited to one or even a handful of states, which means a Black person can’t simply relocate to another part of the country to escape it. Almost everywhere in the U.S., police departments kill Black people at a disproportionately higher rate, including states as varied as Missouri, Utah, Nevada, Florida, Arizona, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and California. In her research, Daanika Gordon, an assistant professor of sociology at Tufts University, has found that “predominantly Black neighborhoods are simultaneously over-policed when it comes to surveillance and social control, and under-policed when it comes to emergency services.” Black people are also harassed by police on the road. A 2015 analysis by The New York Times found that in North Carolina, police “used their discretion to search Black drivers or their cars more than twice as often as white motorists — even though they found drugs and weapons significantly more often when the driver was white. Officers were more likely to stop Black drivers for no discernible reason. And they were more likely to use force if the driver was Black, even when they did not encounter physical resistance.” Sometimes such stops result in death, such as in the cases of Wright and Philando Castile.
In comparison with other races, the government disproportionately incarcerates and punishes Black Americans for criminal offenses because they are Black. Based on statistics for 2019, Black men are imprisoned at nearly six times the rate of white men and Black people are imprisoned at more than five times the rate of white people. Moreover, according to a 2017 report by the Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality, one in 10 Black children has a parent in prison, compared with about one in 60 white children. Judges are also more likely to incarcerate Black people with longer sentences than white people for the same or similar crimes. A 2017 U.S. Sentencing Commission report found that judges give Black men prison sentences that are 19.1% longer for federal crimes that are the same in all relevant ways as the crimes committed by white men. One example of the way the criminal justice system, racial bias, and voter disenfranchisement can come together to impact Black Americans is the five-year prison sentence Crystal Mason received for voting when she did not realize a prior felony conviction for tax fraud had made her ineligible to cast a ballot. Her vote was never counted. Terri Lynn Rote, a white woman with no prior convictions, who tried to vote twice in the 2016 presidential election, was sentenced to two years of probation and fined $750.
Discrimination rises to the level of persecution if it leads to substantially harmful consequences for the person, such as serious restrictions on the person’s right to earn a livelihood or access normally available educational spaces, according to the United Nations Human Rights Council. It’s not hard to see how over-policing of Black neighborhoods and frequent traffic stops and searches could lead to more police killings and the disproportionate imprisonment of Black people, who are then subjected to harsher sentences because they are Black. Incarceration also leads to disenfranchisement, which means Black people lose another right of citizenship. In 18 states, people convicted of a felony lose their voting rights during incarceration and for a period of time after, and in 11 states, people lose their voting rights for even longer or indefinitely for some crimes. These laws mean that one in 16 Black Americans of voting age is disenfranchised, according to the Sentencing Project, which is 3.7 times greater than the number of disenfranchised Americans of other races. Black people who haven’t been incarcerated are kept from the polls through voter identification and automatic purge laws, intimidation at the polls, and frequent changes to polling station locations. Taken together, killings by the police, lack of police presence when Black people need help, harassment of Black drivers, over-policing of Black neighborhoods, disproportionate incarceration, and disenfranchisement, could be argued to amount to the kind of persecution asylum seekers are asked to prove.
Additionally, a hypothetical Black asylum applicant could show a well-founded fear of persecution by demonstrating a historical pattern or practice of persecution against Black people. There is no shortage of scholarship and articles documenting such a pattern or practice in this country, from slavery, Jim Crow laws, lynching, and redlining to voter suppression. Many of these policies continue to impact the lives of Black Americans.
To fix its racism problem, the United States should replace its constitution with one guided by principles of equality and human rights. Our constitution was written when “we the people” did not include Black people. Since then, attempts to modernize the constitution via amendments, like the Fourth Amendment and the 14th Amendment, have not done enough to protect Black citizens — or any other vulnerable communities for that matter — because systemic racism cannot be fixed via a patchwork approach. It requires a holistic overhaul of the systems that perpetuate it and a clear commitment to anti-racism and equality. As a starting point, the U.S. can look to South Africa. After the end of apartheid in the early 1990s, the South African government did two important things to begin building a non-racist society. First, it created the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to uncover and review atrocities committed during apartheid. Second, in 1996, it adopted a new constitution based on the idea that “human dignity, the achievement of equality, and the advancement of human rights and freedom” should guide everything the government does. The constitution was drafted with input from the public and 26 different political parties. As the BBC notes, it is considered one of the most progressive constitutions in the world.
Like South Africa, the U.S. should make the right to equality explicitly “non-derogable,” meaning it can’t be suspended or limited under any circumstance due to its importance. South Africa’s Bill of Rights states that neither the state nor a person may “unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race…ethnic or social origin, color…and birth.” That’s the kind of moral clarity we need. Black Americans are Americans and it is time the U.S. Constitution treated them as such.
South Africa's Bill of Rights is not nearly good enough. Anything based on "human rights" is promoting humanism (ie. treating non-humans as the outgroup). And anything based on "equality" is delusional. People are not equal. Racists are inferior. Humanists are also inferior. America can do better.
Would anyone like to draft a new truly American constitution? Zea_mays?
-
Racist origins of u.s. "law":
https://youtu.be/FFebp7GZeHY
-
Bankruptcy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy
Bankruptcy is a legal process through which people or other entities who cannot repay debts to creditors may seek relief from some or all of their debts. In most jurisdictions, bankruptcy is imposed by a court order, often initiated by the debtor.
is another Western institution spread around the world during the colonial era that has been thoughtlessly continued, but which we need to get rid of. It is an institution that favours people who take risks with money, since if it goes well they keep the profits, but if it goes badly they are insulated from the consequences:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjMDhBAXgAIjq35.jpg)
It is strategically sensible for capitalism to support bankruptcy as capitalism wants more people to take risks with money (so that some succeed). By eliminating bankruptcy, we would also weaken capitalism as a whole, as people would become more cautious with money.
So where does bankruptcy come from?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_bankruptcy_law
In Judaism and the Torah, or Old Testament, every seventh year is decreed by Mosaic Law as a Sabbatical year wherein the release of all debts that are owed by members of the Jewish community is mandated, but not of "gentiles".[1] The seventh Sabbatical year, or forty-ninth year, is then followed by another Sabbatical year known as the Year of Jubilee wherein the release of all debts is mandated, for fellow community members and foreigners alike, and the release of all debt-slaves is also mandated.[2] The Year of Jubilee is announced in advance on the Day of Atonement, or the tenth day of the seventh Biblical month, in the forty-ninth year by the blowing of trumpets throughout the land of Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy_Act_1705
Under the Act, the Lord Chancellor was given power to discharge bankrupts, once disclosure of all assets and various procedures had been fulfilled.
Discharge from debt was introduced for those who cooperated with creditors.
-
So, I was reading this article:
https://us.yahoo.com/news/agnes-chow-former-hong-kong-090200653.html
Arrested for alleged national security crimes, Agnes Chow hails from a generation of Hong Kong democracy activists who cut their teeth in politics as teenagers and are now being steadily silenced by China.
The media cameras flashed incessantly as the 23-year-old was led handcuffed from her apartment on Monday evening by police officers with Hong Kong's new national security unit.
She is one of the first opposition politicians to be arrested under Beijing's new security law -- on a charge of "colluding with foreign forces" -- and could face up to life in jail if convicted.
Late Tuesday, she was released on bail.
And it suddenly hit me that the option of bail would not have been available if not for colonialism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bail#History
In the early 17th century, King Charles I ordered noblemen to issue him loans. Those who refused were imprisoned. Five of the prisoners filed a habeas corpus petition arguing that they should not be held indefinitely without trial or bail. In the Petition of Right (1628) Parliament argued that the King had flouted Magna Carta by imprisoning people without just cause.
The Habeas Corpus Act 1679 states, "A Magistrate shall discharge prisoners from their Imprisonment taking their Recognizance, with one or more Surety or Sureties, in any Sum according to the Magistrate's discretion, unless it shall appear that the Party is committed for such Matter or offences for which by law the Prisoner is not bailable."
So we should aim to eliminate bail. On ethical grounds, bail obviously advantages the wealthy, as the poor are less likely to be able to afford bail. There is also room for further discrimination by judges on other counts:
A common criticism of bail in the United States is that a suspect's likelihood of being released is significantly affected by their economic status[61] and systemic racial bias.[62]
A flat absence of bail would at least remove these discrepancies and thus produce fairer treatment overall.
Furthermore, the very notion that a monetary deposit is sufficient collateral for the possibility of the accused escaping encourages the view of people as basically a commodity. A good citizen, in contrast, should consider it a civic duty to voluntarily remain in detention prior to trial in order to simplify state administration. So why should the state pander to the bad citizens (those who lack such dutifulness) by providing an option of bail (but only to those who can afford it.....) in the first place? Thus we see Western inferiority in its understanding of civics once again.
-
OLD CONTENT
Here is a somewhat confusingly laid out map that nonetheless shows the pandemic impact of Western civilization on law worldwide:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Map_of_the_Legal_systems_of_the_world_%28en%29.png)
I certainly encourage people from all formerly colonized countries to study the legal systems in those countries prior to Western influence, and consider how to go about eventually reviving them.
I myself have in the past proposed, for example, eliminating the jury system as part of a broader movement to eliminate decisions made by voting.
---
www.yahoo.com/news/chinas-hong-kong-law-set-104923076.html
BEIJING (Reuters) - Beijing's planned national security legislation for Hong Kong is set to block its foreign judges from handling national security trials, people familiar with the matter said, which would exacerbate concerns about the city's judicial independence.
Note the cognitive dissonance here. How can the city have "judicial independence" when foreign judges handle national security trials FFS?
Its highest court, the Court of Final Appeal, has 23 judges, of whom 15 are foreign, from places like Britain, Canada and Australia.
Oh, I get it. "Independence" means being a British colony!
While under the new law they would no longer be able to handle national security cases, they will not be excluded from civil, financial or other cases, the sources said.
Not good enough.