On 01/03/2014 03:10 AM, Juan Garofalo wrote:
--On Thursday, January 02, 2014 8:53 PM -0500 Ulex Europae <europus@gmail.com> wrote:
In practice, it is pretty obvious that most practitioners of civil disobedience believe they are above the law, that they usually *are* above the law, and that in particular Swartz believed he was above the law, and was shocked to find that he was not. You seem to be laboring under a pernicious misapprehension: that there is a legitimate mandate to obey laws that are unconstitutional and/or unjust. There is a mandate, but it is just as illegitimate as the unconstitutional or the unjust law. ..but youre implicitly asserting that people are supposed to obey 'laws'
At 04:38 PM 12/31/2013, James A. Donald wrote: that are 'constitutional'?(whatever the fuck 'constitutional' means)
this list just keeps getting better. or worse. I see what you're up to.
Illegitimate =? unconstitutional | unjust As for me, I don't give a fuck about your constitutions, and in many cases I don't care about your theories of justice either.