Establishing Proper Context
for
Proper Comprehension
The definitions for words change over time. We have:
One word in particular, unrelated to the this topic, that demonstrates this is the word hot.
As this relates to the government topic at hand, the origins of the words Democracy and Republic, what those words meant in the 1700's and what those words mean in 2019 seem to differ.
When we continue allowing our government officers to redefine the words in the contracts intended to properly control our governments, we get increased injuries from our repeated petitions. We get ever-increasing volumes of laws that violate our rights.
- original meanings, which is what the word meant at the time it was first used
- meanings at the time used, which is exactly that — what the word meant at the time it was used, perhaps in a law or contract
- the present-day meaning, which is what those words mean at the time any person reads the words written from any previous year
One word in particular, unrelated to the this topic, that demonstrates this is the word hot.
- originally it only referred to a temperature (as opposed to cool or cold)
- see HOT in the Online Word Origins link
- it quickly acquired meanings to include; sexual desirability, stolen, and even cool.
As this relates to the government topic at hand, the origins of the words Democracy and Republic, what those words meant in the 1700's and what those words mean in 2019 seem to differ.
- Democracy, originally, government by the (common) people; 1700's, The sovereign power lodged in the body of people; modern use tends towards mob-rule.
- Republic, originally, the public interest; in the 1700's, state in which the power is lodged in more than one; modern use leans toward government officers who are intended to do for the people what the government officer thinks best for the people whether the people like it or not.
When we continue allowing our government officers to redefine the words in the contracts intended to properly control our governments, we get increased injuries from our repeated petitions. We get ever-increasing volumes of laws that violate our rights.
Proper Comprehension & Original Meaning
|
Critical for proper comprehension of older documents, whether contracts or laws, we must work to discover what those words meant to the most people who were party to them — at the time just prior to signing those contracts, whether signed by each individual or by their lawful representatives. We know this must be the case within these united States of America because of this phrase from The unanimous Declaration:
How can any individual, of right, grant their consent to any thing or anyone if they do not properly comprehend the terms and intent that their consent conveys to another? Inserting modern definitions into contracts and laws is an unlawful mode of amending or changing the definitions of words that alter the terms of those contracts and laws. The new definitions may not have been what was intended at the time of the signing, especially when the definitions change. With respect to the document-contract-laws listed below, each has a mode by which to amend them to keep them up to date. Not one mode involves using newer definitions. The 1756 dictionary is used for
The 1785 dictionary is used for
|
This is a page from the front material of the 1756 common-use dictionary of the English language.
The Roman Numerals: MDCCLVI = 1756
|
Proper Context makes these documents truly elementary to properly comprehend.
The binding contract among all united States Americans
|
There remains to this day an enforceable contract among all united States Americans with respect to what kinds of powers the governed people can even grant to our governments, which is very limited, as well as how our votes are supposed to be counted, which is very precise. These rules apply to any balloted item as well as candidates, whether for the city, county, state, or national governments.
The contract is The unanimous Declaration of the [then thirteen and now fifty] united States of America. As long as our nation is the united States of America — this contract remains binding and enforceable among us — the governed people. This contract founded our nation as the united States of America (the union of States). This contract is the Founding Charter for our governments, in that it establishes the principle upon which to build our governments. The unanimous Declaration provides so much more information for the governed-people, who are, when unified for this purpose, the sovereign power responsible for properly controlling our government officers. We must begin acting like we the people own our governments in the same manner as though we owned any commercial enterprise, treating our government officers as our employees — not royalty. To help with this concept, let's look into a common-use dictionary from 1756 to define Corporate, Corporation: See snapshot images from a 1756 dictionary. That charter is — The unanimous Declaration of the [then thirteen and now fifty] united States of America. The unanimous Declaration, literally is the social-political equivalent to The Corporate Founding Charter. The Constitution, the equivalent to the commercial-corporate By-Laws. They perform the exact same function for their respective fictitious organizations; the one is a government; the other a commercial business. Some of reason why The unanimous Declaration remains important and enforceable for us today includes:
To FOUND: 3. To establish; erect. 5. To rise upon, as on a principle or ground.
CHARTER: 2. To bring two parties together; to make a bargain.
BY-LAW: By-laws are orders made for the good of those that make them, farther than the publick law binds.
CORPORATE. United in a body or community.
CORPORATION. A body politick, authorized to have a common seal, one head officer or more, able by their common consent, to grant or receive in law, any thing within the compass of their charter : even as one man.
|
To INCORPORATE: 3. To form into a corporation, or body politick. 4. To unite; to associate.
INCORPORATION: 2. Formation of a body politick.
CONTRACT: s. 1. A bargain; a compact.
POLITICKS: The science of government; the art or practice of administering publick affairs.
To CONSTITUTE: 1. To give formal existence; to produce. 2. To erect; to establish. 3. To depute.
-
CONSTITUTION: 6. Established form of government; system of laws and customs.
These definitions are presented to show how the people of the 1700's looked upon their government establishments.
They saw them in the same light and form the same perspective as we look upon our commercial corporation today. The owners and voters are supposed to control the powers that the corporate employees exercise. Much more detail on this topic in Part II Dissection in the downloadable PDF above. Hopefully, these definition shine a brighter light for all who read them concerning how we should look upon our governments and the people we employ — hired by way of elections - to fill those offices. |
And, because people ask
Yes, they did register voters in the 1700's. They charges a tax to register. It was called a Poll Tax.
Also, because it is one of the most important elements of the Old Math with respect to how to calculate whether or not an item or candidate on the ballot passes with sufficient consent or fails
Yes! Absolutely every Registered Voter does vote every time a ballot goes out in their district.
Proof they had registered voters in the 1700's exists with the 1756 definition for POLL and To POLL as seen to the right.
In the 1700's people had to pay money to register as a voter. In 1964, The US Constitution, Amendment 24, ended the Poll Tax.
For more details that prove all registered voters do vote, go to the Proof: All Registered Voters — Do Vote page.
Yesterday, 6/12/2019 was the first time I heard the phrase first past the post. Seems like it means that the balloted winner need only get one more vote than any other balloted item for the same position. That is not the lawful vote-counting process for any political jurisdiction within and for these united States of America.
Nearly every political jurisdiction in these united States of America has a known number of registered voters. In order to get the consent of the people, the balloted item must be the first past a specific post/marker. That marker is, as the very least, 50% of the total number of registered voters. Specifically, the balloted item or candidate that first gets 50%+1 of the total number of registered voters to consent — wins. Whatever or whomever is on the ballot that does not get that 50%+1 consenting votes — must fail for lack of consent.
Also, because it is one of the most important elements of the Old Math with respect to how to calculate whether or not an item or candidate on the ballot passes with sufficient consent or fails
Yes! Absolutely every Registered Voter does vote every time a ballot goes out in their district.
Proof they had registered voters in the 1700's exists with the 1756 definition for POLL and To POLL as seen to the right.
- A catalog
- list of persons;
- a register of heads.
- To take a list or register of persons
- To enter one's name in a list or register
- To insert into a number as a voter.
In the 1700's people had to pay money to register as a voter. In 1964, The US Constitution, Amendment 24, ended the Poll Tax.
For more details that prove all registered voters do vote, go to the Proof: All Registered Voters — Do Vote page.
Yesterday, 6/12/2019 was the first time I heard the phrase first past the post. Seems like it means that the balloted winner need only get one more vote than any other balloted item for the same position. That is not the lawful vote-counting process for any political jurisdiction within and for these united States of America.
Nearly every political jurisdiction in these united States of America has a known number of registered voters. In order to get the consent of the people, the balloted item must be the first past a specific post/marker. That marker is, as the very least, 50% of the total number of registered voters. Specifically, the balloted item or candidate that first gets 50%+1 of the total number of registered voters to consent — wins. Whatever or whomever is on the ballot that does not get that 50%+1 consenting votes — must fail for lack of consent.
Phraseology
|
The way a phrase is worded tells the reader a lot of information:
For example: This phrase from The unanimous Declaration of the [then thirteen and now fifty] united States of America, states:
They could have written it with what has become the common (modern) practice:
How is consent defined in 1756? 
CONSENT: 1. The act of yielding or consenting. 2. Concord; agreement; accord. 4. Tendency to one point.
To CONSENT: 1. To be of the same mind; to agree. 2. To co-operate to the same end.
|
If one only looks at definition #1 for Consent — ignoring all the others for Consent and To Consent - we certainly can get the modern concept.
However, the entire purpose for The unanimous Declaration of the [then thirteen and now fifty] united States of America, is to reduce the ease by which corruption, tyranny, and despotism might enter into our governments. With this idea in mind, consider the rest of the definitions for Consent and To Consent when reading the actual words written in the still-enforceable contract of The unanimous Declaration of the [then thirteen and now fifty] united States of America.
Consent of the governed requires that the majority of the total known body actively grant their consent — or whatever or whomever is on the ballot must fail for lack of consent. Tendency to one point; or To be of the same mind; tells an entirely contrary story than the modern practice. When 60% to 80% of the total number of people who registered as voters refuse to check in at the polling station — we have a tendency to one point and the majority of the total known body being of the same mind. Their action state that they do not consent to anything or anyone on the ballot to be done or enforced; and they do not want anyone on the ballot to be sworn into office. When so few people can be convinced that a balloted item or person are worthy enough to warrant using their energy of going to the polls to consent — the balloted items all must fail for lack of consent. |
1776's Old Math produces the following result
Non-Consent
|
Over 60% of all registered voters AGREE ! ! !
From The United States Census Bureau, Newsroom, nearly 58% of all registered voters, in 2014, did not consent to any of the candidates listed on the ballots.
The vast majority of registered voters --- regardless of personal differences and dislikes for one another --- Did NOT and Do NOT consent to most of the politicians who are unlawfully sworn into office. Consent of the governed
The Consent aspects vs. those of non-consent were detailed on the Home Page
All Registered Voters Do Vote.as proved on the Home Page, and nearly 80% agree that most of our government officers are corrupt. "Vote Them Out"
|
The Vote Count
From the top of the second paragraph of The unanimous Declaration, it states:
Today, we refer to the class of the governed who grants or withholds their consent as Registered Voters. Ah yes. They had registered voters in the 1700's as detailed earlier on this page with the dictionary image and content on Poll and To Poll. In order to get the consent from a known body of voters — at the very least, the majority of the total number of that known body of registered voters must actively Consent. Without the active consent from the majority of that known number of registered voters — whoever and whatever is on the ballot Must Fail - for lack of consent. The meeting of the minds being that of non-consent. So what happens when the vast majority of registered voters refuse or fail to get to the polling stations to consent? Their vote must be recorded as having Not-Consented to anything or anyone on the ballot — Because they did not actively Consent. It is the duty of the candidate or people who support the candidate or other items on the ballot to create enough support to get the voters to the polls to CONSENT TO the candidate or other items — or they must fail for lack of consent. |
Consenting Vote-Count Benefits
It forces the people all political parties and other divides (such as religion, money, sex, age, etc.) to work together to find a candidate common-enough and trusted-enough by the majority of the total number of registered voters to attain their consent.
It saves a lot of vote-counting time. If less than 50% of the total number of registered voters check in at the polling stations — we know that everything and everyone on the ballots automatically failed for lack of consent. People who do not want to consent to anything or anyone on the ballot need not even go to the polling station, which saves them time from standing in line. People who want to consent to something or someone on the ballot need not stand in line behind non-consenting voters, which saves them time at the polls as well. This demonstrates to all — that the people truly control of our governments for the first time in our nation's history. It automatically eliminates most of the corruption in government because those elected will have earned the trust of the majority of voters — knowing that the majority of voters can remove them from office before the end of their term. It eliminates the mob-rule and special-interest voting at present that allows super-small voting populations to control government. Counting votes in this manner also encourages more voters to go to the polls if they want some item or candidate to pass — knowing that if they do not consent to that which they want to pass — in not going to the polls their vote automatically counts against everything and everyone on the ballot. Because they did not consent. The voter registration gets 100% purged more frequently (at least once every 3 years), so as to remove the names of those who
The major bonus is that it
With these benefits, I encourage you to circulate this website around the world to help ourselves and other nations clean up our respective governments. We must first inform each other of the benefits — then, we must implement and enforce those benefits. The best way to do this is with a Clarifying Constitutional Amendment with respect to how our votes must be counted. There are other ideas to improve our Form of Government within these website pages that make better use of our defensive military when at peace; as well as better use of duly convicted criminal labor. Thank you. |
What One Person Can Do !
|
Many people do not know the difference JUST ONE Person makes.
Pass this website to others — and suggest corrections to improve content. (Yes. It needs editors, proof-readers, illustrators, animators, publisher, and investors). Are you any of them? Contact me by way of: Daniel Kingery danielmkingery@gmail.com When we realize that over 60% of the total number of registered voters already agree — all we have to do is inform them that they have the strongest gripe about their non-consent votes not being counted, the 30 day goal is not only possible. It is DOABLE. This is GRASSROOTS at work. |
Notice the quick growth rate for each day of 30 days if each of us simply gets one more person to participate each of the 30 day..
|
By the end of the 30 days we have more than enough people to succeed.
We must believe that it can happen and then make it happen. 
|