Our Lands
Friday, July 25, 2008--Andis Kaulins [7/25/2008 01:20:00 AM] - Home - About - Our Book
Barack Obama Speaks in Berlin to "The Berliner" about "This is our moment. This is our time." Berlin, Germany, July 24, 2008
Click here to go to the video and/or text of Barack Obama's speech in Berlin, in which he spoke to a gigantic throng of maybe about 200,000 people, mostly Berliner, and stated inter alia as follows (it was Obama-mania, the largest crowd he has drawn anywhere, including speeches in the USA) :
"Thank you to the citizens of Berlin and to the people of Germany. Let me thank Chancellor Merkel and Foreign Minister Steinmeier for welcoming me earlier today. Thank you Mayor Wowereit, the Berlin Senate, the police, and most of all thank you for this welcome.
I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before. Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen – a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.
I know that I don’t look like the Americans who’ve previously spoken in this great city. The journey that led me here is improbable. My mother was born in the heartland of America, but my father grew up herding goats in Kenya. His father – my grandfather – was a cook, a domestic servant to the British.
At the height of the Cold War, my father decided, like so many others in the forgotten corners of the world, that his yearning – his dream – required the freedom and opportunity promised by the West. And so he wrote letter after letter to universities all across America until somebody, somewhere answered his prayer for a better life.
That is why I’m here. And you are here because you too know that yearning. This city, of all cities, knows the dream of freedom. And you know that the only reason we stand here tonight is because men and women from both of our nations came together to work, and struggle, and sacrifice for that better life.
Ours is a partnership that truly began sixty years ago this summer, on the day when the first American plane touched down at Templehof. "
Read the rest at the BarackObama.com website online.
Barack Obama Speaks in Berlin to "The Berliner" about "This is our moment. This is our time." Berlin, Germany, July 24, 2008
Click here to go to the video and/or text of Barack Obama's speech in Berlin, in which he spoke to a gigantic throng of maybe about 200,000 people, mostly Berliner, and stated inter alia as follows (it was Obama-mania, the largest crowd he has drawn anywhere, including speeches in the USA) :
"Thank you to the citizens of Berlin and to the people of Germany. Let me thank Chancellor Merkel and Foreign Minister Steinmeier for welcoming me earlier today. Thank you Mayor Wowereit, the Berlin Senate, the police, and most of all thank you for this welcome.
I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before. Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen – a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.
I know that I don’t look like the Americans who’ve previously spoken in this great city. The journey that led me here is improbable. My mother was born in the heartland of America, but my father grew up herding goats in Kenya. His father – my grandfather – was a cook, a domestic servant to the British.
At the height of the Cold War, my father decided, like so many others in the forgotten corners of the world, that his yearning – his dream – required the freedom and opportunity promised by the West. And so he wrote letter after letter to universities all across America until somebody, somewhere answered his prayer for a better life.
That is why I’m here. And you are here because you too know that yearning. This city, of all cities, knows the dream of freedom. And you know that the only reason we stand here tonight is because men and women from both of our nations came together to work, and struggle, and sacrifice for that better life.
Ours is a partnership that truly began sixty years ago this summer, on the day when the first American plane touched down at Templehof. "
Read the rest at the BarackObama.com website online.
Permalink
Thursday, July 24, 2008--Andis Kaulins [7/24/2008 02:11:00 AM] - Home - About - Our Book
Real Estate : The Zindex and Zestimates at Zillow Provide Nationwide Home Valuations at Estimated Market Value by Geographic Location
The Real Estate market is in a turbulent period, but modern online information helps to manage the situation. Take a look at the website Zillow.
Zillow provides nationwide maps and listings of real estate, including residential property valuations.
Zillow's Zestimate ® is their home valuation using Zillow's estimated market value. Note that this is not the same as an appraisal.
Zillow's Zindex ® is their home valuation index using the median Zestimate ® valuation - or middle point - for a given geographic area on a given day.
Zestimate and Zindex change every day.
For today, for example, July 23, 2008 (USA time), the Zindex (median Zestimate) is $219,180 for all of the United States, a figure which diverges greatly by State, region, city, and specific location. Today, the Zindex for the State of California, for example, is $412,726, or nearly twice the national Zindex. Showing the effects of the subprime mortgage scandal and the general downturn in the economy, the Zindex for California was over $500,000 only two years ago, so that home prices have plummeted, with California real estate dropping in value nearly 19.6% in the past year, as opposed to about a 6.6% drop for the country as a whole.
To see how your particular State ranks in this regard, see Real Estate by State.
Real Estate valuation is also a matter of specific location. If we look at today's Zindex for Sunnyvale, California, which includes the market created by Silicon Valley and Stanford University, the Zindex there is $850,500 and has increased 3.5% the past year. If you look at Beverly Hills (90210) in Southern California, the Zindex approaches $5 million.
Real Estate : The Zindex and Zestimates at Zillow Provide Nationwide Home Valuations at Estimated Market Value by Geographic Location
The Real Estate market is in a turbulent period, but modern online information helps to manage the situation. Take a look at the website Zillow.
Zillow provides nationwide maps and listings of real estate, including residential property valuations.
Zillow's Zestimate ® is their home valuation using Zillow's estimated market value. Note that this is not the same as an appraisal.
Zillow's Zindex ® is their home valuation index using the median Zestimate ® valuation - or middle point - for a given geographic area on a given day.
Zestimate and Zindex change every day.
For today, for example, July 23, 2008 (USA time), the Zindex (median Zestimate) is $219,180 for all of the United States, a figure which diverges greatly by State, region, city, and specific location. Today, the Zindex for the State of California, for example, is $412,726, or nearly twice the national Zindex. Showing the effects of the subprime mortgage scandal and the general downturn in the economy, the Zindex for California was over $500,000 only two years ago, so that home prices have plummeted, with California real estate dropping in value nearly 19.6% in the past year, as opposed to about a 6.6% drop for the country as a whole.
To see how your particular State ranks in this regard, see Real Estate by State.
Real Estate valuation is also a matter of specific location. If we look at today's Zindex for Sunnyvale, California, which includes the market created by Silicon Valley and Stanford University, the Zindex there is $850,500 and has increased 3.5% the past year. If you look at Beverly Hills (90210) in Southern California, the Zindex approaches $5 million.
Monday, July 21, 2008--Andis Kaulins [7/21/2008 11:28:00 PM] - Home - About - Our Book
Readers of LawPundit : Hacienda Heights, California : Location of the Hsi Lai Temple : Buddhism and Chinese Culture
We recently had a visitor at LawPundit from Hacienda Heights, an unusual unincorporated census-designated place in Los Angeles County, which is definitely one of the most interesting communities in the State of California, if not the entire United States. The Wikipedia notes:
"Hacienda Heights is notable for being home to one of the largest Buddhist temples in the United States, the Hsi Lai Temple (meaning "Coming West"). The temple encompasses 15 acres and a floor area of 102,432 sq. ft. The temple's Ming Dynasty (1368-1644 AD) and Qing Dynasty (1644-1911 AD) architecture is faithful to the traditional style of buildings, gardens, and statuary of traditional ancient Chinese monasteries. Hsi Lai was built to serve as a spiritual and cultural center for those interested in learning Buddhism and Chinese culture."
The Hsi Lai Temple in Hacienda Heights is one of two locations in California which claims to be the largest Buddhist monastery in the Western hemisphere. As written at the Wikipedia:
"Since 1988, members of Hsi Lai and others have claimed that their temple is the largest temple in the Western Hemisphere. However, the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas situated in Talmage, Northern California has over 80 acres of built-up land on 488 acres (1.97 km²) of property as compared to Hsi Lai Temples' 15 acres, but rather than a temple complex as is Hsi Lai Temple, the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas is more of an entire community with several large buildings clustered together. Therefore, both organizations lay claim to being the largest Buddhist monastery in the West....
Hsi Lai is a popular venue for tourists interested in learning more about Chinese culture and Buddhism, and has even been coined the "Forbidden City of America."
The former Hsi Lai University in Hacienda Heights moved to Rosemead, California in 1996 and was renamed The University of the West (Hsi Lai means "Coming West"). It is the first Buddhist-funded university in the United States but students need not be of the Buddhist faith.
Readers of LawPundit : Hacienda Heights, California : Location of the Hsi Lai Temple : Buddhism and Chinese Culture
We recently had a visitor at LawPundit from Hacienda Heights, an unusual unincorporated census-designated place in Los Angeles County, which is definitely one of the most interesting communities in the State of California, if not the entire United States. The Wikipedia notes:
"Hacienda Heights is notable for being home to one of the largest Buddhist temples in the United States, the Hsi Lai Temple (meaning "Coming West"). The temple encompasses 15 acres and a floor area of 102,432 sq. ft. The temple's Ming Dynasty (1368-1644 AD) and Qing Dynasty (1644-1911 AD) architecture is faithful to the traditional style of buildings, gardens, and statuary of traditional ancient Chinese monasteries. Hsi Lai was built to serve as a spiritual and cultural center for those interested in learning Buddhism and Chinese culture."
Hsi Lai Temple, Photo by Aaron Logan
This file is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 1.0 license
This file is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 1.0 license
The Hsi Lai Temple in Hacienda Heights is one of two locations in California which claims to be the largest Buddhist monastery in the Western hemisphere. As written at the Wikipedia:
"Since 1988, members of Hsi Lai and others have claimed that their temple is the largest temple in the Western Hemisphere. However, the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas situated in Talmage, Northern California has over 80 acres of built-up land on 488 acres (1.97 km²) of property as compared to Hsi Lai Temples' 15 acres, but rather than a temple complex as is Hsi Lai Temple, the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas is more of an entire community with several large buildings clustered together. Therefore, both organizations lay claim to being the largest Buddhist monastery in the West....
Hsi Lai is a popular venue for tourists interested in learning more about Chinese culture and Buddhism, and has even been coined the "Forbidden City of America."
The former Hsi Lai University in Hacienda Heights moved to Rosemead, California in 1996 and was renamed The University of the West (Hsi Lai means "Coming West"). It is the first Buddhist-funded university in the United States but students need not be of the Buddhist faith.
Andis Kaulins [7/21/2008 09:21:00 PM] - Home - About - Our Book
Facebook Sues German Social Website StudiVZ (Studienverzeichnis, Studentenverzeicnis, "Students Directory") for Intellectual Property Infringement
Facebook, which has not been successful in establishing itself on the German market for online social networking, has in California federal court filed an intellectual property law suit against the leading German-language (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) social networking website StudiVZ (Studienverzeichnis, Studentenverzeichnis, i.e. "students directory") claiming that StudiVZ is a clone of Facebook. In response, as reported by Reuters:
"The German company sued by Facebook for running a "knockoff" of the social networking Web site said on Sunday it asked a German court to declare that Facebook's claims are without merit....
It may appear initially curious that the suit is being brought now, several years after Facebook considered buying studiVZ.de and even entered into negotiations with them, but the reason for the suit is clear when one becomes cognizant of the fact that Facebook more recently entered the German market with a German-language version and has made little headway here since then.
We are not fans of Facebook or its management by any means and regard this as a very stupid lawsuit. In our view, Facebook has little prospect of winning here in Germany, and a defeat will give other social networking websites the motivation they need to press forward.
The name of the game is competition and we think that the German courts will so decide. There is very little innovative about Facebook or MySpace, the two leading social networking websites in the US - but not elsewhere, whose origin can be traced back to online development in progress long before these sites existed. As noted at the Wikipedia:
"History of social networking services
In any case, although we think Facebook has no chance in Europe, what the California court will do in the US suit is unclear as the California courts are prone to aberrations.
The irony of this lawsuit against studiVZ is that Facebook just settled a lawsuit with ConnectU (we posted about this earlier at LawPundit), which claimed that Facebook had "ripped off" ConnectU's original social networking website ideas.
John Palfrey, (former?) executive director of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard, is quoted by Michael Levenson of the Boston Globe regarding the merits of the Facebook-ConnectU case, as Levenson writes:
"The case underscores the difficulties in pinpointing the originators of ideas on the Internet, particularly for social-networking sites.
Now, undeterred, Facebook is itself busy cloning the applications of others for its own platform.
The fact that Facebook is now bringing this legal action against a German competitor tells us a lot about this company, which we would not touch with a ten foot pole.
Facebook Sues German Social Website StudiVZ (Studienverzeichnis, Studentenverzeicnis, "Students Directory") for Intellectual Property Infringement
Facebook, which has not been successful in establishing itself on the German market for online social networking, has in California federal court filed an intellectual property law suit against the leading German-language (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) social networking website StudiVZ (Studienverzeichnis, Studentenverzeichnis, i.e. "students directory") claiming that StudiVZ is a clone of Facebook. In response, as reported by Reuters:
"The German company sued by Facebook for running a "knockoff" of the social networking Web site said on Sunday it asked a German court to declare that Facebook's claims are without merit....
StudiVZ filed for declaratory judgment at the District Court in Stuttgart, also on Friday.
Facebook's suit also seeks compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
StudiVZ claims Facebook is suing them only because Facebook has failed to transplant its success in the United States and other countries to the German market.
"Their strategy appears to be: 'If you can't beat them, sue them,'" said Marcus Riecke, chief executive of studiVZ, which is owned by Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck, a German publishing company.""
We personally know people who use StudiVZ and the reason they chose StudiVZ was because the site was designed suitably to their tastes and wishes in German. Just compare the registration pages of the The Facebook.de website and the studiVZ.de website and you will already see the strong difference in style, with the studiVZ interface much more European in format. Indeed, the German registration page for Facebook is a strict translation of the American version, with no cultural adjustments. Facebook thus has simply been unable to match German tastes, although no one doubts that all the many social networking sites are by nature similar.It may appear initially curious that the suit is being brought now, several years after Facebook considered buying studiVZ.de and even entered into negotiations with them, but the reason for the suit is clear when one becomes cognizant of the fact that Facebook more recently entered the German market with a German-language version and has made little headway here since then.
We are not fans of Facebook or its management by any means and regard this as a very stupid lawsuit. In our view, Facebook has little prospect of winning here in Germany, and a defeat will give other social networking websites the motivation they need to press forward.
The name of the game is competition and we think that the German courts will so decide. There is very little innovative about Facebook or MySpace, the two leading social networking websites in the US - but not elsewhere, whose origin can be traced back to online development in progress long before these sites existed. As noted at the Wikipedia:
"History of social networking services
The notion that individual computers linked electronically could form the basis of computer mediated social interaction and networking was suggested early on [7]. There were many early efforts to support social networks via computer-mediated communication, including Usenet, ARPANET, LISTSERV, bulletin board services (BBS), and EIES: Murray Turoff's server-based Electronic Information Exchange Service (Turoff and Hiltz, 1978, 1993). The Information Routing Group developed a schema about how the proto-Internet might support this.[8]
Early social networking websites included Classmates.com (1995), focusing on ties with former school mates, and SixDegrees.com (1997), focusing on indirect ties. User profiles could be created, messages sent to users held on a “friends list” and other members could be sought out who had similar interests to yours in their profiles [9] Whilst these features had existed in some form before SixDegrees.com came about, this would be the first time these functions were available in one package. Despite these new developments (that would later catch on and become immensely popular), the website simply wasn’t profitable and eventually shut down [10]. It was even described by the website’s owner [11] as “simply ahead of its time.” Two different models of social networking that came about in 1999 were trust-based, developed by Epinions.com, and friendship-based, such as those developed by Jonathan Bishop and used on some regional UK sites between 1999 and 2001.[12] Innovations included not only showing who is "friends" with whom, but giving users more control over content and connectivity. By 2005, one social networking service MySpace, was reportedly getting more page views than Google, with Facebook, a competitor, rapidly growing in size.[13] In 2007, Facebook began allowing externally-developed add-on applications, and some applications enabled the graphing of a user's own social network - thus linking social networks and social networking.[14]
Social networking began to flourish as a component of business internet strategy at around March 2005 when Yahoo launched Yahoo! 360°. In July 2005 News Corporation bought MySpace, followed by ITV (UK) buying Friends Reunited in December 2005.[15][16] Various social networking sites have sprung up catering to different languages and countries. It is estimated that combined there are now over 200 social networking sites using these existing and emerging social networking models,[17] without counting the niche social networks (also referred to as vertical social networks) made possible by services such as Ning and KickApps. [18].
Facebook did not rise to popularity because of innovation but rather because of investment.In any case, although we think Facebook has no chance in Europe, what the California court will do in the US suit is unclear as the California courts are prone to aberrations.
The irony of this lawsuit against studiVZ is that Facebook just settled a lawsuit with ConnectU (we posted about this earlier at LawPundit), which claimed that Facebook had "ripped off" ConnectU's original social networking website ideas.
John Palfrey, (former?) executive director of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard, is quoted by Michael Levenson of the Boston Globe regarding the merits of the Facebook-ConnectU case, as Levenson writes:
"The case underscores the difficulties in pinpointing the originators of ideas on the Internet, particularly for social-networking sites.
"One thing about the Internet is that most ideas are developed collaboratively in the Internet space, and one thing that was difficult in this matter was trying to parse what was an original idea they had and that somebody else had taken advantage of," said John Palfrey, executive director of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard. "That was going to be awfully hard to show."
Palfrey said both sides should be happy the case was settled."Now, undeterred, Facebook is itself busy cloning the applications of others for its own platform.
The fact that Facebook is now bringing this legal action against a German competitor tells us a lot about this company, which we would not touch with a ten foot pole.
Andis Kaulins [7/21/2008 02:12:00 AM] - Home - About - Our Book
The Up Side of the American Flag : "for the most part, for over 200 years, we've gotten it right"
We ran across this blog and this piece of thought and we thought it was good, so we are sharing it with our readers, who might otherwise think that we are too critical of America:
Some thoughts on the US of A from momchick at Livin' My Life Like It's Golden:
"Now back to my flag...I think the same thing is true of this country. There are always going to be rough patches and tough times. There are going to be disagreements and there might even be times of great political strife. But at the end of the day, this country remains the greatest democratic experiment of all history. We balance our love of personal liberty against the needs of the greater good and for the most part, for over 200 years, we've gotten it right. We need to constantly work at getting better, but we have much to be proud of when we look at the "up" side of the flag."
Take a look at the "up" side of her flag.
The Up Side of the American Flag : "for the most part, for over 200 years, we've gotten it right"
We ran across this blog and this piece of thought and we thought it was good, so we are sharing it with our readers, who might otherwise think that we are too critical of America:
Some thoughts on the US of A from momchick at Livin' My Life Like It's Golden:
"Now back to my flag...I think the same thing is true of this country. There are always going to be rough patches and tough times. There are going to be disagreements and there might even be times of great political strife. But at the end of the day, this country remains the greatest democratic experiment of all history. We balance our love of personal liberty against the needs of the greater good and for the most part, for over 200 years, we've gotten it right. We need to constantly work at getting better, but we have much to be proud of when we look at the "up" side of the flag."
Take a look at the "up" side of her flag.
Andis Kaulins [7/21/2008 01:49:00 AM] - Home - About - Our Book
The Morphology of Legal Reality : Form and Structure in a 4% Physical World Suggest Deeper Forces as Roots for the Rule of Law
Our previous posting on Law, Physics, Legal Theory, Cosmology, Fine-Tuning and the "Useful Parameterization of Ignorance" may at first glance appear to be a rather distanced comparison of two fully disparate conceptual worlds, but in fact our fully justifiable juxtaposition of cosmology and legal theory points inexorably to a much deeper level hidden in the morphology of legal reality.
If we take as a given that our human view of reality is limited at its maximum by the previously discussed mere 4% of the physical universe that is known to us through our cognizance of the atomic world, and if a full 96% of the actual universe is in fact invisible to us, as prevailing cosmological theory would tell us, then what can we know about the true fundamentals of human law?
The famed and now retired advocate Gerry Spence, for example, is grappling with this kind of a problem in his newly begun series of postings that start with What if freedom is a myth?
How, for example, is any "Rule of Law", however described, to prevail against the specter of "Religion", for example, which increasingly calls upon the invisible 96% of the universe's powers. Must the law also call for assistance to the more powerful actors of that universe: the invisible cold dark matter and the dark energy of the primordial underlying forces?
When we speak about the original meaning of the United States Constitution, for example, and when we try to interpret that Constitution in light of the intentions of the original founders of the nation -- as if deeds were to be judged by intentions rather than by results -- are we talking about the 4% of the universe that is known, or are we talking about the 96% of the universe that is invisible to us, thus opening wide the doors to self-serving speculation about what was?
Calling up these invisible spirits of cold dark matter and dark energy is - for certain - a potentially dangerous proposition for all concerned, because no one can be sure where it may lead. It is not without reason that legal theory generally concentrates on the more superficial visible world, avoiding confrontation at the level of fundamental forces, preferring to pick out one group of legal atoms or another as the subject of jurisprudential inquiry, and discussing rationales for the "Rule of Law" in terms of tangible, Newtonian physics, rather than via transcendental Einsteinian forces such as time-warped fields of relativity.
This Newtonian limitation is the vector and engine of motion for our present professed understanding of the nature of "Law", as this understanding is manifested in works of legal scholarship. The visible world of appearances is discussed at length in the peer-reviewed law journals, whereas the deeper nature of law lies submerged beneath the surface.
To some degree, that hidden world is what we call "unwritten law", a concept which gave the philosopher Hobbes so much difficulty.
Alan Cromartie (University of Reading, Department of Politics, Whiteknights, PO Box 218, Reading, UK), British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Volume 2, Number 2, June 2000 , pp. 161-178(18), Blackwell Publishing, DOI: 10.1111/1467-856X.00032) writes about Unwritten law in Hobbesian political thought, a pay-to-view article which is abstracted online as follows:
"In Hobbesian terminology, 'unwritten laws' are natural laws enforced within a polity, by a non-sovereign judge, without some previous public promulgation. This article discusses the idea in the light of successive Hobbesian accounts of 'law' and 'obligation'. Between De Cive and Leviathan, Hobbes dropped the idea that natural law is strictly speaking law, but he continued to believe unwritten laws must form a part of any legal system. He was unable to explain how such a law could claim a legal status. His loyalty to the notion, in spite of all the trouble that it caused, is a sign of his belief that moral knowledge is readily accessible to all."
One aspect of our contemporary "unwritten law" is something which modern philosophy might subsume under the modern concept of egalitarianism, which we find more negatively defined in Nordic countries as Jante Law or in several English-speaking nations as the Tall poppy syndrome.
Such unwritten laws are the antithesis of elitism and are found enshrined as a legal principle in the American concept of equality under the law, a concept which has developed different judge-made levels of legal protection depending on the subject matter in question: 1) strict scrutiny for categorizational violations of equality because of race or national origin; 2) intermediate scrutiny for categorizational violations of equality based on sex (gender); and, 3) a rational-basis test of "reasonableness" for categorizational violations of other kinds.
But how does all of this square with genetics, science in general and Darwin's concept of survival of the fittest? Is this all not in actuality based on a strange kind of "unwritten law"?
For example, The Theist writes at the Friendly Atheist in Can We Have Government Without Faith?:
"Let's say Congress passes legislation on universal health care, and a politician suggests that a certain group be left out of coverage, let's say people with Downs Syndrome.
"It's clear that the theist is confused about Legal Equality; if you read the comments, you’ll see that the atheists are just as confused.
Let’s try to untangle this mess. Firstly, all people are not equal. Individual humans are quite different from each other in a wide variety of ways. But you already knew that.
Yet if people aren’t equal, what does it mean for them to be “equal under the law”, and why is that a good idea? The answer is actually fairly simple. The core idea behind Equality Under the Law is that the law should only treat people differently if there are relevant differences between them....
Of course, sorting out how relevant various differences are can be a complicated business. What the principle of Equality Under the Law objects to are laws which hand out privileges to certain groups arbitrarily and without good reason."
And so, writes Robert Blake at the Foundation for Economic Education:
"According to the Declaration of Independence, "All men are created equal."
But man is a creature of limitations. He is limited as to height, weight, strength, health, intelligence, beauty, virtue, inheritance, environment, everything. Since these limitations vary from man to man, no man is equal to another, not physically, mentally, morally, or spiritually. In fact, all men are created unequal, except in one sense: All men are created equal under the Law. All men are equally subject to the same physical laws, the law of gravity, nutrition, growth, and so on. And all men are equally subject to the same moral laws: Thou shalt not steal; Thou shalt not kill, and the like. Since civil law is, or ought to be, an extension of moral law, all men should be equally subject to civil law. Whether a man is rich or poor, strong or weak, black or white, influential or a nonentity, should make no more difference under civil law than under physical or moral law. This is what is meant by the Declaration of Independence: All men are created equal under law."
Equality under the law is therefore more like the invisible fields of relativity rather than the precise visible genes of biological genetics, and this brings us full circle to our original juxtaposition of cosmology and legal theory. Even the idea of equality is a "dark field of energy" rather than an identifiable physical component of the brightly lit legal universe.
Accordingly, it is not the US Constitution which is in reality the "law of the land", but rather the underlying forces which created that Constitution. It is thus not the "original meaning" of the Constitution which is therefore determinative but rather the origin of that original meaning. What was decided is not as important as why it was a subject of decision in the first place.
The Morphology of Legal Reality : Form and Structure in a 4% Physical World Suggest Deeper Forces as Roots for the Rule of Law
Our previous posting on Law, Physics, Legal Theory, Cosmology, Fine-Tuning and the "Useful Parameterization of Ignorance" may at first glance appear to be a rather distanced comparison of two fully disparate conceptual worlds, but in fact our fully justifiable juxtaposition of cosmology and legal theory points inexorably to a much deeper level hidden in the morphology of legal reality.
If we take as a given that our human view of reality is limited at its maximum by the previously discussed mere 4% of the physical universe that is known to us through our cognizance of the atomic world, and if a full 96% of the actual universe is in fact invisible to us, as prevailing cosmological theory would tell us, then what can we know about the true fundamentals of human law?
The famed and now retired advocate Gerry Spence, for example, is grappling with this kind of a problem in his newly begun series of postings that start with What if freedom is a myth?
How, for example, is any "Rule of Law", however described, to prevail against the specter of "Religion", for example, which increasingly calls upon the invisible 96% of the universe's powers. Must the law also call for assistance to the more powerful actors of that universe: the invisible cold dark matter and the dark energy of the primordial underlying forces?
When we speak about the original meaning of the United States Constitution, for example, and when we try to interpret that Constitution in light of the intentions of the original founders of the nation -- as if deeds were to be judged by intentions rather than by results -- are we talking about the 4% of the universe that is known, or are we talking about the 96% of the universe that is invisible to us, thus opening wide the doors to self-serving speculation about what was?
Calling up these invisible spirits of cold dark matter and dark energy is - for certain - a potentially dangerous proposition for all concerned, because no one can be sure where it may lead. It is not without reason that legal theory generally concentrates on the more superficial visible world, avoiding confrontation at the level of fundamental forces, preferring to pick out one group of legal atoms or another as the subject of jurisprudential inquiry, and discussing rationales for the "Rule of Law" in terms of tangible, Newtonian physics, rather than via transcendental Einsteinian forces such as time-warped fields of relativity.
This Newtonian limitation is the vector and engine of motion for our present professed understanding of the nature of "Law", as this understanding is manifested in works of legal scholarship. The visible world of appearances is discussed at length in the peer-reviewed law journals, whereas the deeper nature of law lies submerged beneath the surface.
To some degree, that hidden world is what we call "unwritten law", a concept which gave the philosopher Hobbes so much difficulty.
Alan Cromartie (University of Reading, Department of Politics, Whiteknights, PO Box 218, Reading, UK), British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Volume 2, Number 2, June 2000 , pp. 161-178(18), Blackwell Publishing, DOI: 10.1111/1467-856X.00032) writes about Unwritten law in Hobbesian political thought, a pay-to-view article which is abstracted online as follows:
"In Hobbesian terminology, 'unwritten laws' are natural laws enforced within a polity, by a non-sovereign judge, without some previous public promulgation. This article discusses the idea in the light of successive Hobbesian accounts of 'law' and 'obligation'. Between De Cive and Leviathan, Hobbes dropped the idea that natural law is strictly speaking law, but he continued to believe unwritten laws must form a part of any legal system. He was unable to explain how such a law could claim a legal status. His loyalty to the notion, in spite of all the trouble that it caused, is a sign of his belief that moral knowledge is readily accessible to all."
One aspect of our contemporary "unwritten law" is something which modern philosophy might subsume under the modern concept of egalitarianism, which we find more negatively defined in Nordic countries as Jante Law or in several English-speaking nations as the Tall poppy syndrome.
Such unwritten laws are the antithesis of elitism and are found enshrined as a legal principle in the American concept of equality under the law, a concept which has developed different judge-made levels of legal protection depending on the subject matter in question: 1) strict scrutiny for categorizational violations of equality because of race or national origin; 2) intermediate scrutiny for categorizational violations of equality based on sex (gender); and, 3) a rational-basis test of "reasonableness" for categorizational violations of other kinds.
But how does all of this square with genetics, science in general and Darwin's concept of survival of the fittest? Is this all not in actuality based on a strange kind of "unwritten law"?
For example, The Theist writes at the Friendly Atheist in Can We Have Government Without Faith?:
"Let's say Congress passes legislation on universal health care, and a politician suggests that a certain group be left out of coverage, let's say people with Downs Syndrome.
Now, most people would be appalled at this suggestion. The argument against it would be that everyone is equal, and deserves equal treatment under the law.
But how do you prove this? In fact, science tells us that we are not all equal. Some of us are taller, stronger, faster, and have higher IQ’s. The idea that we are all equal is in contradiction of what science concludes. A person might then argue that we all deserve equal treatment, even if we aren’t equal. But how do you prove this? In fact, science tells us that many species survive by letting the weak or sick die instead of depleting resources for them when they can’t add survival value to the community....
[E]veryone I have met from an atheist perspective believes in certain principles, such as equal worth of all humans, equal treatment of all humans, and autonomy. In fact, people will stand behind these principles like they will the laws of physics....I will use Richard Dawkins distinction between science and faith as put forth in The God Delusion, where he states: “Religion turns untested belief into unshakable truth, where as science is a process of reason, skepticism, and questioning to draw conclusions.”
Using that definition, it seems the belief in equal worth, equal treatment, and autonomy are more faith based than science. So given that we want these principles in government, is it not necessary to have faith inside government? For people reading this who identify themselves as atheist yet believe in these principles, how is that not faith?"
The blog Winter's Haven has an answer for this quandry:"It's clear that the theist is confused about Legal Equality; if you read the comments, you’ll see that the atheists are just as confused.
Let’s try to untangle this mess. Firstly, all people are not equal. Individual humans are quite different from each other in a wide variety of ways. But you already knew that.
Yet if people aren’t equal, what does it mean for them to be “equal under the law”, and why is that a good idea? The answer is actually fairly simple. The core idea behind Equality Under the Law is that the law should only treat people differently if there are relevant differences between them....
Of course, sorting out how relevant various differences are can be a complicated business. What the principle of Equality Under the Law objects to are laws which hand out privileges to certain groups arbitrarily and without good reason."
And so, writes Robert Blake at the Foundation for Economic Education:
"According to the Declaration of Independence, "All men are created equal."
But man is a creature of limitations. He is limited as to height, weight, strength, health, intelligence, beauty, virtue, inheritance, environment, everything. Since these limitations vary from man to man, no man is equal to another, not physically, mentally, morally, or spiritually. In fact, all men are created unequal, except in one sense: All men are created equal under the Law. All men are equally subject to the same physical laws, the law of gravity, nutrition, growth, and so on. And all men are equally subject to the same moral laws: Thou shalt not steal; Thou shalt not kill, and the like. Since civil law is, or ought to be, an extension of moral law, all men should be equally subject to civil law. Whether a man is rich or poor, strong or weak, black or white, influential or a nonentity, should make no more difference under civil law than under physical or moral law. This is what is meant by the Declaration of Independence: All men are created equal under law."
Equality under the law is therefore more like the invisible fields of relativity rather than the precise visible genes of biological genetics, and this brings us full circle to our original juxtaposition of cosmology and legal theory. Even the idea of equality is a "dark field of energy" rather than an identifiable physical component of the brightly lit legal universe.
Accordingly, it is not the US Constitution which is in reality the "law of the land", but rather the underlying forces which created that Constitution. It is thus not the "original meaning" of the Constitution which is therefore determinative but rather the origin of that original meaning. What was decided is not as important as why it was a subject of decision in the first place.
Sunday, July 20, 2008--Andis Kaulins [7/20/2008 05:37:00 PM] - Home - About - Our Book
Oil and Gas Prices, Nancy Pelosi (House Speaker) and The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Energy in the USA and Europe, 2008 Truck, Auto and SUV Sales
We were just watching a CNN interview with US House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, in which she again advocated opening up the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve to deal with the US energy problems created by the soaring price of oil and gas.
Although our political direction is a centrist one, and even though we support Barack Obama in the current Presidential Election campaign, we can only shake our head at the stunningly bad judgment demonstrated by the Pelosi proposal, and we must side with Michelle Malkin on this gaseous issue. How did this woman get to be House Speaker?
Having just returned from three weeks in the United States, where the price of gasoline at the local gas station is in most States still less than half of what we pay here in Germany per gallon (recalculated from litres), we can only marvel at Pelosi pressing the panic button and urging for a very badly advised short-term stop-gap measure which will do absolutely nothing to combat the actual long-term problem.
One aspect of the problem, of course, as we have previously posted at LawPundit in discussing the 2008 automobiles, is that Europe long ago reacted to energy scarcity by switching to smaller cars, whereas America has continued to ignore all the energy warning signs, opting for gas-guzzling pickup trucks, SUVs and large sedans or other over-sized car models.
Understandably, car sales in the US have now plummeted to a 10-year low, and, as written by Bill Vlasic in the New York Times Business section on July 2:
"Even with some factories running at peak capacity, auto companies cannot meet the surging demand for small, fuel-efficient cars. At the same time, manufacturers are slashing production of slow-selling pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles."
America, welcome to the real world. I say this as a U.S. citizen. In Europe, you can go everywhere and still find people walking, because you simply do not have to drive everywhere. But in America, who walks, if you can drive? As one first-time visitor asked astonishingly some years ago in viewing the comparatively people-empty streets in the USA: "Where are all the people?" The answer is: they are in their gas-guzzling cars.
Americans who have recognized the true problem now have to see to it that America's leaders, including House Speaker Pelosi, also awaken to the realities of this world. What Pelosi should be addressing are the completely skewed energy attitudes in the country. Opening up the strategic petroleum reserves is no solution to anything.
Oil and Gas Prices, Nancy Pelosi (House Speaker) and The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Energy in the USA and Europe, 2008 Truck, Auto and SUV Sales
We were just watching a CNN interview with US House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, in which she again advocated opening up the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve to deal with the US energy problems created by the soaring price of oil and gas.
Although our political direction is a centrist one, and even though we support Barack Obama in the current Presidential Election campaign, we can only shake our head at the stunningly bad judgment demonstrated by the Pelosi proposal, and we must side with Michelle Malkin on this gaseous issue. How did this woman get to be House Speaker?
Having just returned from three weeks in the United States, where the price of gasoline at the local gas station is in most States still less than half of what we pay here in Germany per gallon (recalculated from litres), we can only marvel at Pelosi pressing the panic button and urging for a very badly advised short-term stop-gap measure which will do absolutely nothing to combat the actual long-term problem.
One aspect of the problem, of course, as we have previously posted at LawPundit in discussing the 2008 automobiles, is that Europe long ago reacted to energy scarcity by switching to smaller cars, whereas America has continued to ignore all the energy warning signs, opting for gas-guzzling pickup trucks, SUVs and large sedans or other over-sized car models.
Understandably, car sales in the US have now plummeted to a 10-year low, and, as written by Bill Vlasic in the New York Times Business section on July 2:
"Even with some factories running at peak capacity, auto companies cannot meet the surging demand for small, fuel-efficient cars. At the same time, manufacturers are slashing production of slow-selling pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles."
America, welcome to the real world. I say this as a U.S. citizen. In Europe, you can go everywhere and still find people walking, because you simply do not have to drive everywhere. But in America, who walks, if you can drive? As one first-time visitor asked astonishingly some years ago in viewing the comparatively people-empty streets in the USA: "Where are all the people?" The answer is: they are in their gas-guzzling cars.
Americans who have recognized the true problem now have to see to it that America's leaders, including House Speaker Pelosi, also awaken to the realities of this world. What Pelosi should be addressing are the completely skewed energy attitudes in the country. Opening up the strategic petroleum reserves is no solution to anything.
Saturday, July 19, 2008--Andis Kaulins [7/19/2008 10:20:00 PM] - Home - About - Our Book
Greg "The Shark" Norman Leads the British Open at the Royal Birkdale Going into the Final Round
Tiger Who?
How can we not write about this?
Just when everyone thought that the professional golfing world was going to fall into a deep abyss because of the sudden prolonged absence of Tiger Woods due to a knee operation, a 53-year-old former Number One world golfer has resurfaced with a vengeance and brought an excitement to golf that no one would have thought possible just a few days ago.
Greg Norman, who many viewed as being virtually retired from high-level pro golf and surely far past his prime, has come out of nowhere to lead the British Open by two strokes after three rounds of golf against the best players in the world.
Win or lose in Sunday's last round, what Norman has already achieved in three rounds is great for golf, showing what a tremendous game it is, both for players and spectators alike.
When one champion goes, others take his place.
The King is gone. Long live the (new) King, whoever he may turn out to be.
Update
Australian Greg Norman may have tried too hard in the fourth round and finished tied with Sweden's Henrik Stenson for 3rd as a closing 77 put him out of contention for the win, which went to defending champion Padraig Harrington of Ireland, who stoutly battled a painful wrist but prevailed as the first European in more than 100 years to defend the British Open title. Ian Poulter of England finished second. The best American finisher was Jim Furyk, tied for 5th with English amateur Chris Wood, the world's 6th-ranked amateur, who now surely will move up.
Greg "The Shark" Norman Leads the British Open at the Royal Birkdale Going into the Final Round
Tiger Who?
How can we not write about this?
Just when everyone thought that the professional golfing world was going to fall into a deep abyss because of the sudden prolonged absence of Tiger Woods due to a knee operation, a 53-year-old former Number One world golfer has resurfaced with a vengeance and brought an excitement to golf that no one would have thought possible just a few days ago.
Greg Norman, who many viewed as being virtually retired from high-level pro golf and surely far past his prime, has come out of nowhere to lead the British Open by two strokes after three rounds of golf against the best players in the world.
Win or lose in Sunday's last round, what Norman has already achieved in three rounds is great for golf, showing what a tremendous game it is, both for players and spectators alike.
When one champion goes, others take his place.
The King is gone. Long live the (new) King, whoever he may turn out to be.
Update
Australian Greg Norman may have tried too hard in the fourth round and finished tied with Sweden's Henrik Stenson for 3rd as a closing 77 put him out of contention for the win, which went to defending champion Padraig Harrington of Ireland, who stoutly battled a painful wrist but prevailed as the first European in more than 100 years to defend the British Open title. Ian Poulter of England finished second. The best American finisher was Jim Furyk, tied for 5th with English amateur Chris Wood, the world's 6th-ranked amateur, who now surely will move up.
Andis Kaulins [7/19/2008 09:20:00 PM] - Home - About - Our Book
Famed Country Lawyer Gerry Spence Starts a Blawg
Famed country lawyer Gerry Spence (see our previous posting about him) started a blawg a few days ago which has already drawn a good deal of comment from the blogosphere.
Take a look at his first blog posting, May we get together?
Famed Country Lawyer Gerry Spence Starts a Blawg
Famed country lawyer Gerry Spence (see our previous posting about him) started a blawg a few days ago which has already drawn a good deal of comment from the blogosphere.
Take a look at his first blog posting, May we get together?
Andis Kaulins [7/19/2008 08:03:00 PM] - Home - About - Our Book
The American Lawyer 2008 A-List of Top 20 US Law Firms based on Revenue per Lawyer, Pro Bono Work, Associate Satisfaction & Diversity Representation
Looking for The American Lawyer 2008 A-List of the top 20 US Law Firms? The prestigious list is created by ranking 4 criteria: revenue per lawyer, pro bono work, associate satisfaction and diversity representation - with revenue per lawyer and pro bono scores counting double.
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP of New York City has the 2008 A-List online as a special .pdf.
A Los Angeles law firm topped the US list for the first time ever, as Munger, Tolles & Olsen replaced perennial winner Debevoise & Plimpton of New York City, which had won the award the last four years, but dropped to 5th place.
We are glad to see that our former firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, headquartered in New York City, made the list again (at 17th).
Some of the law firms on the 2008 A-List with various website pages mentioning or commenting on their selection:
Latham & Watkins (2nd)
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (3rd) They get our award for using their position on this list to best advantage by means of making a special reprint of the A-List.
Weil Gotshal (4th)
Hughes Hubbard & Reed (6th)
Orrick (7th)
Arnold & Porter (8th)
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (9th)
O’Melveny (16th)
Sullivan & Cromwell (19th)
Morrison & Foerster (MoFo, 20th)
The blawg Above the Law has a nice posting about the A-List.
The American Lawyer 2008 A-List of Top 20 US Law Firms based on Revenue per Lawyer, Pro Bono Work, Associate Satisfaction & Diversity Representation
Looking for The American Lawyer 2008 A-List of the top 20 US Law Firms? The prestigious list is created by ranking 4 criteria: revenue per lawyer, pro bono work, associate satisfaction and diversity representation - with revenue per lawyer and pro bono scores counting double.
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP of New York City has the 2008 A-List online as a special .pdf.
A Los Angeles law firm topped the US list for the first time ever, as Munger, Tolles & Olsen replaced perennial winner Debevoise & Plimpton of New York City, which had won the award the last four years, but dropped to 5th place.
We are glad to see that our former firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, headquartered in New York City, made the list again (at 17th).
Some of the law firms on the 2008 A-List with various website pages mentioning or commenting on their selection:
Latham & Watkins (2nd)
Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler (3rd) They get our award for using their position on this list to best advantage by means of making a special reprint of the A-List.
Weil Gotshal (4th)
Hughes Hubbard & Reed (6th)
Orrick (7th)
Arnold & Porter (8th)
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (9th)
O’Melveny (16th)
Sullivan & Cromwell (19th)
Morrison & Foerster (MoFo, 20th)
The blawg Above the Law has a nice posting about the A-List.