The Common Law Rules of Evidence Must Regulate Academic and Political Arguments

The Common Law Rules of Evidence provide a reasonable basis for the consideration of facts and arguments which produce probable truth. Under the Rules of Evidence, there are certain objections which make sense in an ordinary, academic or political argument.

1. Objection as to relevancy. The objection is that the facts or ideas being asserted are not
reasonably relevant to the question at issue, or even, the propostion being asserted.

2. Objection as to hearsay. The objection is that an out of hearing statement is being wrongly
used for the truth of the matter asserted.

3. Objection as to lack of foundation. The objection is that the facts or ideas being
asserted are not based on sworn testimony as to first hand sense experience, and are not based upon reasonable rules, and are not
based upon an expert opinion, by a qualified expert, which meets the standard of reasonable
scientific certainty, and therefore cannot be considered.

If the foregoing rules are used in ordinary, legal,academic and political argument and debate, then the result of such a political arugment or debate will tend towards probable truth, and will tend to eliminate fraudulent arguments and assertions.

(C)Copyright 2010 by Anthony J. Fejfar

Book Review of: Slaveholder's Union

George VanCleve has recently published his book, "Slaveholder's Union" (2010) (University of Chicago Press). To put it bluntly, VanCleve comes to the absurd conclusion that the American Revolution, the Declaration of Independence, and the United States Constitution were movtivated primarily to enshrine Slavery in America. There are several points to be made in relation to VanCleve's book. First, the title "Slaveholder's Union" is stupid. While VanCleve's book begin with analysis of the American Republic prior to the American Revolution, the rather misleading title he uses refers to the Union North during the American Civil War of the 1860's, where America was divided between the Union North and the Confederate South. VanCleve would have done better to emmulate the title found in the book, "Slaveholding Republic" by Don Fehrenbacher, published in 2001. Contrary to an assertion made in a synopsis of VanCleve's book, it is clear that the dispositive treatment of Slavery in America is Fehrenbacher's book, "Slaveholding Republic." Feherenbacher comes to the more balanced conclusion that the American Revolution has nothing to do with Slavery, one way or the other. My own scholarship indicates that the American Revolutionary movement laid the groundwork for the abolition of Slavery in America. The Pennsylvania Charter of 1681 by King Charles II of England states that all laws must be in accorance with reason, that is, they must be reasonable. Similary, the British Constitution, Magna Charta (1215), incorported into the Maryland Constitution, guarantees that each person has a Natural Right to Liberty. Grotius, Europe's' greatest legal philosopher, wrote that all law must be in accordance with reason, and that Natural Law, providing that the Natural Right to Liberty , is inalienable and cannot be taken away. Finally, the American Declaration of Independence and the Pennsylvania Constiution both provide that each person, without exception, has a indefeasible right to Life, Liberty, Property, and the pursuit of Happiness. Therefore, I argue that the intellecual groundwork was laid to declare that blacks also have Natural Rights to Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, which act to abolish Slavery. Politically, you can see that if protection from Slavery was not included in the foregoing legal protections, then it would have been possible for there to be Slavery for Native Americans, Creole Whites, Mullat Blacks, relgious minorities, and ethnic minorities. Thus, it became apparent that if Black's could be unreasonably enslaved, then other groups could as well. Thus, both as a matter of Principle, and as a matter of rational self interest, a growing movement to abolish all Slavery began. This is affirmed by the fact that the Treaty between Britain and America ending the War of 1812 bound both countries to eliminate slavery as soon as possible. So, it is clear that the driving force behind the American movement for Independence was politically motivated by a desire to eliminate arbritrary government and ensure Individual Rights of each person based upon a Natural, inherent Right to Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. VanCleve's first try at an academic book is a simpliste effort, and it is encouraging to note that Harvard is still putting out graduates with the caliber of George VanCleve.

Reviewed by Anthony J. Fejfar, Esq., Coif Member, United States Supreme Court Bar

Bourgeios Communism is Evil

Karl Marx, author of the Communist Manifesto, said that ideally, the proletariat, or working class, should be in charge is society. Thus, Marx argued that ordinary people such as electricians, plumbers, carpenters, brick layers, day laborers, concrete layers, teachers, and firemen should be in charge in society. Marx taught that the bourgeios upper middle class and the bourgeios wealthy, should not be in charge, because, they often were parasites who fed off the honest work of the working class. However, communism did not turn out the way Marx had predicted. Instead of the proletariat being in charge in the Russian Soviet Union, the bourgeios rich and upper middle class professionals got control of the Soviet Union. In fact, the bourgeios wealthy became the soviet presidium and the politburo, while the bourgeios upper middle class professionals became the bureaucratic apparichnick class. In fact, the bourgeios communists are so corrupt in the Soviet Union, that they will not even allow the proletariat to have labor unions. In the United States the Soviet spy network, the KGB, supports bourgeios communism. Ronald Reagan was clearly a bourgeios communist who did everything he could to destroy government programs which help the middle class and the poor, and did everything he could to favor the bourgeios capitalist wealthy and upper middle class, and, to destroy labor unions. In fact, most KGB agents in the United States, even after glastnos and peristroika in the Soviet Union and the formation of the Russian Republic, remain bourgeios capitalists who are the doctors, dentists, lawyers, and corrupt bureacratic adminstrators who rip off the poor and the working class, often having satanic rules which allow them to charge more in fees to poor people, and give discounts to the wealthy. Real constitutitonal democracy promotes regulated capitalism and reasonable business practices, not the destructive short term, profit maximization promoted by the bourgeios communists here in the United States. We must stop the tyranny of the bourgeios communist KGB in America.