IN THE CIVIL MAGISTRATES COURT
DISTRICT OF GEORGE, HELD AT GEORGE, SOUTH AFRICA
Case _______________ IIn the matter between:
Lara Johnson Applicant
and
Frederik Willem de Klerk 1st Respondent
FW de Klerk Foundation 2nd Respondent
Mahlatse Mahlase 3rd Respondent
SANEF: SA National Editors Forum 4th Respondent
Ilse Schoonraad 5th Respondent
George Herald 6th Respondent
Francois Moll 7th Respondent
York High School 8th Respondent
Western Cape Dept of Education 9th Respondent
Cameron Dugmore 10th Respondent
ANC: African National Congress 11th Respondent
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Request for Information:
Sincere Peacenik / Honourable Warrior Culture Information
Requested.
Annex: Request for Info: Accuracy / Error of [A] EoP RH FR Frame of Orientation1;
[B] Ego Literacy Communication Policy2; [C] EoP Scientific and Cultural Law3; [D]
EoP Footprint.
EoP Scientific and Cultural law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za4] – based on EoP
Footprint [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za5] – is the Ecology of Peace culture’s answer to
the EoP John Brown6 – how to get along without deceiving, overbreeding and
overconsuming – Question: What is a Sustainable Procreation and Consumption footprint? EoP RH FR [eop-rh-fr.tygae.org.za7] is the recommended objective reality
1 http://lj-v-fwdk.tygae.org.za/pdf/19-02-16_LJvFWdK_SoC_C-EOPRHFR.pdf 2 http://lj-v-fwdk.tygae.org.za/pdf/19-02-16_LJvFWdK_SoC_C-EgoLit.pdf 3 http://lj-v-fwdk.tygae.org.za/pdf/19-02-16_LJvFWdK_SoC_C-SciCultL.pdf 4 http://eop-nwo-scf.tygae.org.za/scientific-cultural-law/ archive.is/QneCw 5 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/eop-footprint/ archive.is/Guli3 6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist) 7 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-fr/ archive.is/BSOAb
socio-legal cultural frame of orientation process for implementing EoP SciCult law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za] as international law.
The EoP John Brown – how to get along without deceiving, overbreeding and overconsuming – Question is: What is a Sustainable Procreation and Consumption footprint?
Fact: If all the beings who call themselves humans and publicly represent
themselves as a sincere peacenik and/or honourable warrior agreed on (a) a single Keep it Simple Stupid language scientifically based clear definition of a sincere peacenik / honourable warrior that a layperson could understand; and (b) signed a pledge or policy statement confirming their commitment to abide by those sincere peacenik / honourable warrior values; (c) there would be enough people to provide a mandate for sincere peacenik / honourable warrior leaders to implement sincere peacenik / honourable warrior international law.
Fact: If many or most of the beings who call themselves humans and publicly represent themselves as some form of sincere peacenik and/or honourable warrior are fake peaceniks and/or dishonourable warriors: i.e. refuse to (a) agree on a single Keep it Simple Stupid language scientifically based clear definition of a sincere peacenik / honourable warrior that a layperson could understand; and (b) sign a pledge or policy statement confirming their commitment to abide by those sincere peacenik / honourable warrior values; it is unknown whether there would be enough people to provide a mandate for sincere peacenik / honourable warrior leaders to implement sincere peacenik / honourable warrior international law.
Sincere Peacenik / Honourable Warrior Culture Information Requested:
[1] If the respondent – racially, religious, culturally or ideologically – considers themselves a sincere / honourable – racial, religious, cultural or ideological – peacenik / warrior:
[1.1] Are there any factual errors in EoP RH FR [eop-rh-fr.tygae.org.za8]:
Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty Functional Interpretation of Objective Reality Transforming the World Constraints for Sincere Peaceniks /
Honourable Warriors?
[2] If Respondent Helps to Expose any Errors:
[2.1] Applicant will apologize for her sincerely held, but proven to be inaccurate working hypothesis about sincere peacenik / honourable warrior objective reality cultural values.
[3] If Respondent cannot find any Errors; and/or is willing to engage in truthseeking enquiry to test sincere peacenik / honourable warrior legal hypothesis for existential accuracy and/or errors: Applicant requests Respondent to:
[3.1] co-operate to implement EoP Scientific and Cultural law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za9] as international law; by …..
[A] Sincere Peacenik / Honourable Warrior Officials: ….. facilitating any and all legal processes for sincere peacenik / honourable warrior citizens to provide sincere peacenik / honourable warrior political, religious and/or legal leaders with a mandate to begin official EoP TRC to End Abel and Kane Cold War [eoptrc-akcoldwar.tygae.org.za10] negotiations to
implement [eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za11] EoP Scientific and Cultural law
[eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za12] as international law.
[B] Sincere Peacenik / Honourable Warrior Citizens: …….(a) signing your Responsible Freedom Oaths and/or EoP Policy Statements; or (b)
confirming your intention to sign your Responsible Freedom Oath and/or EoP Policy Statement; if or when Sincere Peacenik / Honourable Warrior Officials provide for a database registration venue for sincere peacenik / honourable warrior citizens to register at.
Summary: EoP TRC to End Abel and Kane Cold War Negotiations Goal:
EoP Applicants [eop-applicants.tygae.org.za13] Sincere Peacenik / Honourable
Warrior frame of orientation is to support EoP TRC to End Abel and Kane Cold War [eoptrc-akcoldwar.tygae.org.za14] negotiations to implement
[eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za15] EoP Scientific and Cultural law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za16] as
international law; to [A] enable responsible freedom 9 http://eop-nwo-scf.tygae.org.za/scientific-cultural-law/ archive.is/QneCw 10 http://eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za/eoptrc-akcoldwar/ archive.is/l6mUc 11 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za archive.fo/udkdK 12 http://eop-nwo-scf.tygae.org.za/scientific-cultural-law/ archive.is/QneCw 13 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-app/ archive.fo/0e7mk 14 http://eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za/eoptrc-akcoldwar/ archive.is/l6mUc 15 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za archive.fo/udkdK 16 http://eop-nwo-scf.tygae.org.za/scientific-cultural-law/ archive.is/QneCw
freedom.tygae.org.za17] orderly and humane – de-industrialization and
depopulation [eop-v-wip-deindpopn.tygae.org.za18], prisoner release
[prisoner-pardon.tygae.org.za19], land reform [eop-landreform.tygae.org.za20] and
denuclearization [eop-denuke-defn.tygae.org.za21] – shut down of the WiP Ponzi
Swamp economy [eop-sdwipecon.tygae.org.za22]; [B] require all citizens of all races,
religions, nations, to breed [one-child-law.tygae.org.za23] and consume below
ecological carrying capacity limits [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za24]; or be humanely
eliminated from the planetary genepool [crimes-of-aggression.tygae.org.za25]; [C]
nationalize all property and provide all responsible freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] oath citizens: (i) cultural law self rule
[cult-law-self-rule.tygae.org.za26] for groups with subjective racial, religious & gender identities;
and (ii) a property ration [property-ration.tygae.org.za27] land reform
[eop-landreform.tygae.org.za28] to enable their shelter and survival self-sufficiency to
enable the rebuilding of a relocalized low-tech organic agrarian sustainable future.
Definition: Culture / Religion:
[4] Erich Fromm: To Have or to Be: A Culture/Religion is a Group-Shared System of Thought and Action that Offers the Individual a Frame of Orientation and an Object of Devotion:
[4.1] “To clarify, “religion” as I use it here does not refer to a system that has necessarily to do with a concept of God or with idols or even to a system perceived as religion, but to any group-shared system of thought and action that offers the individual a frame of orientation and an object of devotion. Indeed, in this broad sense of the world no culture of the past or present, and it seems no culture in the future, can be considered as not having religion. 17 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/responsible-freedom/ archive.is/rXzYe 18 http://eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za/coc/eop-v-wip/eop-v-wip-deindpopn/ archive.li/qqNc3 19 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/prisoner-pardon/ archive.fo/rXKVD 20 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/land-reform/ archive.is/2c9XD 21 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-denuke-defn/ archive.is/ofrGD 22 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/sd-wip-econ/ archive.is/hWAdA 23 http://ss-defcon.tygae.org.za/2010/07/humans-an-endangered-species-v/ archive.fo/qnrNz 24 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/eop-footprint/ archive.is/Guli3 25 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/crimes-of-aggression/ archive.is/esaH6 26 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/cult-law-self-rule/ archive.fo/BfgMu 27 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/property-ration/ archive.fo/AWxH8 28 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/land-reform/ archive.is/2c9XD
[4.2] This definition does not tell us anything about its specific content. People may worship animals, trees, idols of gold or stone, an invisible god, a saintly person, or a diabolical leader; they may worship their ancestors, their nation, their class or party, money or success. Their religion may be conducive to the development of destructiveness or of love, of domination or of solidarity; it may further their power of reason or paralyze it. .. [4.3] A specific religion, provided it is effective in motivating conduct, is not a
sum total of doctrines and beliefs; it is rooted in a specific character
structure of the individual and, inasmuch as it is the religion of a group, in the social character. Thus, our religious attitude may be considered an aspect of our character structure, for we are what we are devoted to, and what we are devoted to is what motivates our conduct. Often however, individuals are not even aware of the real objects of their personal devotion and mistake their “official” beliefs for their real, though secret religion. If, for instance, a man worships power while professing a religion of love, the religion of power is his secret religion, while his so-called official religion, for example Christianity, is only an ideology.”
Definition: Sincere, Honour, Honesty:
[5] Sincere: (a) free from pretence or deceit; proceeding from genuine feelings; (b) (of a person) saying what they genuinely feel or believe; not dishonest or hypocritical; (c) (of a person, feelings, or behaviour) not pretending or lying; honest.
[6] Honour: (a) honesty, fairness, or integrity in one's beliefs and actions; (b) to accept and acknowledge personal responsibility for one's actions.
[6.1] Integrity: (a) the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; (b) the state of being whole and undivided.
[6.2] Morality: (a) principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour; (b) a particular system of values and principles of conduct; (c) the extent to which an action is right or wrong. [7] Honesty: (a) telling the truth or able to be trusted and not likely to steal,
cheat, or lie; (b) (of a person) truthful or able to be trusted; not likely to steal, cheat, or lie, or (of actions, speech, or appearance) showing these qualities.
[A] Ecology of Peace culture honesty about objective reality: (a) Earth is round, not flat. (b) Resources are finite. (c) When beings who call
themselves humans breed or consume above ecological carrying capacity limits, it results in ecological overshoot, resource depletion and resource conflict. (d) Some of the socio-cultural and psycho-political consequences of overpopulation & consumption collision with declining resources
include: climate change, poverty, slavery, unemployment, food shortages, food inflation, cost of living increases, urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, pollution, peak oil, peak water, peak food, peak population, species extinction, loss of biodiversity, peak resources, racial, religious, class, gender resource war conflict, militarized police, psycho-social and cultural conformity pressures on free speech, etc; inter-cultural conflict; legal, political and corporate corruption, etc. (e) The root cause of
humans breeding and consuming above ecological carrying capacity limits are the Masonic War is Peace clauses of international law allowing individuals who call themselves humans to breed and consume above carrying capacity limits..
Definition: Objective and Subjective Reality:
[8] Objective and Subjective Reality:
[8.1] Objective Reality is the collection of factual things that we are sure exist independently of us. Every person is able, in principle, to verify every aspect of the objective reality. Anything that cannot be verified in this way is not part of the objective reality.
[8.2] Subjective Reality is our interpretation of facts and the meaning we make – based upon our racial, religious, class or gender identity – of those interpretations.
[9] Objective Reality:
[9.1] Factual Reality: who said what, who did what to whom, how and when. We create the world by noticing who, what, when and how via our senses of sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch.
[10] Subjective Reality:
[10.1] Interpretive Reality: when we ask why who said what, who did what to whom, how and when, we are involved in interpreting facts. We are
interpreting their motives; because unless we were able to read their mind; we don’t know — for a fact — what their motive was for doing or saying what they did.
[10.2] Identity (Meaning Making) Reality: Our motives for who we choose to be, and what we choose to do and say are a reflection of our identity subjective reality; which would include ethnicity, religion and class. Meaning Making identity stories are based upon collective – racial, religious, ideological, class or culture – tribal identity moral interpretations of a collection of historical events, where many identity interpretations, have generated a moral – racial, religious, class or culture – tribal meaning making story. If an individual’s primary identity is ‘I am a Christian’ then their meaning making of their interpretations is based upon their ‘Christian frame of orientation’ aka Christian history.
[11] Example:
[11.1] Objective Reality Fact: A woman is running down a street.
[11.2] Subjective Reality Interpretation: She is running because she is late. [11.3] Subjective Reality Interpretation: She is running because she is being
chased.
[11.4] Subjective Reality Identity Meaning Making: She is running because she is late, because she is lazy and did not prepare and now she has to rush to finish her job.
[11.5] Subjective Reality Identity Meaning Making: She is running because she is being chased by a racial, religious, class, gender predator.
Functional and Dysfunctional – Cultural, Religious, Class and Gender – Interpretations of Objective Reality.
[12] Although there are a very large number of interpretations of the
world; there are unbelievably severe constraints; on the number of functional interpretations there are in the world:
[13] The postmodernists were actually wrestling with quite a difficult problem. The founders of postmodernism were by no means unintelligent and the actually put their finger on quite an important problem. The important problem that the put their finger on was the fact that any set of phenomena has a near infinite number of potential interpretations. That actually
happens to be the case. That fact, lets say, was discovered simultaneously in a number of different disciplines … One of the disciplines was artificial intelligence … It was much more difficult to make a machine that could perceive the world, than it had originally been supposed. .. Part of the reason for the lack of artificial intelligence robots back in the 60’s was that the artificial intelligence researchers, when they were starting to instantiate perception into their machines, learned that charting your course in the world might be a trivial problem, in comparison to determining how to perceive the world, and the reason for that is that there is a very large number of ways to perceive the world. The postmodernists actually cottoned on to this, and the claims they made was that there is a near infinite number of ways to
interpret any given text; and that actually also happens to be the case. Then they said, well if there is a near infinite number of ways to interpret any text, how do you know if any given interpretation should take precedence over any other interpretation, which is also a perfectly reasonable issue. …. The
error in postmodernism is the failure to recognize that there are a finite number of credible interpretations of phenomena; and also a refusal to engage with the intellectual problem to determine to engage to find out what the finite number may actually consist of. I
will give you a brief overview of how we happened to solve this problem as human beings. We do it partly biologically because we inhabit a biological framework that’s been developed over the course of about 3.5 million years; that severally constrains the manner in which we interpret the world. It constrains it such that we only tend to spontaneously manifest
interpretations of the world that don’t result in undue suffering and our demise. There is plenty of ways to be stupid enough to perish and there are plenty of ways to be stupid enough to suffer without meaning; but there aren’t very many ways to live properly and carefully for a long period of time; in a manner that doesn’t also simultaneously do harm to other people. So that is the second set of constraints. You have biological constraints on your
perception and they are built in, as a consequence of the Darwinian process; and the second part is that you are forced to interact with yourself now in this week, next week, and the month after. So you have to conduct yourself in a way that doesn’t interfere with your future life as you are living now. And simultaneously you have to conduct yourself in a way that makes all the people around you want to cooperate with you and compete with you; and maintain the relationship with you and do that today, and next week and
next month. So although there are a very large number of
interpretations of the world; there are unbelievably severe
constraints; on the number of functional interpretations there are in the world. And one of the things that the humanities was supposed to be
educating the people with regards towards understanding was: what the universe of those finite functional interpretations might be; and that has been more or less abandoned by the universities; under the values of
postmodernism. – Jordan Peterson: Postmodern NeoMarxism: Diagnosis and Cure29.
Ecology of Peace ‘Frame of Orientation’ Objective Reality aka EoP Radical Honoursty Functional Interpretation of Objective Reality Transforming the World Constraints for Sincere Peaceniks / Honourable Warriors:
[14] Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty Factual Reality [eop-rh-fr.tygae.org.za] and EoP Scientific and Cultural Law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za] are EoP culture’s functional group shared system of thought and action frame of orientation and object of inter-species relating devotion interpretation of global geopolitical reality for individuals whose object of devotion/values include: (i) honest – race, religious, gender and cultural – relationships; (ii) an ecological carrying capacity based perspective of observable factual social contract reality; and (iii) non-violent cooperative root cause problem solving. [15] EoP RH FR: Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty Factual Reality30:
[15.1] Factual Reality:
[A] Earth is round, not flat. [B] Resources are finite.
[C] When beings who call themselves humans breed or consume above ecological carrying capacity limits, it results in ecological overshoot, resource depletion and resource conflict.
[D] Some of the socio-cultural and psycho-political consequences of
overpopulation & consumption collision with declining resources include: poverty, slavery, unemployment, food shortages, food inflation, cost of living increases, urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, pollution, peak
29 http://ss-defcon.tygae.org.za/2017/07/09-jul-jpeterson/ archive.is/R1Hy4 30 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-fr/ archive.is/BSOAb
oil, peak water, peak food, peak population, species extinction, loss of biodiversity, peak resources, racial, religious, class, gender resource war conflict, militarized police, psycho-social and cultural conformity
pressures on free speech, etc; inter-cultural conflict; legal, political and corporate corruption, etc.
[E] The root cause of humans breeding and consuming above ecological carrying capacity limits are the Masonic War is Peace clauses of international law allowing individuals who call themselves humans to breed and consume above carrying capacity limits.
[15.2] Interpretive Reality:
[A] If individuals, families, tribes, races, religions, political parties, corporations and/or nations sincerely want to (a) sustainably protect natural resources for future generations; and/or (b) reduce class, racial and/or religious local, national and international resource war conflict; and/or (c) enable honourable, transparent and humane international cooperative de-industrialization and depopulation of the planet to return to living in accordance to ecological carrying capacity limits; they should (d) cooperate to nullify the ‘right to breed and consume with total
disregard for ecological carrying capacity limits’ clauses and replace them with Ecology of Peace – EoP Scientific and Cultural law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za31] – clauses that restricts all the worlds citizens
to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits; or be humanely eliminated from the planetary genepool.
EoP Sincere Peacenik / Honourable Warrior Co-Operator:
[16] EoP Applicants are Right – EoP RH FR is Objective Reality – Co-operator: [17] If Respondent Agrees with EoP frame of orientation/functional interpretation
of objective reality [eop-rh-fr.tygae.org.za32].
[18] Kindly sign your Ecology of Peace Policy Statement [eop-policy-stmnt.tygae.org.za] and/or responsible Freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za33] Oath [eop-axis-oath.tygae.org.za34].
31 http://eop-nwo-scf.tygae.org.za/scientific-cultural-law/ archive.is/QneCw 32 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-fr/ archive.is/BSOAb
33 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/responsible-freedom/ archive.is/rXzYe 34 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-axis-milnec-evac/eop-axis-oath/ archive.fo/Yv2t3
[18.1] Your EoP Policy Statement and/or Responsible Freedom Oath will be used by EoP Applicants to provide your nations and/or EoP Axis
[eop-axis.tygae.org.za35] nations Presidents and/or Prime Ministers and/or
Constitutional/Supreme Court Judges – whether left or right, white or black, religious or secular – with a mandate to begin official EoP TRC to End Abel and Kane Cold War [eoptrc-akcoldwar.tygae.org.za36]
negotiations to implement EoP Scientific and Cultural law
[eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za37] as international law; to shut down of the WiP
Ponzi Swamp economy [eop-sdwipecon.tygae.org.za38].
[19] Not sure Truthseeker: EoP Applicants Could be Right or Wrong Honourable Critic Co-operator:
[20] If Respondent is (a) a truthseeker – whether religious, racial, or ideological, and your ideology is not based upon objective reality its going to collide with objective reality – and (b) not sure whether EoP Applicants frame of
orientation objective reality is accurate [eop-rh-fr.tygae.org.za39]:
[20.1] An Honourable Critic Cooperator is an individual who uses Ego literate [ego-eco-literacy.tygae.org.za40] communication policies to (a) make sure
they are accurately understanding the person they are in discussion with; and if so (b) to provide such person with constructive criticism to expose errors in their legal definitions and/or principles or values. If any Ecology of Peace definition is factually in error, the sooner they are proven so; the sooner they can be amended or discarded as incorrect.
[21] Clarify which if any of EoP SciCult law definition/s or principle/s are in error: [21.1] Ego literacy fully informed consenting communication policy:
[ego-eco-literacy.tygae.org.za41]
[21.2] Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty Factual Reality [eop-rh-fr.tygae.org.za42]
[21.3] EoP Scientific and Cultural law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za43]
35 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-axis-milnec-evac/eop-axis/ archive.is/2Ll4O 36 http://eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za/eoptrc-akcoldwar/ archive.is/l6mUc 37 http://eop-nwo-scf.tygae.org.za/scientific-cultural-law/ archive.is/QneCw 38 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/sd-wip-econ/ archive.is/hWAdA 39 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-fr/ archive.is/BSOAb 40 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-cult-info/ego-eco-literacy/ archive.vn/q4sMD 41 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-cult-info/ego-eco-literacy/ archive.vn/q4sMD 42 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-fr/ archive.is/BSOAb
[21.4] Sustainable procreation and consumption footprint below ecological carrying capacity limits [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za44].
Are there any factual errors in EoP definitions or values?:
[22] Ego Literacy / Responsible Freedom Communication Policy45:
[22.1] If I am committed to honourable discourse; and I am giving someone else the benefit of the doubt that they are committed to honourable
truthseeking discussion:
[22.2] I clarify my preferences; to enable people being communicated to, to clearly know what I want; and whether they are willing to engage me in entering into an agreement; to help me get what I want; and reciprocally whether I can help them to get what they may want.
[22.3] I always respond to verbal and written correspondence, with a sincere honest response. If I don’t have time to respond; I inform them by when they can expect a response.
[22.4] I sincerely and actively listen to the evidence from any individual, irrespective of their political ideology – i.e. right wing to left wing – religion, race or culture. Active listening means that I verify that my interpretation of their statements is accurate; before concluding that I have ‘heard their argument’.
[22.5] I focus on simplifying the issue discussed, using as much as possible descriptive words; as opposed to abstract concepts. If or where I include reference to abstract concepts; I am willing to define my meaning of that abstract concept within that context. [Info re: Abstract, General, Concrete or Specific Terms46]
[22.6] I evaluate their argument based upon the evidence they present, not their race, religion, gender, age, physical appearance or political ideology; etc. [22.7] If I am not convinced by the quality of their evidence on any particular
issue; I am willing to agree to disagree on that particular issue, and cooperate if they are willing to engage in cooperative truthseeking to get
43 http://eop-nwo-scf.tygae.org.za/scientific-cultural-law/ archive.is/QneCw 44 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/eop-footprint/ archive.is/Guli3
45 http://eop-miled-clerk.tygae.org.za/eop-rh-cult-info/ego-eco-literacy/ archive.vn/q4sMD 46 http://ss-defcon.tygae.org.za/2009/10/01-oct-jfriedlander/ archive.is/OJyMM
better quality evidence; so that a stronger beyond reasonable doubt conclusion can be drawn on the particular issue in dispute.
[22.8] I remain in the conversation until we find agreement; so as to support each other on other issues that we do agree upon, which are based upon more conclusive buck stops here evidence.
[22.9] If or where sincere conflict arises in the discussion about the issue in dispute; I am committed to remaining in the conversation and finding a way to resolve the conflict, by allowing myself, them or both of us to get over our anger; as opposed to requiring them to suppress their anger for political correct ‘lets pretend we are getting along’ reasons.
[22.10] Once the emotional steam has been released through the conflict resolution process; both parties will find themselves in a more calm neutral space where the truthseeking conversation can proceed. If either of us decide that we are unable to resolve the conflict between us:
[22.11] If none of us are employed by the State and/or legally obligated to help each other on the particular issue of preference in dispute; we honourably terminate discussions and approach others for help to get what we
respectively want.
[22.12] If one or both of us are employed by the State and/or an organization or profession legally obligated to provide support to enable resolution of the particular requested preference; we cooperatively refer the matter to an honourable discourse truthseeking arbitrator for impartial dispute resolution.
[22.13] If at any point during discussion; or arbitration proceedings; their evidence proves any of my evidence for any of my ideological, racial or religious working hypothesis theories or beliefs to be inaccurate; I love reason and logic more than my ego-identity and hence I am willing to publicly change my mind, on that particular subject and amend my ideological working hypothesis or belief with the new evidence provided; and if necessary to apologize.
[23] Ecology of Peace Scientific and Cultural law47:
[23.1] Ecological Carrying Capacity — Eco Footprint — Scientific Law refers to:
[A] Procreation below carrying capacity limits. [B] Consumption below carrying capacity limits. [23.2] Human Nature Scientific Law refers to:
[A] Fully Informed Consenting Agreements.
[24] EoP Footprint: Sustainable procreation and consumption footprint48.
[25] The EoP Footprint [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za49] is the Ecology of Peace
culture’s answer to the EoP John Brown – how to get along without overbreeding / consuming / deceiving – Question: What is a Sustainable Procreation and Consumption footprint?
[25.1] Ecological Carrying Capacity Limits:
[A] A Sustainable society practices Sustainable Procreation and Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour; i.e. all of its citizens consume and procreate below carrying capacity. Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour behaviour involves the utilization of renewable natural resources—water, cropland, pastureland, forests, and wildlife— exclusively, which can be depleted only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. The utilization of non-renewable natural resources (NNR’s)—fossil fuels, metals, and
minerals—at any level, is not sustainable50.
[25.2] Carrying Capacity Sustainability: I=PAT Equation:
[A] For activities to be genuinely sustainable it must be possible for them to continue indefinitely. The impact of humanity on the environment and the demands that people place on the resources available on the planet can be summarised by what is known as the Ehrlich or IPAT equation, I=PAT. I = impact on the environment or demand for resources, P = population size, A = affluence and T = technology. The two most
important conclusions deriving from this IPAT footprint51 relationship
48 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/eop-footprint/ archive.is/Guli3 49 http://eop-nwo-sco.tygae.org.za/eop-nwo-scp/eop-footprint/ archive.is/Guli3 50 Sustainability Defined, Chris Clugston, WakeUpAmerika
51 EcoFootprint: The difference between the biocapacity and Ecological Footprint of a region or country. A
biocapacity deficit occurs when the Footprint of a population exceeds the biocapacity of the area available to that population. If there is a regional or national biocapacity deficit, it means that the region is importing biocapacity through trade or liquidating regional ecological assets. Global biocapacity deficit cannot be compensated through trade, and is overshoot.
are that: (i) the Earth can support only a limited number of people, at a certain level of affluence, in a sustainable manner; and (ii) Population and Consumption must be reduced to below carrying capacity.
[25.3] Carrying Capacity aka Biocapacity Limits:
[A] “The maximum number of individuals that can be supported sustainably by a given environment is known as its ‘carrying capacity’. Worldwide the total amount of biologically productive land and sea amounts to 12 billion global hectares (gha); or 1.8 gha each if divided by 6.7 billion each. Guerrylla Laws are drawn up in accordance with the proactive
conservation policies of Bhutan52, who set aside 40% of their biologically
productive to be returned to its natural state, for other species and wildlife conservation purposes; then that means that the total amount of biologically productive carrying capacity land available to humans is 60% of 12 billion; which amounts to 7.2 billion gha total; or 60% of 1.8 gha, which is 1 gha each. Population factor is relevant, because the more humans there are, the less biologically productive land there is for everyone else. For example:
[B] Biocapacity limits of 6.7, 3.5, 1 Billion, 500, 250 & 100 Million:
2 billion global hectares of biologically productive land and water divided by (a) 6.7 billion humans, equals: 1.07 gha each; (b) 3.5 billion equals 2.05 gha each; (c) 1 billion equals 7.2 gha each; (d) 500 million equals 14.4 gha each; (e) 250 million equals 28.8 gha; (f) 100 million equals 72 gha each.
[25.4] Procreation Factor:
[A] As noted, the more people there are; the less biologically productive land there is available for everyone else. According to the research of Paul Murtaugh, the procreation factor that should be added by ecology
footprint organisations to their Consumption footprint calculators, is 20
52 Bhutan Proactive Conservation: Bhutan is seen as a model for proactive conservation initiatives. The Kingdom
has received international acclaim for its commitment to the maintenance of its biodiversity. This is reflected in the decision to maintain at least sixty percent of the land area under forest cover, to designate more than 40% of its territory as national parks, reserves and other protected areas, and most recently to identify a further nine percent of land area as biodiversity corridors linking the protected areas. Environmental conservation has been placed at the core of the nation’s development strategy, the middle path. It is not treated as a sector but rather as a set of concerns that must be mainstreamed in Bhutan’s overall approach to development planning and to be buttressed by the force of law. – “Parks of Bhutan”. Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation online. Bhutan Trust Fund.
per child. [Each Child increases a parent’s cumulative consumption footprint by factor of 2053]
[25.5] Difference between Sustainable (Leaver Eco-Innocent) v Unsustainable (Taker Scarcity Combatant):
[A] An individuals IPAT footprint is a result of: (A) Consumption Footprint multiplied by (B) Procreation Factor (Every child increases 20 Child Factor). If their IPAT footprint is below carrying capacity limits, they are an Eco-Innocent Leaver; if their IPAT footprint is above carrying
capacity limits, they are a Scarcity Combatant Taker. [25.6] Total Footprint = Consumption x Procreation Factor.
[A] To work out your Consumption footprint; you will need to use a
Consumption Footprint calculator. Current online footprint calculators: Global Footprint Network54 (copy available at Earth Day55; Center for
Sustainable Economy56; EcoCampus57. See more at Global Footprint’s
Application Standards58, where they detail how their calculators
calculate Consumption footprints. The quiz will ask you various
questions about your consumption habits, and provide you with a final consumption footprint in global hectares which is your ‘consumption footprint’. For the purposes of this calculation; avoid footprint calculator quizzes that do not provide you with your final gha consumption
footprint amount, such as for example: World Wildlife Fund’s footprint calculator59 or Stanford International Students60 (which is excellent and
has great detail; but does not provide you with a final footprint in gha terms). Multiply your consumption footprint gha amount by your Procreation Factor: the number of children you have procreated multiplied by 20. The total amount is your Total Footprint.
[B] For example: Applicants Consumption Footprint using Sustainable Economy’s Myfootprint.org quiz, was 12.7561 global hectares (gha) [now
53 http://ss-defcon.tygae.org.za/2009/07/31-jul-murtaugh-procreation-factor/ archive.is/99OBA 54 http://footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/calculators/ 55 http://www.earthday.org/footprint-calculator 56 http://www.myfootprint.org/ 57 http://ecocamp.us/eco-footprint-calculator 58 http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/application_standards/
59 http://footprint.wwf.org.uk/ Other Green Footprint calculators: http://greenschools.net/article.php?id=271 60 http://footprint.stanford.edu/index.html
15.1362, presumably due to increased population since original quiz was
taken]. She has no children, consequently her procreation factor is 0.5. Consumption (12.75) x Procreation (0.5) = Total Eco Footprint of between 6.375 gha.
______________________________ _________________________
Applicant: Lara Johnson, Pro Se Date: George, South Africa.
