March 25th, 2026 – Law and Legalism

March 25th, 2026

Law and Legalism

Disclaimer:  I am not a lawyer

As a non-lawyer what is the value in Law and Legalism?

Law is a useful system, a system that is more useful to both self and others is both desirable and not a given.

Law and legalism you can’t do that, you can do this.  You can’t do VarA, you can do VarB.  It is a false dichotomy – it allows people to set You can’t do VarA was set appropriately in the first place, that doing VarB has no issues, and that VarC, and VarD are not paths worth investing in, not worth worrying about, not worth factoring into risk mitigation or future optimizations.

VarA = Theft is wrong

VarB = Working for pennies on the dollar is good, optimal, should be turned up for both self and others?

Theft is wrong introduces new problems.  What is theft?  Is theft property?  Is theft intellectual property?  Is theft words?

“They are innocent!” – I said it first, you can’t have those words, you can’t say those words?

It is important not to steal, equates to less can be set to innocent?

Law is built upon words.  Words and linguistics are shakier ground than one would like.  Not an ideal building material, not concrete, not granite, not steel, not actions, actions and support that speak louder than words.

The set of variables are hypotheticals – like ExhibitA and ExhibitB on a document.  Evidence for making a point, or for subtracting from a point.  It is important to remember, that is not up to debate.

VarA = is a non null set of words said that I don’t like, you don’t like

VarB = is be silent, be nice, play your part, sit until called upon

VarA as don’t do that, VarB as do that?

Leading the witness v leading the foreshadow?

These words are a set of vectors, a set of vectors that might profit some in The World.

Band wagon appeal, a point is defendable, means a point is defensible?

Throw in some Peace, less bombs dropped.  Might equate to More Freedom, Better Rules?

Laws are contracts, contracts that all in society are not always required to sign, read, or comprehend, yet are required to be obligated to them, liable to them?

Fault tolerance in law?  Triple modular redundancy?  If one contract doesn’t do the job, three will?  Or maybe better to rely upon some non-legal, non-violent, peaceful creative problem solving to help increase throughput of laws followed, obeyed?  written correctly in the first place?

Sentences must start with a Capital letter.  It is like jaywalking….

H is turn up the rules matter, then break them at leisure?  Break English, sweet pretty little English, what did English ever do to you?

Former, proper, King’s Court, 10 no Australian in?

VarA and VarB might sometimes be in agreement.

VarA = fix that

VarB = fix that

You maybe required to choose a side, You can’t fix that equals reverse psychology, you need to be challenged?  You can fix that might not be ideal desire to fix that?

VarC, VarD, other creative problem solving methods take a back seat, get kicked to the curb?

I partially turn up law and legalism, it allows me to profit from a functional society.  If everyone could drive in any direction they want, not on streets, walking on the sidewalk, sitting on the side walk would be a less profitable endeavor.  Rules have value, value worth following sometimes.  I appreciate.

People sometimes don’t follow the rules because they don’t know the rules.  If you can see a highly visible High Voltage sign on a fence, and you know the danger of lightning, you likely might not want to scale the fence.  I don’t get shocked added bonus, I reinforce rules followed that protect life, added bonus.  I remind that clarity and increased knowledge is a beneficial endeavor.