declaration of individual independance

7/30/2019 Declaration of Individual Independance

1/28

A Self-Sovereignty Document

Declaration of Individual Independence (Draft)Annotated Version

SPECIAL NOTE:

For the first time reader it is probably best to not use the links from the words in this documentbeginning with a capital (which are technical terms whose links point to their definitions within theNatural Social Contract). Instead, for a first reading it is strongly suggested that the reader shouldsimply attempt to use the vernacular meaning of a word which seems appropriate to the context in

which it is used in this document. After in this manner obtaining a glimmer of what the Declaration ofIndividual Independence is about and continuing on to do the same for both the Theory of Social Meta-Needs and the Natural Social Contract, the reader will then be in a better position to delve into the fullnuances of the definitions and their meanings within all these documents. Even though related, thesemeanings and usages are often quite significantly different than any vernacular usages of thecapitalized words and such differences will only become fully clear by using a circular approach tolearning. Only by doing so will it be possible to fully understand the meaning and operation of thesedocuments.

General Notes

There is a version of this document forExecution (signing) which does not contain all the explanatorymaterial which is included in this annotated version. In addition, there is a dialogue of discussion of theSelf-Sovereign Individual Project with George H. Smith in which the part related to an earlier versionof this document begins at Section 3 of George H. Smith Dialogue.

However, all questions, comments and/or criticisms should be made to this annotated version!Furthermore, there is additional amplification in theNatural Social Contract (NSC) and its annotationsof many of the ideas expressed in this document including its annotated version. In addition, thetheoretical basis for all the ideas in these documents is presented in the Theory of Social Meta-Needs.Therefore, all of the Theory of Social Meta-Needs, the Natural Social Contract and its 37 annotationsshould be read before questions, comments and/or criticisms are made to this document.

The words in this document beginning with a capital are linked to their definitions within the NSC (asthey are intended to be understood in the entire Project). However, the reader should be warned thatthese words are technical terms within the NSC written as an axiomatic system (see the NSCIntroduction and the annotation to that Introduction for detail on what this means). The definitions aretherefore only a beginning to understanding the meanings of the words, which meanings will onlybecome fully apparent when the Theory of Social Meta-Needs, the entire NSC document and all itsannotations have been read. The links from this document to those words are therefore only for thepurpose of gaining an initial idea of how such a word is being used in the context of this document, ifthat is not clear. Use of the right click mouse button for opening these links in another window is
http://nsc.html/http://doii.html/http://nsc.html/http://doii.html/http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/


2/28

recommended.

Note: In the annotational remarks herein, the gender neutral pronouns "s/he" for she or he, and "hir" forhis, her, him, hers are used.

The Declaration of Individual Independence

Preface to the Annotated VersionPurpose:first steptowardscomplete

maturity

The purpose of the Declaration of Individual Independence (DOII) is to enable a person todeclare hir fundamental, necessary and complete ethical independence from allgovernments everywhere - to state that s/he is Self-Sovereign (the political portion of Self-Master); that s/he is not bound by the rules and regulations of any government anywhere;

and that s/he reserves to hirself alone the ultimate determination of, Judgment of andresponsibility for hir own Actions. The Execution of this document is intended to be thefirst step that a human will take in order to advance from a past state of subservience togovernmental forms and methods, towards a state of Socially Responsible, yet individuallyfree and independent enlightenment - to reach the truly advanced human state where one isboth fully independent in mind and body from all other humans, and yet one is also readyand eager to join with people of similar maturity in order to share in the enormous Benefitswhich can only be had from the efforts of many specialized talents working together inmutual harmony.

In the words of tienne de la Botie (1530 - 1563) translated from the original French:

"Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place handsupon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then youwill behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his ownweight and break into pieces."1

Motivation:increaseone'sscope

of possibleactions

A thoughtful and curious reader may immediately ask:1) What prompted you to write such a Declaration?2) Why should any person wish to make it?A brief answer to the first question is that government actions in the name of "the people"and government interference in almost every aspect of life has become completely

intolerable and I (Paul Antonik Wakfer) together with my wife (Kitty Antonik Wakfer) -the "we", "us" and "our" in most of the following - have decided that we must do more toremove ourselves from the subjugation of government and to provide a path to moreLiberty for ourselves and others before that domination becomes even worse. This alsoimplies that a brief answer to the second question is: "in order to attain more Freedom!"

Particularlywith

A more complete and personal answer to the first question relates to the fact the we are lifeextensionists (for details see ourMoreLife.org website). Not only do we think thatcurrently available methods can greatly retard the age-related decline in capability of the
http://morelife.org/personal/http://morelife.org/personal/http://morelife.org/http://morelife.org/http://morelife.org/personal/http://morelife.org/personal/http://morelife.org/


3/28

respect tohealthand vitallifespan

human body and brain, but we think there is excellent evidence that the causes of suchdecline will soon be understood well enough that methods to prevent these declines andthus, to vastly extend the healthy active human lifespan will soon be possible. However,just at the time when this understanding is coming to fruition and practical life extendingmethods could soon be available, we are also becoming convinced that the myriad ofgovernment restrictions of all non-coercive, voluntary actions is growing so fast that if we

do not act now these current and developing life extending products and services willeither cease to be developed or be severely restricted (or even banned - some already are -eg. DHEA and melatonin in Canada and elsewhere), and additional life extending scientificbreakthroughs will be prevented from being developed. The result will be that it willbecome increasingly impossible to attain our goal of vastly extended healthy, vital andproductive life. Of course, it should go without saying that our desire for more life is adirect consequence of our desire to optimally increase our Lifetime Happiness - in short,our zest for life is so great that we want MORE! Furthermore, we think that theavalanching government restrictions on nonviolent activities will soon be so invasive andprohibitive as to make a Declaration such as this one, and even moreso the Self-SovereignIndividual Project of which it is a part, a far more dangerous endeavor than now, and that

any major increase in human Liberty may thus become impossible for decades or evencenturies to come. Since the end of the 18th century, the United States of America has beena bastion and a beacon of Liberty and greater Freedom for the rest of the world. However,in the last 50 years that has been fast declining and it is now all but gone. Since there isnowhere else on Earth that is significantly better, it is even conceivable that humancivilization is on the brink of a new "dark ages" with respect to Liberty, human Happiness,production of goods and services, and scientific and technological progress - the total of allhuman Available Actions.

However, there is an additional major reason why we think that life extension is allimportant for society. This is because the full advantage and effect of long-range thought,

responsibility, and obligation can not occur when life lengths are limited. Only under thecircumstances of unbounded lifespan is it truly rational (ie. optimally promotional of one'sLifetime Happiness) for a human to plan all his Actions bearing in mind the unboundednature of the Effects of those Actions. For more detail on this aspect seeLiberty andLifespan [in progress].

A Call toallconcernedaboutgovernme

ntviolationsof liberty

To address the second question above (why would anyone want to Declare what is writtenin the DOII?) in more detail, we expect and hope that thinking people, who are asconcerned about government distortions of the Choices available and Constraints of theLiberty necessary for optimal living as we are, will be interested to make such aDeclaration and to join with us and others in the Self-Sovereign Individual Project.

Although they may not yet be life extensionists, there are still millions of matureintelligent people who agree that governments everywhere are the major impediment to theachievement of some special and important project which each of them deeply wishes tosee achieved. That such people should join us in the Self-Sovereign Individual Project isexplicitly stated and called for at the end of this Declaration. I and Kitty making thisDeclaration alone would accomplish little. For the Self-Sovereign Individual Project to besuccessful in gaining us more Freedom in any practical sense, and in eventuallyeliminating government interference with our lives, we need to be joined by large numbersof other sufficiently like-minded individuals.


4/28

General Annotations to the Declaration of Individual Independence

Format ofAmericanDeclaration

ofIndependencepurposefullyused

1) If some of the phrasings and word usages in this Declaration of IndividualIndependence appear a bit odd and out of place or time, that is because the DOII hasbeen written as much as possible in the style of the original American Declaration of

Independence (TDOI), even purposefully using some of the phrases from that documentwhere they were appropriate. This was done for several reasons. First, TDOI wasorganized with a structure which was reasonable for a Declaration of state sovereignty,but that same structure is just as reasonable for an individual Declaration of Self-Sovereignty, ie. for a Declaration of an individual human's independence from rule bygovernments everywhere. Second, TDOI correctly attempted to state its message interms of basic principles as should any such Declaration and as does DOII. Third, TDOIwas elegantly phrased for its time even though, as I have shown in a critique of TDOI, itcontained major omissions and flaws. Finally, I wanted to create a Declaration whichwould inspire; one which would grab the hearts and minds of as many US residents aspossible. Even though the last century has seen enormous reduction in consistent

thought and action among USers in general about the purposes and methods ofgovernment, I think that they may still be the most fertile group among which to findpeople to join the cause of the Self-Sovereign Individual Project. Therefore, althoughthis Declaration is not as I would have written it had the historical one not existed, it isnot necessarily deficient from what that would have been, and it may, hopefully, bemore persuasive.

Details ofdisplay andgender usage

2) The original document text is displayed in serif-style text. The annotations arenumbered, as n., and are in normal text.

3) All uses of the masculine gender include the feminine gender. Neither in this

Declaration nor in theNatural Social Contract is there any need to distinguish the twohuman genders.

Plurals usedveryrestrictively

4) However, all singulars should be carefully distinguished from all plurals. Inparticular, I have intentionally refrained from using "we", "us" and "our", except where Iexplicitly refer to all human beings, to a clearly defined group, or to Kitty and PaulAntonik Wakfer together only. In addition, as opposed to most other writers, I neverascribe human thought, Action or any Attributes which can only be held by individualPersons, to plural nouns or pronouns. For details of why I think this is a fundamentalproblem, see annotation 6) below and my essay "The Essential Collectivism ofLanguage and Thought".

Historicalanalysis notnecessaryforunderstanding

5) When reading the annotations of the DOII statements given below, the reader shouldrealize that some of the ideas being explained are old and well known in our culture andsome are creatively original or given boldly new interpretations, but all are highlycomplex, whether or not this has been recognized by others. A complete and detailedhistorical analysis of all the ideas expressed within the DOII and additionally within thisbrief annotated amplification of it would require hundreds of pages of text to adequatelycover the full range of the intricacies involved, as they have been seen by other thinkers
http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/


5/28

throughout history; that much and more can be found on these topics within theliterature of civilization. In these annotated remarks I make no attempt at such acomplete analysis of historical thought about these ideas, because I do not think that it isnecessary. Instead I think that the explanations provided here should be sufficient toallow the thoughtful intelligent reader to understand what I am saying. As always, ifanyone has questions or comments he should bring these to my attention at the Yahoo

group MoreLife - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morelife, quoting the specific portioninvolved.

Annotations to the Document Itself

When in the course of his life anyindividual achieves a clearunderstanding that the realizationof his human potential for theultimate promotion of his LifetimeHappiness is being severelyConstrained and UnPermittedlyModified by the regulations ofthose governing his life, and at thesame time he appreciates thatincreasing his Lifetime Happinessis solely his own responsibility,

6) This document is first and foremost a Declaration ofindependence and Self-Sovereignty by an "individual" human, notby any group of them, political or otherwise. This is becausegroups of humans do not Exist as thinking, Acting entities withany Characteristics of Decision making or Acting similar to thoseof individual humans. Ignoring the foundational character of thisfact of reality is the fundamental flaw lurking within the writingsand conclusions of most thinkers on the subject of human socialrelationships. The use of plurals, either nouns or pronouns, to referto Collectives (even where they are Well-Defined) as if they haveall the Attributes of their Members by most writers throughouthistory is not trivial, nor merely a syntactical, stylistic orsuperficial linguistic convention. As this use of plurals to represententities which are then depicted within sentences as thinking,Deciding, Acting, etc. - ie. doing all manner of mental andphysical activities which only individual humans can do - isfundamental to the very structure of most world languages, so alsoand to the same extent are family, team, tribe, clan, nation andother Collectivist notions fundamental to the very core thinking ofmost humans. It is this that I seek to expose, so that it can beeradicated from human thought and so that the Reality of trueindividualism can finally shine through the veil of Collectivism(so-called "group think") which currently shrouds much humanthought. For more details see my essay "The EssentialCollectivism of Language and Thought".

7) Such a Declaration as the DOII can only take place at a timewhen a human has reached sufficient intellectual understanding to

know that the full realization of his life's potential for the purposeof optimally increasing his Lifetime Happiness requires no moreand no less than a very minimal, but nevertheless special andessential kind of ordering of Society. Whether sufficient numbersof people have reached this stage to allow the achievement of sucha Society is not at all certain. However, it is my hope that with theuse of the Internet to aid the promotion and implementation of theideas, a Society of optimal InterPersonal Liberty and vastly
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/morelifehttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/morelife


6/28

increased Freedom can eventually be achieved.

8) I have, above, summarized the hallmarks of this intellectualunderstanding and maturity, and have in theNatural SocialContract used the terms Self-Sovereign Individual or Freeman todescribe a person who has attained this level. From a Social

perspective, Freeman Status may be seen as having been reachedby and appropriate to a human who understands that portion of hisown nature which necessitates a certain kind of behavior towardsand from others in order to enable the most optimal mutualincrease of his own and their Lifetime Happiness.

9) The phrase, "optimal increase of his Lifetime Happiness", iscritical to understanding this Declaration and the world-view uponwhich it is based (as will be seen below) since, even thoughDeciding how to best promote one's own Happiness is fraughtwith great difficulty, one thing is certain - that only the individual

himself has any significant chance to correctly Decide it.However, even the individual hirself needs to be very clear aboutwhat exactly s/he is trying to increase or augment when s/he aimsto promote hir Lifetime Happiness. As detailed in its definitionannotation, I distinguish the term Happiness from pleasure,gratification, satisfaction, contentment, fulfillment and the myriadof other feelings or emotions which humans seek to gain orincrease, although these are all preliminary to, contributory to andpart of Happiness. Instead, I use the term Lifetime Happiness forthe summed Evaluations of all these multiple components andmore - ie. Happiness is that which a Rational, volitional, self-

aware and self-directed lifeform seeks. The major differencebetween self-aware and non self-aware lifeforms may be that anon self-aware lifeform "seeks" (actually it is merely compelledby its nature) only to maximize its instantaneous pleasure orgratification, while a self-aware lifeform consciously seeks and aconsciously Rational lifeform volitionally Chooses to maximizeits integrated Lifetime Happiness. It should be noted in passingthat humans are not the only lifeforms on earth that show evidenceof self-awareness and on some level operate to optimally increasetheir Lifetime Happiness - eg. most mammals exhibit some suchtraits.

Even though "realization of his human potential" is not a primarygoal, I have included it before "promotion of his LifetimeHappiness" because it is so preliminary to and necessary for theHappiness of any being with human Attributes as to be practicallyessential (particularly the potential for Rational thought andAction). In addition, there are many, many humans who could, infact, never be completely Happy without realizing some particularpotential. For them, "realization of his human potential" (even if
http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/


7/28

not a potential which is unique to humans - see next paragraph) is,in fact, one of the dimensions of their Happiness.2 In addition,Happiness seems to be an amount or Value of some State whichValue is unbounded (certainly in time) and not something whichcan be achieved, whereas human potential appears not to be anunbounded amount of some State, but instead a level or goal that,

although it may be altered by self-knowledge, is capable ofattainment at some point in a lifetime (particularly for somespecific human potential). It is optimally increasing suchHappiness summed up over a lifetime which is the consciouspurposeful human goal that each reasonable human seeks, and thisstatement is one of the self-evident truths (empirically derivedaxioms of reality) that I formally state as item III of theDeclaration. For much more detail about Happiness, see theannotation to the Natural Social Contract for Happiness and theTheory of Social Meta-Needs wherein optimally increasing hirLifetime Happiness is shown to be the only possible reasonable

ultimate purpose for any human.10) The phrase, "his human potential", is also critical here becausethe juxtaposition of "human" with "potential" refers to thecommon Attributes that all humans have as Members of thespecies homo sapiens sapiens and which differentiate them fromother lifeforms - most particularly it refers to the Characteristics ofmind - the defining human Characteristics. In the sense ofAvailable Actions, humans have limited Freedom just as doeseverything else in nature. They can only Act according to whatthey are in Reality. They are not Free to fly (unaided), time travel,

to walk through walls, or to read the minds of other humans. Justas any lifeform in Reality must Act according to its nature (oraccept some usually negative consequences), so humans too areonly Free to do what is in their nature according to the laws ofReality without incurring Harm. For example, just as a woodenbeam under too much of a load will break, so a human's healthwill suffer if s/he does not eat adequate food in type and amount,and so also will hir potential for Happiness suffer if s/he does notassociate at all with other humans or if s/he does not interact withthem in a manner appropriate to their common nature as humans.Thus, what a human needs for the full promotion of hir Happinessis the maximum Freedom that this common essentially humannature allows in reality, which is not in conflict with the equalmaximum Freedom of every other human being (ie. s/he needscompossible - consistently, mutually sustainable - Liberties).While the entire range of potential human Freedoms can only begained by increases in available Choices (by advancing scientificand technological progress and creative invention), it is mycontention that a clear, relatively concise delineation of amaximally compossible set of natural Liberties (the Social part of


8/28

Freedoms) is possible, and that is what I have tried to succinctlystate in this Declaration and in theNatural Social Contract.

11) A fundamental aspect of the nature of human beings is that oneindividual cannot directly affect the Happiness State of anotherexcept through Events which cause physical Harm or Benefit. All

sensory input must be Evaluated by the mind, if onlysubconsciously and automatically, before it generates either aHappy or UnHappy emotion. This is an important aspect of thephrase "solely his own responsibility". Others can contribute to itsgeneration, but only an individual human can be the EffectiveCause of an increase of hir own Happiness in all of its manydimensions. This is not only because much of the manner in whichs/he filters, Evaluates, combines and integrates hir sensory input isultimately under hir volitional Control, but also because only s/hecan know the intimate and complex details of what contributes tohir own Happiness. I am not saying that s/he can easily (or even

ever completely) Control hir Evaluations or know with certaintywhat will cause hir to be Happy. I am only saying that others haveeven less chance to Control and Evaluate it to suit hir best thans/he does. They have no ability at all to Control the dispositionand Evaluation of hir sensory input once it is past hir senses, andsince they cannot read his mind, they cannot know his intimateEvaluations of data to any significant degree. On the negative sidehowever, since the health and wholeness of an individual's body isessential for hir optimal Happiness, physical Harm mustnecessarily reduce the level of Happiness of any Rationalindividual.

then it becomes necessary for himto declare his refusal to sanctionthe necessity, Effect and the veryExistence of such regulations overhim, to unilaterally dissolve thoseConnection Attributes by which hehas been Involved with hisgovernors, and to assume his placeamong other Freemen with the

independence of thought andsovereignty of Action which hisand their nature entitles andrequires of them as shown by theTheory of Social Meta-Needs.

12) In order to attain the best Social arrangement for the purposeof maximizing the achievement of hir potential to optimallyincrease hir Lifetime Happiness, unless the current situation of hirLiberty is so bad that s/he would be in clear danger by doing so,the first and one of the most important steps that a person musttake is to declare hir disagreement with those current socialarrangements which decrease hir ability to attain these goals byreducing hir Available Actions and UnPermitedly Modifying hirChoice Estimations (and that of others with whom s/he needs to

interface to reach hir goals) below what they could and shouldnaturally be. Now some people may be rightly concerned withsuch an open act of defiance and may ask: "Why cannot I simplyact in disobedience covertly, rather than state it openly, and alsodo all that I can to escape the regulations of my 'governors'?" Myanswer is that while I acknowledge that such a silent opting outand covert persuasion of others to do likewise may in time resultin the atrophy and eventual disappearance of the state (and this isindeed what I have personally been doing for over two decades), I
http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/


9/28

now think that the entrenchment and rate of growth of statist ideasis such that such atrophy and disappearance is highly unlikely tohappen within any time frame which will Benefit anyone alivetoday, and furthermore, that the chances of it succeeding at all aregrowing slimmer every day. The reason that this silent, covertmethod is insufficient to accomplish the purposes of ultimate full

and lasting Self-Sovereignty in any reasonable time frame, or evenat all, is that for such a state of Self-Sovereignty to be practicallyBeneficial (ie. to be truly effective), it is necessary that asignificant number of other individuals take part in the socialstructure that such a Free Society (actually a Freeman Society)requires, and that the regulations of the government, which areseverely restricting such a free society currently, be greatlyreduced and eventually eliminated. I think this can only be doneby a courageous, forthright and open declaration of Self-Sovereignty (as was done by those who signed the Declaration ofIndependence). Only in this way will the declarer be seen to be

sufficiently honorable and be able to appeal directly to enoughpeople. Only by such an open declaration will s/he be able to gainsufficient credible publicity that s/he can eventually persuadesufficient numbers of people to join hir to enable theaccomplishment of hir (and their) joint goal - instead of itremaining a mere utopian dream.

Thus, I am convinced that such a declaration is absolutelynecessary in order to achieve the maximum possible LifetimeHappiness which Reality allows, not merely optimal LifetimeHappiness under one's present conditions (ie a "global"3 rather

than a "local3 maximum of Lifetime Happiness). It is certainlytrue that people can achieve a local maximum of Happiness indifferent ways (one can be Happy even in a prison if one ignoreswhat one is missing from lack of Liberty), but in order to achievea global maximum, one must promote one's disagreement with thesocial status quo and take action to change those current socialarrangements in order to gain more Available Actions (Freedom).Because in order to attain a global maximum Happiness State anindividual needs the Available Choices and Actions which only theefforts of many others can provide, s/he really has no alternativeexcept to declare hir dissatisfaction with the present state ofsociety and to attempt to convince others to help hir change to abetter social arrangement.

13) It is important to note that the declarer is not saying and neednot say that s/he definitely intends to break any laws andregulations. All that s/he is saying is that these laws andregulations have no moral validity and that s/he reserves to hirselfthe Liberty to Decide whether to obey them or not. Though IDecided not to use the term within the Declaration itself, the


10/28

declarer is, in effect, formally seceding from the state.

14) Finally, the reason why the nature of man in Reality "requires"this "independence of thought and sovereignty of action" and thatthe Declarer wishes to join with others who have it, is becausesuch "independence of thought and sovereignty of action" is

necessary for the achievement of a person's potential and to enablehir to optimally increase hir Lifetime Happiness.

Since a reasonable person will bothrespect the opinions of otherthoughtful individuals, and alsorealize that optimally increasing hisLifetime Happiness requires theirindividual cooperation inspecialization and division of labor

and in mutual Exchange to the bestinterests of all, such a Declarationshould thoroughly explain andjustify the reasons that have causedthe Declarer to take this Action tono longer bind himself with themin obedience to the state. Finally, inorder to make it abundantly clearthat his Declaration ofindependence is not merely alicense to do as he pleases

according to his whims, theDeclarer's respect for and need ofthe cooperation of Freemennecessitates that he state hisPersonal Responsibilities to themin a Contract form to which heunilaterally agrees and which heunilaterally Executes, at the sametime imploring those who are notyet Freemen to make the sameDeclaration and to reciprocally

Contract with him by becomingFreemen.

15) This paragraph describes another primary aspect of humannature, and its needs for the optimal promotion of the declarer'sLifetime Happiness and achievement of his potential, which as amature human he has come to understand. The declarer knows thatthis goal cannot be attained by hirself alone, but also requires thecooperation of others for its achievement. For this reason thedeclarer needs to persuade many other humans to each declare hir

own Self-Sovereignty and join together with the declarer. This canonly be accomplished by patient, clear, forthright and openexplanation of the reasons for this Declaration, how it wouldpromote a better Social structure Benefiting all Rationalproductive individuals, and thus, why other people should alsomake this or a very similar Declaration in their own best interest.Complete, honest and fully open debate is needed with all whoquestion the declarer's reasons, motives or Intentions. The declarerneeds to stress that s/he is not forsaking the other humans insociety so long as they do not Violate hir, but that s/he is onlyabandoning allegiance to the state. Finally, the declarer must make

it very clear that, together with hir unilateral Execution of a SocialContract (for example see theNatural Social Contract), this stepwill, in fact, make hir even more responsible for Restitution toothers for any Responsible Harm which s/he does to them thanunder current government justice systems. Only by conductinghirself in this manner can the declarer expect to attract thenecessary number of other humans to join and reciprocallyContract with hir.

I, the Declarer, hold these truths tobe self-evident:

16) By "self-evident" I do not mean obvious (nor did the Framersof TDOI mean that). Instead, I use "self-evident" in the sense ofaxiomatic or fundamental (and I think that is also how the Framersof TDOI meant it). The truths about to be enumerated have beendetermined to be axioms of Reality by the use ofrational
http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/http://morelife.org/fundamentals/scimeth.htmlhttp://nsc.html/http://morelife.org/fundamentals/scimeth.html


11/28

empiricism, a sound, scientific and/or logical study of Realitywhich other reasoning humans should be able to understand and toverify and which is the only valid method of determining truthwhich is currently known (and of which the scientific method is aextremely important part). Thus, the validity of "these truths" is nomore and no less than the validity of the evidence from which the

laws of physics or the postulates from which the rules ofarithmetic are derived, for example. However, a differencebetween these two (laws of physics and postulates of arithmetic)should also be noted. The only absolute truths in Reality are thoseRelationships that hold between pure abstractions - betweenartificial constructs that only describe (model) clearly delineatedsubsets of reality, such as logic, mathematics and other theories.Since all knowledge of measurable parameters of MaterialExistents has a limited accuracy and is held with a probability ofvalidity of less than 100%, when something is said to be true ofReality it should always be understood to mean only that it is

thought that it is highly likely to be so every time that it isobserved under circumstances as nearly identical as can beproduced or observed. Moreover, this nearly identical means thatachieving certainty in Reality is not possible by means of thescientific method, since no two Events can ever be completelyidentical. Such mere probabilistic certainty does not apply tocertain logical or simple arithmetic statements about Reality. Suchsentences are absolutely true precisely because it is possible tofully define, compare and recreate the logical and mathematicalAttributes of an abstract System. The "self-evident truths" of theDOII, are of mixed nature, both scientific and logical.

I. that as a human, I am anindividual Person, essentiallyseparate from every other humanwith a uniquely different mind, anda uniquely different set of physicaland mental Attributes.

17) This truth follows from the logical facts that humans are not(normally) joined in body or mind and have a uniquedevelopmental environment, and the experimentally verified factthat each human that is not a clone (identical twins are clones) hasa unique genome. (Even for identical twins the lack of uniquenessis an experimentally verified fact of reality - their divergence fromidenticalness begins at the moment when the initial cell bodysplits in two.) The human genome is best described as a recipe fora human being, rather than a blueprint.4 This uniqueness and

separateness (strengthened by the truths specified in IV and V) iswhat I always mean when I use the term "individual" in referenceto a human.

II. that as a human, I have thepotential for self-awareness,introspection, abstraction, Rationalthought and volitional Action

18) These are mental Characteristics that scientific evidenceshows are possible for any human mind that is not physiologicallydefective. This set of mental Attributes may even be unique tohumans among all the Earth's current lifeforms, and thus, may
http://morelife.org/fundamentals/scimeth.htmlhttp://morelife.org/fundamentals/scimeth.html


12/28

directed toward optimallyincreasing my Lifetime Happiness.

most fundamentally differentiate humans from other animals. It isnoteworthy that these Characteristics are all related to the mind.They are sometimes summarized by the term sentient, but thatterm, meaning conscious or capable of sensation or feeling, ismuch less than the full set of mental Attributes that characterizehumans. Certainly, any human individual who has the ability to

read, understand and agree with this Declaration and itscorollaries, must have these mental Attributes, at the very least.

Before proceeding, a word is in order about the use of the word"volitional" and the related topic of free will. There is nothing inthe DOII or theNatural Social Contract which requires thathumans have free will in any fully non-deterministic sense. Aswill be seen when I discuss the complexity of the humanbrain/mind and its Evaluative processes, the logic of my argumentand the need for a system similar to what I propose relies on thepurpose of human life being the optimal increase of Lifetime

Happiness in an Environment of Actions by individuals whoseChoice Estimations are mostly unknowable to one another.

III. that although my evolutionarypurpose, as an animal, is merelythe survival of my genome, nowthat I have matured to adulthood,as a human adult, this evolutionarypurpose has been superseded bythe desire to optimally increase my

Lifetime Happiness in accord withmy individual abilities and theEvaluations directed by myRational thought.

19) The only reasonable meaning of "purpose" for a non-sentientlifeform (if any such idea of purpose is reasonable at all for a non-sentient lifeform) is procreation leading to the survival of itsgenome. However, a lifeform which is capable of self-awareness,introspection, abstraction and Rational thought can create its ownpurposes that can then override its evolutionary imperative, or atthe least, limit that instinctual drive according to its own wishes.

By means of exercising hir Rational introspection, a human canattempt to determine those things that will increase hir currentHappiness State. By additional Rational thought and introspectionof hir Values and of their Relationship to Reality, s/he can also tryto determine those Actions that will optimally increase hirHappiness over hir Lifetime (the "Lifetime Happiness" of III). Bythis I mean hir instantaneous Happiness summed (integrated in amathematical sense) over hir whole Lifetime, ie. hir LifetimeHappiness - for a detailed analysis see the Natural Social Contractannotation for Happiness. The goals of the Actions taken by amature human in order to optimally increase hir Lifetime

Happiness may then be termed hir "individual purposes" of IV.

IV. that one consequence of myhuman separateness is that theInformation contents of my mindcannot, with any significant degreeof completeness or accuracy, betransferred to or determined by

20) I have used the phrase "Information contents" (ie Informationand meaning content of the brain) because modern neurosciencehas reached the stage where some of the biochemical andneurological contents of one human brain can be determined byanother. However, true mind reading is nowhere in sight and manyscientists doubt with good reason that this will ever be possible for


13/28

another human without mycooperation, and even then, withonly limited completeness andaccuracy except for very simplethings, because of the smallbandwidth of Outward

communication compared withInward. In particular, my individualpurposes are both uniquelydifferent from, and cannot besignificantly determined ahead ofmy Actions by any other human.

human brains as they are now constructed and organized. I thinkthat it is fair to say that the complexity and delicacy of the brain issuch that for many centuries to come the statement that I havemade will remain valid. The second sentence above followslogically from the first sentence and those truths stated prior to it.By "cannot be significantly determined" I mean here that the

amount of possible prior determination of a person's Choices andActions is small, unreliable and not useful for any practicalpurpose (again unless adequate communication has taken place -but even that is fraught with problems at least partly because of itsinherent low bandwidth). The prime reason for the statement ofthis truth is to show that such simple rules of behavior as, forexample, the golden rule cannot be sufficient to optimizeHappiness, nor will any kind of general altruism be alwaysBeneficial, even for the receiver of the Value.

V. that another consequence of myhuman separateness is that all ofmy mental and physical abilitiesfor thought, Evaluation, Choiceand Action are not to anysignificant degree under theControl of anyone but myself - thatI am Master of MySelf.

21) It is even more the case with respect to use and "Control" thanwith respect to "Information contents" that one human has nodirect connection with the body and mind of another to anysignificant degree (under normal physiological circumstances).Each human individual is essentially a Self-Master. Of course, theAvailable Actions for an individual can be reduced or altered bysomeone Violating hir in some manner which Constrains hirLiberty or UnPermitedly Modifies hir Choice Estimations, butalthough highly important, that is generally a rather gross andsmall portion of hir entire range of physical and biologicalActions. Unless and until a person is actually killed, s/he retains a

large part of hir innate power of Self-Mastery.

VI. that even though all humanshave separate and uniquelydifferent individual purposes, thereexists a set of Social Meta-Needs,Responsibilities and Entitlementswhich, each of us agreeing to,mutually, consistently andconcurrently (ie. compossibly from

"com" - together and "possible")optimizes the potential of each ofus to achieve his individualpurposes; and that to enable thatoptimization of potential, thiscompossible set needs to berecorded as a manifest mutualunderstanding, a Social Contract,specifying the Relationships/a>

22) Even though humans are unique individuals with a large partof their being only minimally understandable to all but possibly afew very intimate others, they do have many important Attributesin common which relate to both their self-behavior and theirInteractions with other humans. As with all human RationalActions, the purpose of the Actions guided by these SocialCharacteristics is the optimal increasing of the Lifetime Happinessof each individual. Although it might be an interesting

investigation, there is no need here, in order to enumerate and usethem, to attempt to discern how the evolutionary development ofhomo sapiens sapiens has created these self-behaviors and SocialMeta-Needs which are required for the optimization of humanHappiness acquisition. Neither is it my purpose here to investigatethe existence of or to analyze any common Non-Social aspects ofhuman behavior (by Non-Social, I mean behavior that does notAffect other humans) concerning whether such behaviors will orwill not help an individual to optimally increase hir Lifetime


14/28

between Self-SovereignIndividuals, and Executed by each.

Happiness. However, in order to for humans to optimize their liveswithin a Social context, they must ascertain the Social Meta-Needs (ie. the requirements of human behavior which directlyAffect all humans) of humans from a study of the common aspectsof each human's "individual purposes". Not only must these SocialMeta-Needs (also Social requirements) be determined, but to be

implemented and achieved without ambiguity andmisunderstanding they need to be formulated into a clear writtenContract detailing the Responsibilities and Entitlements withrespect to all other Contractees to which the Executor of theContract intends to adhere in hir InterActions with them. I havecalled these requirements Social Meta-Needs because they are theset of human needs in a Social Environment (ie. in a Society ofwhich they are Members) which are necessary to provide aframework of InterPersonal Relationships in which moreimmediate and direct human needs can then be optimally satisfied.For example, it is the Social Meta-Need of having one's life,

Liberty and Property reasonably safe from Violation (andRestituted if Violated) which must be in place before humans cansafely and satisfactorily invest in wealth accumulation and Tradefor the many material goods and services which directly benefittheir lives and happiness.

Although the original social contracts of Hobbes, Locke andRousseau were very different from each other, they are also verydifferent from mine. For one thing they all thought that some formof government (even if minimal as with Locke) was necessary.5However, after more than 200 years of additional analysis and

study in economic and political thought, it can be seen (at least bysome) that human Choices and Actions in the marketplace ofservices can provide the necessary defensive, protective,investigative, trial and judgment services.6 All (but nevertheless abig all!) that is needed is a Contract specifying the basic structuralRelationships that will allow these market services to coexist withindividual humans in a manner that will simultaneously promotethe individual purposes of each human by supplying the commonSocial Meta-Needs of all at one and the same time. In spite of theuse of the term social contract by Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau,Rawls and many others to describe something quite different(from mine as well as each other), I have still chosen to use thatname because it is the most correct phrase to describe the purposeof what is required by a Self-Sovereign Individual inContractually declaring hir Social Meta-Needs, Responsibilitiesand Entitlements with respect to hir fellow human beings. I haveprefixed the word Natural onto the name of my Social Contractbecause my document is more true to human nature than any ofthose preceding it and because, by doing so, it is my desire and myhope to see it eventually replace those distortions of the phrase


15/28

social contract.

VII. that such a Social Contractrequires, at the least, that eachExecutor:

a) accepts the Entitlement of eachFreeman to be Sovereign overhimself;

b) declares his desire that thePerson or Property of no Freemanshould be Harmed, and his Intentnot to be the Effective Cause ofany such Harm, with the Harmbeing judged solely by the Harmed

Freeman; and

c) will hold himself fullyResponsible for restoration of theLifetime Happiness of eachFreeman for whom he is theEffective Cause of Harm, to thebest of his ability and with suchRestitution being determined solelyby the Harmed Freeman.

23) Note that it is only now after all the groundwork concerningthe common essential Characteristics of humans and theirInterActions (which from now on I will simply call "the nature of

man") has been laid down, that the enumeration of any humanSocial Meta-Needs (historically called rights) can logically be setforth. This makes it very clear that Social Meta-Needs arelogically secondary concepts derived from the nature of man,Reality, and human Social InterActions.7 Thus, the fundamentalrights of TDOI are here seen as entirely derivative from the natureof man. Rights are simply the requirements of each mature humanwith respect to hir Relationship to each other mature human,which s/he needs in order to optimally increase hir LifetimeHappiness and which are mutually consistent with the samerequirements of those other mature humans with whom s/he

InterActs.

It should be noted that I have not even used the term right withinthe DOII (except where I refer to government violations, sincecurrent legal systems often use that term). This is because I thinkthat there is an additional and more fundamental problem with thewhole notion of rights which makes it an obfuscating, unfruitfuland ultimately invalid idea. The concept of rights essentiallyreverses cause and effect - the Actions of the individual towardothers and the Actions of others toward hir. IfI wish to optimizemy potential for Lifetime Happiness in a social context, it is that

behavior towards others by me which will best ensure that theywill aid me to achieve my own individual purposes, that I need toascertain and to act in accord with, not their behavior towards me,over which I have no direct control at all! It does me little goodto declare "I have rights!", because that act of demanding someconcessions from others does little to convince them that it is intheir best interest to not Violate me. (This is seen quite clearly ifone imagines someone being attacked by a tiger, shouting out "Ihave a right to life!" in an attempt to stop the tiger's attack! Insteadwhat the person has is a need to figure out how to prevent tigersfrom attacking hir, how to get them to aid hir life purposes, or to

physically defend hirself from such attack if prevention hasfailed.) Since humans can understand communication and logicalargument, the first step in prevention of Harm from them is to setan example by unilaterally declaring that it is one's most sinceredesire that others not be Harmed and one's sincerest Intent to notbe the Effective Cause of any Harm to them, and furthermore, thatif I should ever be the Effective Cause of Harm to any of themthen I will be fully Responsible for complete Restitution to thosewho I have Harmed, to the best of my ability as determined by


16/28

them. It would be even better if one could state: "I will neverHarm you", but this would quickly be seen as a blatant lie,because not only is there always the possibility that such Harmwill occur accidentally, but there are even situations (generallytermed "lifeboat" situations) where that statement would bedirectly and clearly contrary to the sustaining of one's life, without

which no promotion of one's Happiness is even possible. In suchlifeboat situations, I probably will Violate another person if I amconvinced that is necessary to save my own life and suchViolation is even a correct Action for me so long as I am alsoprepared to accept the potential Restitutional result. Thus, onedoes all that one can honestly do, by declaring one's earnest desireand Intention not to Harm, and to Restitute to the best of one'sability as determined by the Harmed person, if one ever shouldHarm someone. Therefore, I have not phrased the DOII in termsof "rights", nor is this idea found in theNatural Social Contract.

Although it should be clear from the preceding itemized "truths",particularly that described in V, the definition of "Harm"essentially means physical Harm (Harm which is unavoidable bythe recipient) and the definition of "Effective Cause" precludes theemotional Harm of which a person is hirself the Effective Cause.In theNatural Social Contract, these two notions are combined tobecome the definition of Responsible Harm, the only kind ofHarm to another for which one is Responsible for Restitution.

Although it will be hard to convince most pro-liberty advocates,grounded in Natural Rights Theory as they are, instead of rights,

what humans really have are Social Meta-Needs! But these are notany kind of claim on anyone else, so long as they are kept to thosewhich are fully compossible (can be consistently, mutuallysustained). The Social Meta-Needs of people are exactly and onlythose which enable them to best Perform to provide Benefits forthemselves. Because they are compossible, each Freeman Actingin accord with these Social needs, within a Social Environmentwhere they are concurrently satisfied for everyone, cannot actcontrary to the best interests of any other person in the FreemanSociety, and thus, Trades of Value within such a Society willalways be to Intended mutual Benefit (even though, for variouspossible reasons, one or both parties may later Decide that theTrade was not actually Beneficial). Moreover, this system willalso ensure that each Freeman generates the best possible Benefitsfor others, of which s/he is capable, without decreasing hir ownBenefits. Notice also that as opposed to rights, which being aclaim on other humans have no meaning outside of humanRelationships, a human always has Meta-Needs even whencompletely isolated from other humans. Thus, Meta-Needs arefirst needs - those conditions of existence which are general,
http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/http://nsc.html/


17/28

primary and prior to all other specific material needs and creaturecomforts because they are necessary before any of these specificneeds can be obtained in any optimal manner.

VIII. that whenever any human or

group of humans, whether callingthemselves a government or not,becomes destructive of my Self-Sovereignty, then my individualpurposes allow, nay even requireme to resist and to terminate thisdestruction by whatever means IDecide, and, together with otherhumans of like mind, to mutuallybind ourselves to a ContractualRelationship which shall seem to

each of us most likely to Effect ourindividual safety and our individualpotential to optimally increase ourLifetime Happiness.

24) This statement makes it very clear that there is no validity

whatsoever to the claim of any person or group of persons thatthey have the right (or even a valid Social Meta-Need) to Violateany person. It matters not whether the authority for that supposedright is a diety, democracy (even including the agreement of everyother person in the world), the dictatorship of the proletariat, theorders of a petty tyrant, the customs of the Mafia, or merely thethreat of a mugger. All such claims require Intended Compulsionin order to be Effective and Harm as their result; all areinconsistent with the Happiness of the Violated person, asperceived by hir, and thus, all are equally groundless. Wheneverany person or group Violates another person, that person's desire

to optimally increase hir own Lifetime Happiness makes it also hirRational Action to Defend hirself to the best of hir ability, to theextent that such Defense does not Effect even more Harm. In fact,it is no less hir Rational Action to Defend hirself from Violationby other people as it is to Defend hirself from wild animals,bacteria, lightning bolts, or anything else which might reduce hirLifetime Happiness or hir potential to gain more Happiness. Itmatters not what is the character or source of legitimacy of theothers who are making the Violation.

Given that the overall effect of such actions will not decrease a

person's Lifetime Happiness, one of hir individual purposes shouldlogically be "to resist and to terminate" such Violations. I highlyappreciate that this conclusion (ie. whether the overall result isactually Harmful or Beneficial) will vary greatly between differentindividuals and their different circumstances. However, Inevertheless implore each reader to think hard and deeply of thelong-term consequences of continuing to do little or nothing togain more Liberty (which, as I stated just above, is really nodifferent than Estimating the long-term consequences of any otherAction in Reality for its Effectiveness to enhance one's potentialfor Happiness). As each day of InAction goes by, it becomes

harder and harder to Act, partly because there are more and moreConstraints and partly because one gets more entrenched in andattached to the status quo. For example, this is why big businessshould no longer be expected to help the cause of true Liberty -their entire structure, form and methods of successful operationare entrenched in the forms and regulations required of them bygovernments and their fundamental design to work withgovernments.8 Finally, as I have stated before, one or a fewDeclarers cannot make this effort Effective in increasing Liberty


18/28

and decreasing government Violations, but even a few who begincan, by leading the way and persuading others, start theexponential growth which will ultimately Liberate those who jointhis Declaration.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that socialforms and arrangements longestablished should not be abolished forlight and transient causes; andaccordingly many people may considerit better to suffer an abusive governmentwhile reduction of their ability toachieve their individual purposes issufferable, than to right themselves byabolishing a government to which theyare accustomed and potentially also

terminating the social order concurrentwith that government, howeverimperfect and incomplete that socialorder may be. But when a long train oflaws, regulations and abuses pursuinginvariably the same object evinces adesign to reduce me under absolute statecontrol, my individual purposes make itmy personal responsibility and duty tomyself to refuse to obey such laws andregulations as are not in accord with any

of my individual purposes, and toContract with others of like mind for ourjoint security and InterAction. Havingsuffered (often impatiently) suchgovernment abuses of my Self-Sovereignty all my life, I now realizethat the optimal increase of my LifetimeHappiness necessitates that I must rejectall government rule to the best of myability.

25) It should be clear to any thinking person that the decadeslong trend of increasing regulatory invasion of every aspectof human life by governments everywhere is neither a "light"nor a "transient" cause. The above paragraph is an attempt toexplain, in the style of TDOI, the reasons that the Declarerhas for making this Declaration of Self-Sovereignty andrefusal to accept government rule any longer. Still, manypeople who fully agree that their Liberty is disgracefullylower than it could be and ought to be, and that somethingreally does need to be done, are nevertheless in a quandaryabout what to do because of their concern that things might

be made worse by any substantial change. This is certainly amajor reason why any change must not be wrought byviolent revolution, since there is little that the initiators cando to control the outcome of such a process once it isunleashed. Instead, the method that I am proposing is agradual transition with no necessary violence. In fact, theonly violence that can occur will be from the governingpowers themselves attempting to prevent the method'simplementation and its success. The envisaged result will bea growing number of Freemen who are InterActingPermittedly (Trading Values) with each other and simply

ignoring the government to the greatest extent that is feasiblefor each, but which extent will be increasing as their numbersgrow. In the end, the government will simply disappearbecause no one will be using it, no one will be obeying it,and no one will be supporting it.

The history of all governments and theiragencies is a history of repeatedlegislation and actions against peoplewhich Violate their Self-Sovereignty, inparticular which Violate their life(Person), Liberty and Property, and eventheir voluntary InterRelationships byreplacing them with other, far less

26) As with the original Declaration, the reasons for makingit are made much clearer, cogent, forceful and compelling bylisting the litany of Violations from which the Declarerwishes to be free. However, there are so many Violations bycurrent governments that no exhaustive listing is feasible inthis small document. I have therefore attempted to list themin some logical groupings, giving examples within eachgroup for illustrative purposes. Even so, government


19/28

optimal arrangements. To prove this, letfacts be submitted to a candid world.

distortions have become so convoluted that many people willthink that some of the items that I list are pro-Liberty when,as I will explain below, in the context of a Freeman Societythey are actually anti-Liberty. An example of this is MirandaRights (see item 4.l. below). Finally note that I have made noattempt to say anything about why government may be doing

these things. For many excellent analyses of the reasons whygovernments operate as they do, the reader should goelsewhere. The purpose of my annotations here is merely tohelp the reader understand that these actions of governmentsare Violations of human Liberty, and that such actions musttherefore be strenuously opposed, never sanctioned andeventually terminated.

1. Government actions Constrain eachperson or UnPermittedly Modify the

Choice Estimations of each person frommaking use of whatever lifeforms,substances, natural or manufacturedobjects that he Estimates will mostincrease his Lifetime Happiness byacquiring and to using them and whichdo not by themselves Harm any otherperson. Governments do this not only byforbidding or highly regulating theimportation, production, sale,distribution, Possession and Control of

such items,

27) It is important here to emphasize that the acquisition ofanything about which one knows that its mere presence will

Violate others will always be something which must benegotiated ahead of time with those others, since not to do sowould Breach one's Declaration of Intent and desire not toHarm. Because Harm is always in the eye and mind of thereceiver, this implies that no one has the absolute right (oreven a fundamental Social Meta-Need) to export anythingfrom hir own Property to that of another person. Examplescausing such possible export would be sources of unshieldedradiation, loud noise or noxious gas. In addition, the presenceof something that might be perceived as a Defendable Threat,such as an unsafely stored or hair-trigger bomb, may also be

subject to preemptive removal by anyone who perceives it tobe such to hir Person or Property, which preemptive Actionmay be Determined to be either not a Violation at all or anExcusable Breach. The critical point here for both parties isto be responsible for their Actions, which in this case willentail each individual justifying any Action as necessary toprevent Harm to hirself or, if such justification is not upheldby a Trial, the payment of Restitution for the Harm done tothe other by hir Actions. Generally, only when Harm toanother person occurs or is Defend ably Threatened, has aViolation then occurred, and only then, respectively, need

Restitution be made or is one Entitled to take a DefensiveAction. The perception of a threat and how to handle it is oneof the most difficult questions which is dealt with by theNatural Social Contract

but also by their monopoly granting ofpatents, forbidding certain kinds of non-Violational research and obstructing the

28) The point being made here is not that there should not besome form of legitimate intellectual property rights(fundamental Social Meta-Needs), but only that these should


20/28

free flow of Information. be based on the Characteristics of humans and Information,and the Contracts between humans Exchanging Information,rather than being a somewhat arbitrary and highly unrealisticmonopoly mandate from governments.

2. With respect to various services,government actions Constrain eachperson or UnPermittedly Modifythe Choice Estimations of eachperson from providing or usingwhichever of these he Estimateswill most increase his LifetimeHappiness and which do not bythemselves Harm any other personsuch as:

1. prostitution,2. pornography,3. abortion,4. cloning,5. sale of human organs, and6. any services which require

certification and licensing.

29) One should be Entitled to enter into any Valid Contractualservice and servitude.

3. With respect to Property,government agencies eitherconfiscate, or strongly control its

usage by each adult human bymeans of all forms of:

1. taxation,2. price controls,3. import and export controls

and duties,4. license fees,5. zoning,6. expropriation,7. impounding of property

both at the border and whenunder suspicion,

8. control of the moneysupply,

9. regulation of interest rates,and

10.lack of full restitution of alllost value resulting fromunproven charges both

30) These are mostly pretty obvious. The major premise here isthat there is not and does not need to be any such concept as thepublic good which overrides the fundamental need of each

individual not to be Violated in hir Person or Property. How andwhy no such contradiction to this fundamental need is required inorder to enable the Rational Actions of Freemen to naturally orderSociety in an optimal manner for everyone can be seen within thedetails of theNatural Social Contract. The last item above is amajor principle based upon what the nature of a human requiresfrom hir Social InterActions with others in order to optimallyincrease hir Lifetime Happiness (ie. what are hir Social Meta-Needs): "That the end result of any Violation should be arestoration of the Lifetime Happiness to date, of the Violated partyto what it would have been at that time, had the Violation not

occurred". This principle might be termed, "The FundamentalPrinciple of Justice in Human Relationships", however for reasonsthat are more fully explained in the Natural Social Contract, I willavoid using the term justice because I think that it is not definablein a manner to which any large segment of humans will agree andis therefore, an unfruitful and possibly even a destructive concept.With respect to the item above, the person who has been Chargedand has been exonerated is the one who has been Violated (bybeing Required to defend hirself) and must have hir Lifetime


21/28

criminal and civil. Happiness fully restored. A method by which this principle can beimplemented in a Society undistorted by governments is proposedin the Natural Social Contract.

4. With respect to Liberty,

government laws UnPermittedlyModified the non-Harmful Actionsof human individuals bythreatening Constraints throughsuch laws as:

1. compulsory jury duty,2. conscription,3. subpoena power,4. contempt of court penalties,5. detention or arrest without

charge or trial, and withoutfull Restitution to thedetainee upon releasewithout charge or trial, orafter a verdict of not guilty,

6. denying Victims fullRestitution by the Violatorfor all their Harm due tolosses of time, Liberty andProperty caused by hisViolation,

7. denying victims fullrestitution by the violatorfor their losses of time,liberty and property causedby his violation,

8. heavily restricting theimmigration or visits ofpersons living outside itsjurisdiction,

9. impeding the movement ofall people across its

borders,10.forbidding manyInterPersonal activities fullyPermitted by theparticipants,

11.prohibition of manysolitary, non-aggressiveactions in public, and

12.allowing criminals to

31) Once again, all these items are clear Violations of the Liberty

of a person and/or of hir Social Meta-Need for full Restitution ofany reduction of hir Lifetime Happiness incurred by a Violation,and, as is shown in theNatural Social Contract, are alsocompletely unnecessary for the operation of a fully adequate,mutually Beneficial, non-Constraining Social order among Self-Sovereign Individuals. If the Requirement for full Restitution wasa Stipulation to which all persons had Contractually agreed, then itwould be patently clear that the manner by which the truth isdetermined has no bearing whatsoever on the Determination of thevalidity of the Event of Violation under investigation and nor onthe amount of Restitution owed to the Victim. Instead, it bears

only on a completely separate possible Violation - that of thesuspected Violator by the investigators. If the suspected Violatorbecomes an Alleged Violator and is exonerated, then anyViolations s/he has suffered during the investigation must be fullyRestituted. If such full liability for Restitution were the situationnow, the police would be much more cautious about the way theytreated a suspect.


22/28

escape prosecution through: denying the validity

of evidence"wrongfully"obtained,

violation of their

"rights" during theinvestigation, arrestor trial, and

plea bargaining(including thereduction/dismissalof charges againstthose who provideinformation leadingto the conviction ofother criminals).

5. With respect to the Availabilityof Actions, government createdmonopolies so distort the freemarket that the creation of newChoices of uniquely differentgoods and services, eachcompeting for the purchaser'smoney according to his individualpurposes, is effectively prevented.Examples of this are:

1. enforcement agencies of allkinds,

2. civil and criminal courts,3. the promulgation of law,4. coast guard, army, navy and

air forces,5. the creation of money,6. the granting of charters,7. mandated standards of

weights and measures,

8. postal mail,9. public utilities,10.public health care,11.public education,12.public roads and other

transportation systems,13.the allocation and use of the

electromagnetic spectrum,14.exploration and

32) As with some of the previous grievances and the one to follow,these are probably most important because of what they haveprevented from coming into being. Far too few people, even thosewho appreciate the evil of the state, realize that its most damagingeffect is probably not its direct Violations of individuals, but itsenormous distortion of social production and efficacy therebypreventing the growth of knowledge, the production of desiredproducts and services and the development of unknown Benefits(unknown because they are prevented from coming into Existence- being Realized - and therefore they remain totally hidden from

view). This is an extreme case of the problem of the seen and theunseen.9 All that one can be sure about is the seen (the directViolations of the Person, Liberty and Property of people). Aboutthe unseen Events and Effects that might have occurred, no onecan say anything with certainty. However, I am convinced that thegovernment distortion of the totality of possible exchanges ofgoods and services is so large that many research objectives thathave been in place for decades would have been achieved by nowif that distortion had not been occurring. Almost certainly, peoplewould be living much longer healthy lives and some would beliving in space.

33) As stated before, with respect to patents, copyrights andtrademarks, I am not saying that these should not be some form ofProperty, but only that the methods by which this occurs shouldnot be monopolized and mandated by any government.


23/28

development of space,15.patent granting, and16.copyright and trademark

granting.

6. Government wastage of scarce

resources by maintaining manypeople in tasks which producenothing that a reasonable personwould Choose to purchase,prevents the application of thoseman hours and monetary resourcesto create and produce products andservices that people do want. Suchdistortion of scientific,technological and industrialproductivity by governments has

been growing exponentially inrecent years as per capita incomeincreases enable it to do so.

34) It is quite reasonably very difficult to make an estimate of both

the type and number of goods and services which would havebeen created and produced in the last century if government hadbeen eliminated and had not been wasting so many scarceresources on non-production of real Value. More unfortunately, itappears that no one has even tried to make such an estimationattempt, or if they have done so have never published it. However,a little thought and imagination makes it clear that the worldwould be an enormously different place with almost certainly farlonger human lifespans, most medical diseases likely eradicated,and quite possibly some humans living in space. Some idea of themerely economic effects of such current wastage can be gained

from reading Sense and Sensibility and its references, particularlyto the 1998 Joint Economic Committee Study on EconomicGrowth and Government Size.

7. Government actions outside of its territoryhave not only wasted the resources of itscitizens but have caused its citizens to be thetargets of aggressive retaliation by those whohave been Harmed by these extraterritorial

actions. Thus, rather than enhancing thesecurity of its citizens, government has,through its actions, directly decreased thissecurity and the Freedom of its citizens totravel outside the country without beingViolated.

35) This grievance is not true of many governments, butit is certainly true for imperial powers such as theUnited States.

8. Governments have made a mockery of theprinciple that all adult humans are to betreated equally under the law by granting tomany of its agents and employees privileges

(in effect, additional entitlements), includingimmunity from prosecution or from requiredRestitution to their Victims. A blatantexample of this is allowing police agents tobreak the law during "sting operations" and tonot be prosecuted for precisely the sameactions for which other citizens are beingprosecuted.

36) This is true of governments everywhere, but it isespecially inconsistent and egregious in the UnitedStates and many other places (including the formerSoviet Union countries) which began by rebellion

against the existence of special classes with entitlementand privilege.10


24/28

9. Governments have forbidden or heavilyrestricted travel, trade and information flowwith certain areas of the world.

In every stage of these oppressions manypeople have petitioned for redress in the most

sincere and honest manner, but their repeatedpetitions have been answered only byrepeated injuries of worsening nature. AGovernment, whose only reasonable purposeshould be as a mutual benefit organization,the character of which is thus marked insteadby every act which may define a tyranny, isunfit to be voluntarily supported by adults.

37) After repeated failed attempts to reform them andbecause of the fundamental flaws in the philosophicalfoundations of all governments, it is time to abandonsuch reform efforts and to drastically alter the structureof society, ultimately eliminating governmentseverywhere by not sanctioning and supporting them.

I, therefore, an adult human with nothing butthe best of intentions toward all those whorefrain from initiating or threatening violenceagainst or defrauding me, my property andmy loved ones, do, by my life and reality andmy love of both, solemnly publish anddeclare:

38) In order to make the risk to the Declarer from attackby the government as low as possible, it is extremelyimportant that s/he make it abundantly clear that hirmotive, desires and Intentions for all people everywhereare nothing but the highest - that s/he is not making thisDeclaration for purely narrow material selfish motives.In fact, as can be seen in theNatural Social Contract,the Declarer and all those who Execute it Intend to beeven more responsible in many respects for theRestitution of those who they Violate than they arerequired to be under any current legal system.

A. that my essential human Characteristicsmake me a Self-Sovereign Individual with theuse and Control of my own body and mindand the need to use and Control the productof my body and mind according to myindividual purposes;

39) As the Declarer, it is my human nature in Realitywhich causes me to be a Self-Sovereign Individual, notany so-called set of rights. I have no claim nor right toSelf-Ownership. I simply have it, by nature, whateveranyone else thinks or does! All that I am asking is thatothers understand and accept this fact of Reality. I amalso asking that others understand and accept that I willbest produce for our mutual Benefit if they alsoacknowledge my Ownership, use, and Control of theproducts of my body and my mind.

B. that as a Self-Sovereign Individual, I nolonger sanction, nor have any duty to obeythe laws, regulations or agents of anygovernments, and that all authority ofgovernment agencies over me, is and ought tobe totally dissolved;

40) These two Declarations are very close in form tothose of the US Declaration of Independence, the majordifference being that the state has been replaced by theindividual adult human. Again note that I, the Declarer,am not saying that I intend to break any laws, only that Ihave the Social Meta-Need to do so according to theconsistent, mutual best interests of myself and others in


25/28

C. that in order to promote my LifetimeHappiness, it is my desire, my Intention andmy responsibility to not Violate the Person orProperty of any human, to Defend my Person,my Property and the Persons and Property ofother humans whom I Value, to Contract with

other Self-Sovereign Individuals for servicesand for Trade according to mutually agreedTerms, to be fully responsible to Restitute anyother human for any actual Harm done tothem by my physical Actions, and to Performall other Acts which I alone Decide are mostlikely to optimally increase my LifetimeHappiness according to the laws of Reality;and

society.

D. that in order to promote the conditions

under which my Actions and the Actions ofothers will optimally contribute to theLifetime Happiness of each of us, Iacknowledge the Self-Ownership of everyother human and his entitlement to act in thesame manner as I Stipulate that I will dowithin this document;

E. that in order to implement theseDeclarations as a clear consistent mutualmanifest understanding of the compossible

set of Responsibilities and Entitlementswhich optimize the potential of each Self-Sovereign Individual to achieve hisindividual purposes, I have Executed andPublished a Social Contract which binds meto all others who do likewise.

41) This last Declaration clause fills a major gap which

was omitted from TDOI and which was later partiallyfilled by the Articles of Confederation. Any Declarationof independence will be only a halfway and ineffectivemeasure unless it is linked with a set of Contractualobligations (Responsibilities)of conduct towards otherDeclarers. Otherwise, it leaves unsaid, and possiblymisconstrued, what will be the Social Relationshipsbetween such independent entities.

F. that in order to make my declared Self-Sovereign Status evident to other humans andto promote the ideas within this Declaration

and my Social Contract, I will henceforthplace the word Freeman after my name,unless I clearly Estimate that doing so mightbe significantly detrimental to my LifetimeHappiness.

42) I have always disliked the practice of listing degreesor titles next to a person's name, viewing it as anattempt to argue from authority, and have never done so

myself even though I am entitled to do so by the currentstandards of society (ie. I could honestly sign Prof. PaulWakfer, B.A.Sc. (Hon.), M.A. - even if that wouldappear to be a bit pretentious). However, the use of thetitle "Freeman" implies no authority, but only aDeclaration of Intent and purpose to treat other humanspeacefully and responsibly according to the publishedterms of this Declaration and a Social Contract.Moreover, at least at its beginning, this movement needs


26/28

something special to clearly set its members apart fromother humans. While it is true that signing as "TomPaine, Freeman" does not guarantee that Tom Paineactually has made such a Declaration and signed such aSocial Contract (and before you would do business withhim you would need to verify that his Social Contract

was one Acceptable to you), this is something whichcould be easily verified via the UniversalCommunications Network, and fraudulent behaviorsoon discovered and Published.

And for the support of this Declaration, Ibeseech others of like mind to sign thisDeclaration, to also Execute the same SocialContract, and with me, as Self-SovereignIndividuals, together to this joint cause,

pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacredhonor.

43) In the style of the original Declaration, animpassioned plea is made for others to join with theDeclarer to jointly and ultimately ensure the Liberationof all of them from continuing government tyranny.

If you like what you are reading, please return value for value received.

Declared and Executed on this ____ day of _________ (month) in the year ____ AD,

by ____________________________ (print name),a Self-Sovereign Individual accessible via email address:__________________

(Signature image)_______________________________________

Attestor:I, ____________________________ (print name),a Self-Sovereign Individual accessible via email address:__________________,

have seen a picture identification (ID) of the Declarer and I Attest to the best of my ability that he/sheand his/her signature above match that ID.

(Signature image)_______________________________________

Published on the Internet (a Universal Communications Network) on: ___________ (date)


27/28

44) As with any important binding document, this one needs to have identification of the Executorverified by an Attestor. In addition, the Executed and Attested document will be placed on the Internetfor all to see and verify its Existence. Such a public place of verification of the Freeman Status of aperson is a very important part of the operation of the structure of a Freeman Society which is herebeginning and will continue with the Execution of a Social Contract and its placement also on theInternet.

1. The entire "The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude" by tienne de laBotie is available online at The Memory Hole.

2. For a contrasting approach, see Den Uyl and Rasmussen: "Liberty and Nature: An AristotelianDefense of Liberal Order", 1991, where happiness, and living rationally and intelligently arecompletely distinguished, with the latter incorrectly being taken as the true purpose of human life. Foran excellent review by John Hasnas see: Are there Derivative Natural Rights? (.pdf)

3. The terms local maximum and global maximum are taken from mathematics and physics, where theyapply to the idea of a surface above a multi-dimensional plane in the space of variables related to theproblem under consideration (think of a topographical map where altitude is the variable beingmaximized). These notions apply very well to the concept of individual Lifetime Happiness which canbe affected by an enormous number of variables (State Values caused by Events) in the life of anindividual. A local maximum is defined as the highest point on the surface in the nearby vicinity of allthe variables (ie. if none of them change very much - think of a small nearby peak). Whereas a globalmaximum is defined as the highest of all local maximums considering all possible changes in thevariables (which may not all be able to change independently, of course - but think of Mount Everest).One can also have a global maximum within a restriction of the set of variables which is not necessarilynearby, but is still not the highest possible (think of Mount McKinley within North America or MontBlanc within Europe). With respect to human Happiness, I maintain that a global maximum is onlyattainable if there occur major alterations of the current social structure. With respect to LifetimeHappiness, which may be truly unbounded if time is so unbounded, no notion of a maximum ispossible except to maximize the potential for increasing it.

4. I first heard this excellent analogy from Steven B Harris, MD.

5. Here is a good overview of this historical idea of social contract.

6. Chapter 29 of David Friedman's Machinery of Freedom discusses how protection from criminalscould be attained and disputes settled without the presence of a government.

7. I have not used the concepts of negative and positive rights (freedoms from interfering actions, andrights to goods and services, respectively) because, although these have some analytical value, I thinkthat overall they confuse the issues. This is because, while the basic Social Meta-Need that humans

require - to be left alone - is clearly negative, the Entitlement of every human to Self-Ownership isclearly positive even though it does not require anyone else to give up anything that s/he Owns - as domost so-called "positive rights".

8. Here are several examples of big business and its leaders use and promotion of governmentinterventions rather than advocation of their reduction and elimination.Banks on the DoleCharities on the DoleA Tale of Regulation - Fractional Airlines


28/28

US Hypocrisy on TradeRegulation and the Stock Market

9. The idea was originally described in Frederic Bastiat's 1850 essay: "THAT WHICH IS SEEN, ANDTHAT WHICH IS NOT SEEN". It was later much expanded in Henry Hazlitt's little book "Economicsin One Lesson". However, neither of these detail the full extent of my conception of the idea whichmight be better phrased as "the problem of seeing only available choices, while not noticing the

missing choices which were prevented from becoming available".10. For another example see Gene Callahan's discussion of a police raid in which an innocent personwas killed in Morality, the State's Way.

Although the owners of this website (Paul and Kitty Antonik Wakfer) assert that, except whereindicated, they are the creators and originators of its content, and also assert that they should receivevalue commensurate with that which anyone reading it receives from the information on it (seehttp://morelife.org/supporting.html for elucidation of the notion of value-for-value), the site content isnot 'copyright' as that term is legally defined because its creators do not agree with governmentcopyright laws.

Readers are welcome to copy and distribute any text within the site as long as they do not modify thetext and they provide a link to this website as its source, so that those who read it will know whereValue for Value gained, can be returned. If those who copy text from or link to this website gain value

from that action, then they are similarly expected to return some of that value to its creators.

MoreLife is Always "Under Construction"

Initially posted 6/21/03

Page last updated 11/21/06

Any questions, comments or suggestions regarding the content of

this websiteshould be addressed at MoreLife Yahoo.

For comments on webpage format, contact Kitty Antonik

Wakfer
http://morelife.org/personal/http://morelife.org/supporting.htmlhttp://morelife.org/supporting.htmlhttp://morelife.org/supporting.htmlhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/morelife/mailto:[email protected]?subject=Self-SIP%20Annotated%20DOII%20-%20Commentsmailto:[email protected]?subject=Self-SIP%20Annotated%20DOII%20-%20Commentshttp://www.guistuff.com/http://solutions/index.htmlhttp://fundamentals/index.htmlhttp://morelife.org/personal/http://morelife.org/supporting.htmlhttp://morelife.org/supporting.htmlhttp://morelife.org/supporting.htmlhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/morelife/mailto:[email protected]?subject=Self-SIP%20Annotated%20DOII%20-%20Commentsmailto:[email protected]?subject=Self-SIP%20Annotated%20DOII%20-%20Comments

declaration of individual independance

Documents