<!DOCTYPE html><html><head><title></title><style type="text/css">p.MsoNormal,p.MsoNoSpacing{margin:0}</style></head><body><div style="font-family:Arial;">True, citing exceptions to specific laws does not indict the <b><i>system</i></b>: <i>"We mean the entire legislative, executive, and judicial enterprise."</i><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">However, the way the phrase,<i> "no one is above the law,"</i> is popularly used, especially now and in the political context, it is not a systemic assertion, but a personal one: hold X accountable because no one is above the specific law that X ostensibly violated. <u>I will accept chastisement for being equally sloppy in usage</u>.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">Also, I would argue that the system has been corrupted to such a point that a whole class of people in particular roles are above the law systemically:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">- Congress abdicated its responsibility to enact laws, ceding it to bureaucrats.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">- Those same bureaucrats usurp the role of the judiciary by indicting and trying those who violate their laws (and they are laws, including criminal felony laws), crafting their own rules of evidence and procedure, and determining guilt or innocence with no recourse to the 'Systems' judiciary.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">- If you include the explosion in use of 'executive decree'; you might argue that a substantial part of the executive branch of government in the U.S. is 'above the law'.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">davew<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"> <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;"><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">On Mon, Oct 14, 2024, at 12:15 PM, glen wrote:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> I think that was Jochen that said it, not Russ. But your refutation is <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> either a fallacy of ambiguity or composition. By "the rule of law", we <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> don't mean the rule of any particular law ... like a city statute <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> against walking your alligator down the street or whatever. We mean the <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> entire legislative, executive, and judicial enterprise. Of course, <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> particular slices of the population are exempt from some particular <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> law. E.g. London cabbies used to be allowed to urinate wherever without <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> regard to the typical laws governing such. That doesn't imply that <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> London cabbies are "above the law". I suppose you could say they're <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> above that particular set of laws. But "exempt" isn't synonymous with <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> "above", anyway.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> I don't think the SCOTUS ruling on immunity claims the President is <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> above the law, contrary to the implications of the left's rhetoric, <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> only that they're exempt from some/most/all laws when executing the <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> role of their office. It's bad. But it's not bad in the way the <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> rhetoric implies.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> On 10/14/24 09:27, Prof David West wrote:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> Sorry Russ, but /"Nobody should be above the law if the rule of law has any meaning in a democratic society,"/ is an absurd idea.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> Assuming the US is a democratic society (in some sense), I would defy you to find any existing law that does not have exceptions that place someone, in some role or in some cirsumstance, "above" that law.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> davew<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2024, at 8:58 AM, John Kennison wrote:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *From:* Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> on behalf of Marcus Daniels <<a href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2024 3:02 PM<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:Russ.Abbott@gmail.com">Russ.Abbott@gmail.com</a> <<a href="mailto:Russ.Abbott@gmail.com">Russ.Abbott@gmail.com</a>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *Subject:* [EXT] Re: [FRIAM] tolerance of intolerance<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> I don’t think that’s fair. It depends on the opponent and what they represent both in terms of ideology and the sociological phenomenon they are a part of.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *From:*Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> *On Behalf Of *Jochen Fromm<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2024 11:52 AM<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *To:* <a href="mailto:Russ.Abbott@gmail.com">Russ.Abbott@gmail.com</a>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] tolerance of intolerance<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> A president who murders his opponents would not be better than an evil dictator in an authoritarian state. Putin's opponents like Navalny, Litvinenko and Nemtsov were all brutally poisoned and/or murdered.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> But you are right, this possibility exists after the recent decision of the supreme court. It seems to be a result of democratic backsliding. Nobody should be above the law if the rule of law has any meaning in a democratic society.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> -J.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> -------- Original message --------<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> From: Russ Abbott <<a href="mailto:russ.abbott@gmail.com">russ.abbott@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:russ.abbott@gmail.com">russ.abbott@gmail.com</a>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> Date: 7/16/24 7:48 PM (GMT+01:00)<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] tolerance of intolerance<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> Why has no one pointed out the possibility that if Trump wins, Biden could take advantage of his newly declared immunity and have him assassinated?<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> -- Russ<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024, 6:24 AM glen <<a href="mailto:gepropella@gmail.com">gepropella@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gepropella@gmail.com">gepropella@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> Yeah. It's one thing to wish it or want it. It's another to think more in Marcus' terms and come up with a more complex strategy not involving stupid 20 year olds and no violence at all. I still hold out hope for my own personal conspiracy theory. Biden becomes the nominee. After the convention fades, the Admnistration announces Biden has gone to the hospital for bone spur surgery. Kamala takes over temporarily and campaigns furiously for Biden-Harris. Biden is re-elected. Biden recovers and gets through the Oath (fingers crossed). Then he goes back to the hospital with some minor thing like a dizzy spell. Kamala takes over again. Biden's condition worsens. First Female President. Biden recovers and becomes America's Grandpa.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> Come on Deep State. Make it happen. 8^D<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> On 7/15/24 17:30, Russ Abbott wrote:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> > I wonder what Scott's response would have been to those of us who, in response to the shooting, thought: better luck next time.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> > On 7/15/24 17:28, Marcus Daniels wrote:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> >> It ignores the option of doing things quietly and indirectly.<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> >> On 7/15/24 16:46, glen wrote:<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> >>> [Scott's] Prayer<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> >>> <a href="https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8117">https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8117</a> <<a href="https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8117">https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8117</a>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> >>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> >>> I'm currently surrounded by people who believe intolerance is properly not tolerated. Scott's message, here, seems extraordinary Christian, to me. (Real Christian, not the Christianism displayed in things like megachurches and whatnot cf <a href="https://raymondsmullyan.com/books/who-knows/">https://raymondsmullyan.com/books/who-knows/</a> <<a href="https://raymondsmullyan.com/books/who-knows/">https://raymondsmullyan.com/books/who-knows/</a>>). This faith that "going high" will, in the long run, win out, seems naive to me. The temptation to "hoist the black flag and start slitting throats" isn't merely a thresholded reaction, it's an intuitive grasp of the iterated prisoner's dilemma, tit-for-tat style strategies, and Ashby's LoRV. But I'm open to changing my mind on that. Maybe I'm just too low-brow?<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">>>> >>><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> -- <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> <a href="https://bit.ly/virtualfriam">https://bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> to (un)subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> archives: 5/2017 thru present <br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br></div><div style="font-family:Arial;">> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><br></div></body></html>