MA’AT NEFERET

GOOD CONDUCT

The Universal Code of Contracting, General; Consolidated

by Scribe Antarah

Abstract

Human labor power, including all mental capacity, is the foundational commodity of society and of the state. All humanity’s efforts to manage this natural resource bear upon our world’s economy. From the labor of childbirth to labor in the field, the human is charged to cultivate life from nature. Indeed, the human, with their potentially divine capacity of mind, is the mediator between the raw material of life (via the senses) and the products of their thoughts and labors. Life is course through which the student grows in knowledge and its practical application, which is their curriculum. Life is a course to which one must have a syllabus of their curriculum.

ii. We may observe that the root of all conflict in human society has come down to who will do what labor for whom. We have now achieved a point in history where labor power can be farmed and exploited en masse by and through covert and overt means of obtaining peoples’ consent, like unto the way that subatomic particles are extracted by strong forces from the dark waves of spacetime to coalesce into a steady energetic state.

iii. Therefore, let us conclude that the individual, the state, and the universe, on increasingly expansive scales, represent a grand, unified, universal, and general contracting system. We shall find, through the contraction of waves, particles, and bodies, that a “contract” refers to the terms of battery entered into by any constitution of matter. A contract governs the conduct of any group of bodies, from a master-slave compact to a whole social contract. Let us now examine the analogy between the human being, endowed by God and nature with the power of mental and physical free will (manifest in labor), and the states of energy which manifest in nature.

I. On the General Conduct of Bodies 

Revised from Crawley’s Ma’at Natural Law Statutory Code, Sesh Sepdet, First Trismegistus Edition, November 7, 2017.

SECTION § 1. Definition & Constitution of Conduction. 

1 Conduction, or Conduct, is  the manner in which a body interacts with, or transmits force upon, another body, with the effect of generating or radiating mass […]. It is a constant function of bodies in motion.

2 Force is the effect of cause […]; that is, force is the product of an accelerating object (i.e., a material body). 

3 A body is any constitution of matter. Matter is that which has mass, that is, substance. The particular nature of the constitution of matter is its state. Therefore mass is a factor of matter, which is the principle of materiality. 

4 All matter in a body is in motion, but the sum total of all motion is zero when that body is at rest. In other words, the sum of all know forces in a system (Gij=G1j+G2j+G3j+…Gzj) equals zero (Gij,j=0) [See Oyibo’s grand unified field theorem]. This is further supported bu the dialectic axioms “To each action there is an equal and opposite reaction” and “Total energy in a system is neither lost not gained”.

5 Force is the energy produced by a given body of mass independent of overall motion in the system (times the limit of the system, i.e. speed of light “c”-squared, a constant).  

6 Force which is conducted (or transmitted) between bodies to mutually generate and/or radiate mass=energy is right (i.e., Ma’at, meaning proportionally balanced within the scale of the whole, ky djd “in harmony”), and the conduct is deemed lawful. 

7 To deem conduct to be lawful is to measure the weight of the force being conducted between the acting bodies. If the conduction of energy between the given bodies inures to their mutual benefit, then their conduct may be deemed good and lawful without contest.

8 The state of bodies when engaged in the act of transmitting force (i.e., conduction) is Battery. 

SECTION § 2. Battery.

1 A battery is any vessel consisting of two or more bodies, in which force is converted into or stored as energy (E) and used as a source of power (i.e., to effect, to manifest a  purpose, to do the will). 

2 To engage in battery is to transmit E force between two or more bodies. Each body or collective body-politic in the context of the act of battery, is polar to the other, to the effect that their interests oppose each other at or approaching 180°. The bodies resolve their opposition at or approaching 360°.

3 E force is generated in high pressure zones and transmitted between bodies from higher to lower pressure zone. 

4 A victim, or subject, of battery is one whose E force is disproportionally dissipated and/or generated to the benefit of the opposing party respective to the period of contraction. 

5 Good Conduct is lawful battery. 

6 Hostile Conduct is unlawful battery in which the subject is bound to contract (i.e., to engage  in battery) against the will and/or interest of their party [magnetic  pole]. Unlawful battery implies the disproportional extraction or exploitation of the energy of a body for the disproportional gain of another. 

SECTION § 3. Impedance.
(October 2021)

1 On September 30, 2021, I received a call from one Jason Benford, who, having read some of the N:.S:. Light Workers’ Protocol, confided in me that he has observed the battery effect operating in his life, and that while he is able to monitor the data coming into his C and can control the execution of his will, he has experienced a certain impedance of his vital life force caused by factors such as his family and so on.  

2 Although Mr. Benford’s train of philosophical thought was tough to follow and in need of clarity, I was able to connect with his account of familial conflict and how that has resulted in his present inability to realize his fullest potential (though his impedance has been disrupted by contact with El-Armana). Having read the Protocol, he became able to articulate the root cause of his impedance, being some kind of dialectic conflict between his birthers. But more than that, even to diagnose oneself as suffering from impedance is a substantial accomplishment. For knowing that one is capable of doing more than one is currently able to perform, one may then focus in on those aspects of their material and spiritual environment which are resisting the flow of the individual’s vital life force, or which are impeding the individual’s ability to realize or manifest their will. 

3 Hearing this definition of impedance expressed by one wholly apart from myself, I became reassured that the resistance to my “life, liberty, and happiness” posed by my current position in life can be overcome by a concentration of will power upon the specific area of impedance, or blockage. It only takes a careful assessment of one’s position and environment to calculate the will-power needed to overcome any amount of resistance. 

II. On the Liquidity of Capital 

Revised from Crawley’s Artcoin Theory and Methodology, 10 May 2021.

1 There is a vast “sea” of value, represented by fluctuating wave-particles called “currents” which make up the “current-sea”.

2 When value flows freely in a “current” (through a market), it is “liquid”. But when is it held up in an asset or other liability, then it is not liquid, because it cannot flow freely. 

3 To get liquid currency from the “sea” to the “shore” where people use it to “work the fields” there must be river “banks” that conduct the liquid current “downstream”.

4 Banks facilitate a capillary system whereby the value of the sea flows to the inland, which is the “income”. People irrigate new streams of income all the time. One must first identify a source of water, which is the market from which they will draw liquid. Then they must use tools to irrigate a stream to flow from the market to their place of business. These tools are means of production, with the resulting channel being the work-product which conducts the liquid currency to them. (It is worth noting that most institutional banks sit on naturally occurring rivers and bodies of water and are designed to be gatekeepers, or dams, to liquidity.)

5 An enterprise of any kind must float upon the sea of capital; for if it does not float, then it will become underwater. This is to say that water a ship floats upon is good credit, but water that has gotten into the ship is bad debt that can sink the ship. How shall the enterprise remain afloat? It is by and through good “stateship” and “leadership” and “stewardship” and “ownership” and “membership” as well as a firm league of “friendship”. These are the ships that float upon the world’s current-sea. What, then, shall convey this company of ships down the river stream of income? It is by and through the ships’ “sales”.

III. Control Program for Mindsoft (CP/M)

Revised from Crawley’s Official Code of Light Workers’ Protocol, February 19, 2019. See, III N.S.C. 27.

1 Abstract: Human Mind-Software (Mindsoft) Tecknowledgey, Mental Health Auditing, Information Systems Analytics, and the Methodology of Integrated Systemtheory. “Theory” is used here in the German sense of “Lehre” where is simply means “science”, “tenants”, “dogma,” and/or “teaching”; here Theorie connotes a theorem or a fundamental truth.

2 This methodology applies to all Systemstheories, meaning Allgemeine, or general and Universal, Laws of exchange between complementary units (i.e. Numbers, Cells, Selves) operating on behalf of a harmonic whole.

3 […]

4 Human Software Systems, i.e. The Mind, has and maintains the ability to function at optimal efficiency called “C-squared” consciousness [Cognizance]. This type of consciousness is actually the conscious of a normal modern human being increased by the power it itself…

5 C-squared consciousness is characterized by the state of mind in perfect peace, or the quality of mental operation at minimal resistance.

6 The mind software codifies an optimal focal point within its hardware (“Body”) called the Eye (i.e. “I” or “Self”) and leverages it against the field of universal data. The software is operative while the data is latent until encountered by the software operation.

7 To receive into the mind (i.e. “to access”) general universal information, the Mind projects its Eye onto the source data. To “project the Eye on” to the data means “to see/bear witness”. The data is appropriately called the “Ion”.

8 The exchange or transmission of such data or information in any form constitutes communication, wherein one (Self) is the receiver of that data which is communicated to it from either a material, incorporeal, or ambient source.

9 The human mind software actively programs the hardware (i.e. “body”) to function as a battery; hence the efficiency of mental operation correlates to an individual’s “ionic capacitance”.

10 The Eye processes the Ions into a line-signal, or sinewave, called the “input information”. The Mind software program receives the input data in order to generate output data (“speech”, “word”, “logos”) and/or program systems command code (“love”, “ignore”, “will”, “power”).

11 Knowledge is the summation operation of the mind upon the data transmitted from one point along a spectrum (i.e. the Alpha), to a secondary point (i.e. the Omega). If the system becomes at peace with the data, then the data is saved in the memory bank.

12 Ignorance results from the system’s failure to integrate received data into knowledge. Fear and hate are data corruptions resulting from the lineage between ignorance and belligerence.

13 All such input information processes, whether written as command code or as logos, saved or unsaved, are recorded in the Mind’s Memory bank, which is often called the Records or Files.

14 The active memory bank is located in the consciousness, or C: drive. However, files which are not saved in the C: drive are not able to be routed into output code by the consciousness.

15 Input which is not routed directly to output is still accorded its due weight in the Memory, however, due to the suppression of the data, it may not be easily recalled by the software system, and therefore may become latent coding in the unconscious command functions corrupting the files of the Self unit.

16 The system’s capacity for Information Processing is commonly referred to as “Thought”. The quality of optimal information processing is called “critical thought”.

17 However, such processes may be inhibited by aberration in the mind’s systems operations which renders in the Eye poor judgement and misunderstanding in the Self unit.

18 These aberrations are called “engrams”, and such are “glitches” in the mental operation.

19 Such operations as are run “through the mind” are called “dianetic”, from the Greek “dia nous”.

20 Therefore, … [CP/M] proves to be a most reliable method for analyzing and resolving human thought patterns which cause the Self to operate short of optimal efficiently: C-squared consciousness, or “Christ”-consciousness. “Diagnosis” puts the God in “dia nous”.

IV. On Historical and Dialectical Materialism

Edited from Four Essays on Philosophy, by Mao Tse-Tung, Foreign Language Press, Peking 1968 (PRC), by Antarah Crawley, 10 October, 2019.

Abstract: Contradiction is the fundamental relationship between the elements of any constitution of matter.

SECTION § 1. Historical and Dialectical Materialism 

1 In his Capital, Marx first analyzes the simplest, most ordinary and fundamental, most common and everyday relation of bourgeois (commodity) society, a relation encountered billions of times, viz. the exchange of commodities. In this very simple phenomenon (in this “cell” of bourgeois society) analysis reveal all the contradictions (or the germs of all the contradictions) of modern society. The subsequent exposition [or study] shows us the development (both growth and movement) of these contradictions and of the summation of its individual parts, from its beginning to its end. Such must also be the method of exposition (or study) of dialectics in general” [34]. 

2 When Marx and Engels applied the law of contradiction in things to the study of the socio-historical process, they discovered the contradiction between the productive forces and the relations of production, they discovered the contradiction between the exploiting and the exploited classes and also the resultant contradiction between the economic base and its superstructure (politics, ideology, etc.), and they discovered how these contradictions inevitably lead to different kinds of social revolution in different kinds of class society. 

3 When Marx applied this law to the study of the economic structure of capitalist society, he discovered that the basic contradiction of this society is the contradiction between the social character of production and the private character of ownership. This contradiction manifests itself in the contradiction between the organized character of production in individual enterprises and the anarchic [decentralized, autonomous] character of production in society as a whole. In terms of class relations, it manifests itself in the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat [48].  

SECTION § 2. Dialectic Procedure of Information Processing to Resolve Contradiction 

1 The dialectical world outlook emerged in ancient times … and was supplanted by metaphysics. The famous German philosopher Hegel, who lived in the late 18th and 19th centuries, made most important contributions to dialectics, but his dialectics was idealist. It was not until Marx and Engels, the great protagonists of the proletarian movement, had synthesized the positive achievements in the history of human knowledge and, in particular, critically absorbed the rational elements of Hegelian dialectics and created the great theory of dialectical and historical materialism that an unprecedented revolution occurred in the history of human knowledge. 

2 This dialectical world outlook teaches us primarily how to observe and analyze the movement of opposites in different things and, on the basis of such analysis, to indicate the method for resolving contradictions. This method has three main stages of observation and analysis: (1) perception, (2) cognition, and (3) practice. 

2(1) In the process of practice, one at first sees only the phenomenal side, the separate aspects and external relations of things. This is called the perceptual stage of cognition, namely the stage of sense perceptions and impressions. This is the first stage of cognition. 

2(2) As social practice continues, the things that give rise to one’s sense perceptions and impressions in the course of their practice are repeated many times; then a sudden change (leap) takes place in the brain in the process of cognition, and concepts are formed. This is the second stage of cognition. When the members of the observation group have collected various data and, what is more, have “thought them over”, they are able to arrive at a judgment. 

2(3) The real task of knowing is, through perception, to arrive at critical thought, to arrive step by step at the comprehension of the internal contradictions of objective things, of their laws and of the internal relations between one process and another, that is, to arrive at practical and logical knowledge [4-6]. 

3 The first step in the process of cognition is contact with the objects of the external world; this belongs to the stage of perception. The second step is to synthesize the data of perception by arranging and reconstructing them; this belongs to the stage of conception, judgment, and inference. 

3(1) As to this sequence in the process of cognition, perceptual experience comes first. All knowledge originates in perception of the objective external world through one’s physical sense organs (hence the emphasis on perception, direct experience, and personal participation, and the dependence of rational knowledge upon perceptual knowledge.) Knowledge begins with experience — this is the materialism of the theory of knowledge [12]. 

3(2) Second in the process of cognition is that knowledge needs to be deepened, that the perceptual stage of knowledge needs to be developed to the rational stage — this is the dialectics of the theory of knowledge … it is necessary to make a leap from perceptual to rational knowledge [12-13]. 

3(3) The active function of knowledge manifests itself not only in the active leap from perceptual to rational knowledge, but it must manifest itself in the leap from rational knowledge to revolutionary practice. This is the process of testing and developing theory, the continuation of the whole process of cognition. Rational knowledge depends upon perceptual knowledge and perceptual knowledge remains to be developed into rational knowledge – this is the dialectical-materialist theory of knowledge [13]. 

4 Discover the truth through practice, and again through practice verify and develop truth. Start from perceptual knowledge and actively develop it into rational knowledge; then start from rational knowledge and actively guide revolutionary practice to change both the subjective and the objective world. Practice, knowledge, again practice, again knowledge. This form repeats itself in endless cycles, and with each cycle the content of practice and knowledge rises to a higher level. Such is the whole of the dialectical-materialist theory of knowledge, and such is the dialectical-materialist theory of the unity of knowing and doing. 

SECTION § 3. Information Processing to Resolve General and Particular Contradiction 

1 As regards the sequence in the movement of one’s knowledge, there is always a gradual growth from the knowledge of the individual and particular things to the knowledge of things in general. Only after one knows the particular essence of many different things can they proceed to generalization and know the common essence of things. These are the two processes of cognition: 

1(1) from the particular to the general; and 

1(2) from the general to the particular. 

2 Thus cognition always moves in cycles and (so long as the scientific method is adhered to) each cycle advances human knowledge a step higher and so makes it more and more profound [37]. 

3 When we speak of understanding each aspect of a contradiction, we mean understanding what specific position each aspect occupies, what concrete form it assumes in its interdependence and in its contradiction with its opposite, and what concrete methods are employed in the struggle with its opposite, when the two are both interdependent and in contraction, and also after the interdependence breaks down. 

4 The living soul of Dialectics is the concrete analysis of concrete conditions. In studying a problem, we must shun subjectivity, once-sidedness, and superficiality. To be subjective means not to look at problems objectively, that is, not to use the materialist viewpoint in looking at problems [40]. 

5 Among the particularities of different kinds of contradictions include: 

5(1) the contradiction in each form of motion of matter, 

5(2) the contradiction in each of its processes of development, 

5(3) the two aspects of the contradiction in each process, 

5(4) the contradiction at each stage of the process, and 

5(5) the two aspects of the contradiction at each stage. 

6 In studying the particularity of all these contradictions, we must not be subjective and arbitrary but must analyze it concretely. Without concrete analysis there can be no knowledge of the particularity of any contradiction [47]. 

7 The particular is united with the universal and the universality as well as the particularity of contradiction is inherent in everything. Universality resides in particularity. We should, when studying an object, try to discover both the particular and the universal and their interconnection, to discover both the particularity and universality and also their interconnection within the object itself, and to discover the interconnections of this object with the many objects outside it [49]. 

8 This truth concerning general and individual character, concerning absoluteness and relativity, is the quintessence of the problem of contradiction in things [51]. 

9 When studying the particular contradictions within a matter, special attention must be paid to the following particularities: 

9(1) If in any process there are a number of contradictions, one of them must be the principal contradiction playing the leading and decisive role, while the rest occupy a secondary and subordinate position. 

9(2) In any given contradiction, whether principal or secondary, the two contradictory aspects should not be treated as equal. Of the two contradictory aspects one must be principal and the other secondary. The principal aspect is the one playing the leading role in the contradiction. The nature of a thing is determined mainly by the principal aspect of a contradiction, the aspect which has gained the dominant position. 

9(3) In a given process or at a given stage in the development of a contradiction, A is the principal aspect and B is the non-principal aspect; at another stage or in another process the roles are reversed — a change determined by the extent of the increase or decrease in the force of each aspect in its struggle against the other in the course of the development of a thing [53-55]. 

10 At certain times in the revolutionary struggle, the difficulties outweigh the favorable conditions and so constitute the principal aspect of the contradiction and the favorable conditions constitute the secondary aspect. But through their efforts the revolutionaries can overcome the difficulties step by step and open up a favorable new situation; thus a difficult situation yields place to a favorable one. When we engage in study, the same holds for the contradiction in the passage from ignorance to knowledge. 

11 At the very beginning of our study of Dialectics, our ignorance of or scanty acquaintance with Dialectics stands in contradiction to knowledge of Dialectics. But by assiduous study, ignorance can be transformed into knowledge, scanty knowledge into substantial knowledge, and blindness in the application of Dialectics into mastery of its application. 

12 When a task, no matter which, has to be performed, but there is as yet no guiding line, method, plan or policy, the principal and decisive thing is to decide on a guiding line, method, plan or policy. When the superstructure (politics, culture, etc.) obstructs the development of the economic base, political and cultural changes become principal and decisive. 

13 We recognize that in the general development of history the material determines the mental and social being determines social consciousness; we also recognize the reaction of mental on material things, of social consciousness on social being and of the superstructure on the economic base. This avoids mechanical materialism and firmly upholds dialectical materialism [57-59]. In this lies the significance of the first Hermetic Principal. 

14 Identity, unity, coincidence, interpenetration, interpermeation, interdependence (or mutual dependence for existence), interconnection or mutual co-operation — all these different terms mean the same thing: 

14(1) the existence of each of the two aspects of a contradiction in the process of development of a thing presupposes the existence of the other aspect, and both aspects coexist in a single entity; 

14(2) in given conditions, each of the two contradictory aspects transforms itself into its opposite. This is the meaning of identity [60]. 

15 The Unity (coincidence, identity, equal action) of opposites is conditional, temporary, transitory, relative. The struggle of mutually exclusive opposites is absolute, just as development and motion are absolute [66]. 

V. On the Due Process of Matter(s), Objective and Subjective

From Crawley’s Omnibus Act, Title 6, An Act to standardize method and practice in the discipline […], human intelligence resource management, clinical dialectic information processing services, and other cognitive-behavioral development programs (collectively known as “mind software”), so as to provide a novel solution to the problem of racism, and for other purposes, August 22, 2020. 

SECTION § 1. On the Condition of Persons Believing Themselves To Be Lacking in Society.

1. [P]eople […] are the members of one human family, having divergent genotypes and phenotypes which cause their skin to appear darker or paler in color along a certain spectrum. This spectrum of skin color does not, however, include the objective visual color spectrum of black, white, violet, indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange, and red. Rather, the skin color of people is subject to interpretation. The difference between subjective and objective is as follows: 

1(a) Subject refers to the person or matter about which a statement is made. Subjective refers to the quality of being influenced by personal sentiments and individual perceptions. 

1(b) Object refers to a person or matter toward which an action is directed. Objective refers to the quality of being a “matter of fact”, that is, clear and unambiguous from any perspective. 

2. We may observe that people experience the perception that they are objectively black or white in terms of color, culture, or “race”. This perception may be the result of certain environmental and cognitive-behavioral factors. Because one may appear darker or lighter in skin color, a person may erroneously equate the objective condition of black or white color with said person’s subjective conditions and experiences. 

3. The psychological act of equating the subjective experience of a person with any objective color is an aberration, or disorder, in the mind. Why? Because even if all brown-colored and dark-colored people experience the same conditions, none of those conditions can be considered objectively “black” — not their skin color, not their nationality, not the development of any genre of music, and certainly not their “race” (assuming such a term can be defined). The assertion that the color black best represents the conditions of brown and dark-skinned and African and other colored people is a gross misrepresentation of objective facts (of which race is not one). Such misrepresentation based on mere pretense or appearance, and not the substantive facts, is colorable. 

4. Colorable is a quality that describes something that is misrepresented based on its appearance, without regard for its actual substance. Colored, on the other hand, is a quality that describes something as it actually appears. While colored describes something according to its actual quality (e.g., brown-skinned people having color), colorable describes something that purports to be something which it is, in fact, not (e.g., brown-skinned people being black). Facts must be based on material, that is, quantifiable and qualifiable, evidence. 

5. There are two main ways in which colorability is manifest: 

5(a) The subjectification of one’s own experiences based on the perception that they are black, white or another objective color; this is a psychological disorder. Apparent “victims of racism” commonly suffer from subjectification. 

5(b) Likewise, the objectification of another person on the grounds that they “are” or appear black, white or otherwise colorable is such a disorder. Apparent “racists” commonly suffer from objectification. 

6. A distinction is drawn between people who are colored (that is, being of one human race having many colors, or “humanist”), and people who are colorable (that is, being of one or another race classified on the basis of color, or “racist”). 

7. By measuring the degree of subjectification and objectification on the basis color in the mind of a person we may thereby assess the degree of “racism” in the mind of said person, that is, the degree to which they are “racist”. (Apparent “victims of racism” also presuppose the existence of races, which is the basis of “racism”). 

8. Regarding such a person who experiences racism, this diagnosis is given: they experience Colored Person Syndrome Disorder (CPSD). About CPSD, this prognosis is given: it is a disorder one shall work against by means of psychological analysis, that is, inquiry of the mind. How then is the method affected, that is, how is this analysis administered? It is through true speech, that is, the dianoetic or dianetic virtue (See, PBSD-001-6).

9. What, then, is the method of true speech? It is dialectic. Otherwise said, it is an inquiry by one into the perspective of another, also called interlocution, discourse, and communication. The inquisitor is the dialectician who solicits, records, and processes information; the client is the witness, querent and/or the source of information. Such a client must swear or affirm that that will produce nothing but true information. 

10. PBSD-001-3 provides for the definition of dialectic as “(a) the process of making known what is unknown; (b) a philosophical method describing the discursive-rational-intuitive process by which oneself individualizes itself…[and manifests its will]”. The application of this method constitutes the practice of discourse or parliament, that is, speech. 

11. While traditional psychology asserts dreams as the subject matter of empirical and scientific psychoanalysis, we propose that it is not the dreams per se under investigation, but the dialectic on the dreams. Therefore the discipline of folk psychology (DFP) takes a dialectic on any matter as the materially quantifiable and qualifiable subject matter of psychological investigation. As such, psychological analysis under DFP shall concern the practice of dialectic. 

12. Much is said by Dr. Carl G. Jung, a founder of Analytical Psychology, regarding the Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious. Regarding the “Collective Unconscious”, our Beloved Ancestors had much to say in the way of the Netjeru (See, PBSD-004). These Netjeru constitute the ancestral Collective Unconscious of humanity, the Birthright of the Children of Nature, having unconscious knowledge of the forms and processions of nature, from the Alpha to Omega. Such knowledge may be collected from the individual’s personal and collective unconscious via the dialectic method of analytical psychology. Such constitutes the method for any investigation into and collection of human intelligence (HUMINT). 

13. These Protocols apply: 

SECTION § 2. Protocols of Due Process of Information

1. PROTOCOL mapping x to y [f:x=>y]. SOLVE f(x)=y. 

IF x = n THEN y = a1 DoProcess(audit-notice) IF x = d THEN y = a2 DoProcess(assess-data) IF x = i THEN y = a3 DoProcess(assure-info) IF x = k THEN y = a4 DoProcess(adjudge-knowlg) <record>deliver ; produce: findings of fact [f(F)] ; and conclusions of induction operation [c(L)] <record> (PBGD-001A-070720, DOS 20, p. 24) 

2. PROTOCOL mapping X=>N, where N = NOTICE: perception, literacy, and reading comprehension; in the 1st Degree (“Clinical Practice”). 

(1) Information Processing Step 1: Filing – To raise a matter of interest or concern to the clinical dialectician/information processing server (IPS), client(s) shall submit information, being a contract to which they are party, a matter of policy in which they have an interest, a grievance, an inquiry, or a petition for investigation (respectively, “the matter(s)”, or, “in re [the matter(s)]”) in electronic, oral, or hard copy to the IPS. 

(2) Investigative Procedure. Step 1: Initial Analysis – Directives: Determine whether a matter which has been raised to the IPS requires formal investigation or whether it can be examined and resolved based on the facts already known/presented/substantiated; determine whether the matter would be more properly handled by another competent jurisdiction; establish the role of the IPS (e.g., to find facts, analyze evidence discovered, and present findings to the decision-maker following completion of the investigation; be cognizant of the involved participants, decisions-makers, and appeals decision-makers (decision-makers should not be directly involved in the course of investigation so as to be — and appear to be — objective in taking any subsequent rule making). 

(PBGD-001A-070720, DOS 12, p. 16) 

3. PROTOCOL mapping X=>D, where D = DATA: discover, collect, weigh, and measure evidence; in the 1st Degree (“Clinical Practice”). 

(1) Information Processing Step 2: 

(A) Reading Comprehension – Help client(s) to read and understand the terms of complicated, formal, or arcane language in the matter(s) in order for them to make informed decisions and good judgments in their own right. If the client acquires the knowledge and understanding needed to resolve the matter(s) in their own right, close the case. 

(B) Charging Documents – If further work/action is required, paper charges and pass the case to 2nd Degree.

(2) Investigative Procedure Step 2: Planning & Leading. 

(A) Directives: determine the scope, complexity, and timeline of the investigation; develop a strategy for the investigative process; bear in mind that all subjects of investigation shall be considered innocent until proven otherwise, and that all subjects of investigation have the right to defend themselves again allegations or charges which may be brought against them; bear in mind that the investigate procedure may reveal trends or shortcomings in practice which can be addressed to prevent future occurrences of a similar nature, and that such investigations develop with time as new facts and/or issues arise. 

(B) An investigative plan shall take account of: the precipitating event (or charge) and all persons involved, including name, contact information, and relation to charges (including but not limited to the investigation subject); the chronology of dates, times, places, meetings, calls, conversation, and other material documentation; general laws, policies, procedures, and/or code of ethics which may bear upon the charges and their investigation, including where such information may be located (as well as other broad issues covered by the investigation); potential sources of evidence and material information (including but not limited to material witnesses); the decision-makers in the matter (i.e., those to whom IPS shall report findings); the order of persons to be interviewed and the subjects to be covered with each; communication planning with those having a need to know in re the matter under investigation; 

(C) Directive: produce and maintain a (confidential and secured) case file of the investigation, including ALL documentation and evidence arising from the investigation, including the original charge/allegation/complaint; including an investigation timetable which shall include the “tick-tock” (or timetable) of the case (which shall include the review of discovery, schedule of interviews, notes and transcripts of interviews, memos-to-file, and preparation of final report). 

(PBGD-001A-070720 DOS 13 p. 17) 

4. PROTOCOL mapping X=>I, where I = INFORMATION: draw inferences from data; make findings of fact, in the 2nd Degree (“Session of Parliament”). 

(1) Information Processing Step 3: 

(A) Discovery – Collect and gather evidence in the matter(s) through discovery of further information by and though Audit Assessment and Assurance Service, investigation (within proper jurisdiction), research, or other lawful and appropriate means. 

(B) Findings – Try, test, and examine client(s)’s working knowledge in the matter(s) and make findings of fact. If findings resolve client’s understanding in the matter(s), close the case. If further work/final action is required to resolve the matter, raise the case to the 3rd Degree. 

(2) Investigative Procedure Step 3: Discovery – Directive: conduct fact-finding through requests for information and conducting interviews (also known as fact-finding conferences, deposition upon written interrogatories or questions, or deposition upon oral examination). Stages of an interview include planning, arranging, opening, conducting, and closing. Bear in mind applicable document retention policies. 

(3) Investigative Procedure Step 4: Analysis & Preponderance – (A) Preparation of a final report of investigation shall rest upon a thorough analysis of the facts and preponderance of the evidence discovered in the course of the (instant) investigation, so as to cause the matter to be resolved between the parties, or to provide the decision-maker(s) with sufficient basis on which to decide the outcome of the case. “Preponderance” means the quality of facts in evidence being accorded greater weight based upon critical analysis of objective and material information; otherwise said, “Preponderance” means to accord weight to genuine, credible and relevant material evidence, so as to determine whether it is “more likely than not” that some matter occurred. 

(PBGD-001A-070720 DOS 14 p. 19) 

5. PROTOCOL mapping X=>K, where K = KNOWLEDGE: draw conclusion, log information under true=1,0; in the 3rd Degree (“Adjudgment Tribunal”). 

(1) Information Processing Step 4: Oral Hearing: Hold oral hearing examination in the matter; call witnesses, documents to formally deposit evidence into record; weigh evidence; try case. 

(2) Information Processing Step 5: Judgment: Upon a preponderance of the evidence, the information processor shall render Declaration of Judgment in re the matter. 

(3) Information Processing Step 6: Verdict Sui Jure: Client renders personal conviction or vindication in light of Judgment, the opinion of the verdict being either unanimous or dissenting.

VI. Mindsoft Operating System Protocol
(or, Information Processing Systemtheory)

From Crawley’s Protocols for Human Mind Software, Policy Bureau Guidance Document, 12 May 2020.

ABSTRACT: IF you apply due processing in re:x, THEN you will get information. Run General Operating System Theory on your mind software to process information.

(a) Mission Statement: “Thought Control Program/Monitor for Mind Software.”
(b) Mission Objective: To develop, operate, and execute self control programs.

SECTION § 1. General Operating Systemtheory for Human Mindsoft

1 Let us take for a processing unit Engelbart’s Human using Language Artifacts and Methodologies in which s/he is trained (H-LAM/T) system with basic von Neumann Architecture:

1(1) Drive C:\ is a control mechanism able to communicate with the body hardware (this is the electromagnetic spinal/central nervous system [CNS] omnibus); Drive A:\ is the ability to access Drive M:\ memory; Drive I:\ is the ability to receive input data (from [CNS] perception); Drive O:\ is the ability to route output data (though [cognitive-behavioral] modes of expression); and Drive R:\ is the ability to record and store these data.

2 IF the matter in question=x, THEN the function f of the human mind is to solve for x (the matter in question). Therefore,

IF x, THEN y

which is to say: IF there is a matter in question, THEN why?

3 The function of cognition is to solve for the matter in question. In other words,

f(x)=y

is the function for finding out “why” a matter is in question, and how to resolve it. y is the solution for each value of x. When processing information x follows the path from notice to data to information to knowledge (ndik).

3(a) IF the human’s ability to apply action=y, THEN where x=notice let y=audit; where x=data let y=assessment; where x=information let y=assurance; and where x=knowledge let y=adjudgment.

3(b) IF x=yourself, THEN y=u/r, where u=understanding and r=resistance(over time). f is the function mapping x to y, in which u/r factors. IF u find y(x), THEN u c(y,x), where c=to see why by applying u/r cognitive function:

f(x)=2cy

3(c) This shows that the cognitive function has the effect of doubling, or squaring, the value of x over y. To resolve x, or to solve for y, is “to see why the matter [is in question]”. The solution to the matter in question is:

2c(u/r)self^2.

3(d) This is the optimal pathway to process information.

4 Function f of conflict resolution services is to solve for x, where x=conflict(contradiction). Therefore f(x)=y is the function used to discover “why there is conflict in the matter of x.” In other words, the process used to discover y and solve for x is the function of conflict resolution. In order to solve for x, we must find out what is the matter (x)?

SECTION § 2. Terms

A:\> f(x)=y Factors
(x1) NOTICE: perception, literacy, and reading comprehension;
(x2) DATA: discover, collect, weigh, and measure evidence;
(x3) INFORMATION: draw inferences from d; make findings of fact;
(x4) KNOWLEDGE: draw conclusion, log information under true=1/0.
(y1) AUDIT: hearing, listening, voir dire and counseling;
(y2) ASSESS: logical analysis and fact-finding, investigation;
(y3) ASSURE: trial, preponderance, and deliberation;
(y4) ADJUDGE: drawing conclusions and making recommendations.

B:\> f(x)=y Variables
1. The meaning of u is the client in a server-client network. u is a bit unit (or “cell”) of f(x); ergo, u is one “self”. Therefore u is a hardware component in Mindsoft OS C:drive.
2. The meaning of “client” is receiver of process servicing.
3. The value of u is unknown until u L=>c u/r cell f(x).
4. The meaning of r is resistance, as in the body (corpus). Because the body is a matter x, it encounters resistance to process. This resistance is manifest over time; that is, the time it takes to perceive, or to c, the matter in question. IF x=a matter in question under normal conditions, THEN default r=1; whereas IF r=0 THEN x=light [speed of].
5. u is the function mapping c to y, where c=cognition. The function mapping c to y is application-ability [of DIPST].
6. f is the function mapping x to y, where x=the subject matter. The function mapping x to y is information processing.
7. y is the solution to the problem x. The way to resolve x is to apply information processing to c u/r cell f(x) square.

C:\> function DoProcess(information) {
SOLVE f:x=>y / * the function mapping x to y * /
LET x=variable i^n; y=u/2 [(u/r primary cellF) * (ips * app^n)
IF u=a/r primary cellF THEN L => c u/r cellF^2, where L=induction(90°) / * induct to see yourself squared * /
/ * apply powers of self-perception * /
[( FIND f:x=>y) =>
IF x=n THEN y=Ia^1
DO process{audit-notice}
IF x=d THEN y=Ia^2
DO process{assess-data}
IF x=i THEN y=Ia^3
DO process{assure-info}
IF x=k THEN y=Ia^4
DO process{adjudge-knowg}
<?>f(k)=C(u/r)cellF^2</?>
return{result:<record>1=true;0=false</record>}
ELSE <ips>DIA(GNOSIS);PRO(GNOSIS);CO(GNOSIS)
Write-Prescription
finding of fact [f(F)] ; and
conclusions of induction operation [c(L)]
</ips>
END IF )]
}

VII. On the Contraction of the Breath into the Word

REDACTED. See, Crawley’s MEDET NEFERET EM SEBA RE TEB HESEB RE SEDJEM RE REKH RE DJED MEDU: Good Speech, or Instructions Toward the Correct Method of Hearing, Knowing, and Speaking Words; Standard Notation for Unified Force Field Mechanics Using the Hametic Script, October 6, 2021.

(See “Record of Ra’s Electromagnetic Field (rREMF)” and how the Unified Force Field operates on the universal level.)

VIII. On Rulership & Statecraft

SECTION § 1. “Sail On Sail On O Ship of State…”
From Archives, May 6, 2019.

Opening Statement (Abstract): A state is a contraction of elements in general, and of people in the case of a society. Although all bodies (i.e., particles) are perpetually in motion, the energy that they conduct shall inure to the benefit of the state in which they reside. Let this evidence be submitted:

Exhibit 1. A “true pilot must of necessity pay attention to the seasons, the heavens, the stars, the winds, and everything proper to the craft if he is really to rule a ship” (Book IV, The Republic, 6.488d).

Exhibit 2. “The pilot should not humbly beg the sailors to be commanded by him –that is not the order of nature; neither are ‘the wise to go to the doors of the rich’ –the ingenious author of this saying told a lie –but the truth is, that, when a man is ill, whether he be rich or poor, to the physician he must go, and he who wants to be governed, to him who is able to govern. The ruler who is good for anything ought not to beg his subjects to be ruled by him; although the present governors of mankind are of a different stamp; they may be justly compared to the mutinous sailors, and the true helmsmen to those who are called by them good-for-nothings and star-gazers.” (Book IV, The Republic, 6.488d)

Argument 1. Thus saith Plato, the ship of state has been mutinied, and is in the hands of pirates; the quarreling congress of merchants has discredited the lover of truth, for they love only wealth and power. How, then, does this allegory recognize the modern approach to electoral government and the leadership of body-polities? I advance that this art and craft of governing polities (i.e., the bodies and minds of people in a locality), while under the guise of “politics” (i.e., “politricks,” the deception of the populous), is in truth and actuality the practice of “Statecraft.”

Exhibit 3. The more recent neo-statecraft variant has a number of core assumptions.

1. The primary focus is on the political leader of the state and their closest advisers. The group is referred to as the leadership ‘Court’.
2. The Court is a unitary, rational and self-interested actor with the primary governing objective of winning and maintaining power. Rather than seeking to achieve any ideological goals, the Court seeks to achieve statecraft.
3. In order to achieve statecraft, they have to undertake five key tasks

(a) Governing competence – governments and leaders need to be seen as competent at managing the country’s affairs, particularly the economy.

(b) Party management – managing parliamentary backbenchers, constituency associations and pressure groups carefully.

(c) Developing a winning electoral strategy – creating a set of policies and image that creates momentum in the polls.

(d) Political argument hegemony – winning the battle of ideas in elite debates

(e) Bending the rules of the game – they will seek to tilt the political game by introducing constitutional reforms that makes statecraft easier. (Toby James)

Exhibit 4. Historical institutionalism (HI) is a new institutionalist social science method that uses institutions to find sequences of social, political, economic behavior and change across time. It is a comparative approach to the study of all aspects of human organizations and does so by relying heavily on case studies.

Argument 2. The aforementioned approaches to statecraft theory are most usefully analyzed through the context of historical and materialist dialectical thought. Given the breadth of world history regarding statesmanship and polity, Statecraft theory must not be founded in the critique of the Thatcher Administration in UK, but may more honestly begin in the Institutes of State best exemplified in the efforts of world powers to institute a society upon the Mysteries of Egypt (Khem, Ham, Kemet, “the fertile black land”). This is observed in the British, French, Arab, Roman, Greek, and Judaeo institutes on Egypt. The latter of which, historically, coincided with the New Kingdom of Egypt and the contention of the Pharaoh Akhenaten against the established State of the Old Kingdom. Now, we will unpack the “nature of the state” of Old Kemet (Egypt), but for now, the populist Judaeo-Dialectic approach to Egypt (see: Old Testament) invites us to observe how the learned followers of the Atenist Revolution carried away the knowledge of Egyptian Statecraft into the wilderness, and by the by into Canaan; and while their State of Israel remains a model of the New Kingdom Dialectic, our present purposes direct us to Plato, student of Egypt (as were all “Greek philosophers”), and delegated by the academies of the Enlightenment as the harbinger of Western Civilization. The dialectic of the ship of state in Plato’s Republic must be analyzed in its historical context, being but one example of a body of political and social theory carried out of Egypt and into the West. This theory is that of the Barque of Ra rising from the East to sail across the noonday sky and set down in the West. This is the earliest recorded instance of Statecraft, literally, to craft a ship of State, a state ruled by the Gods—the Greats—which comes down to us nearly verbatim through Plato’s treatise on Republic. Indeed, the Republic is the ship of state, and it is no coincidence that the Kemites of Egypt were the first people’s in recorded history (which record indeed begins with them) to unify “two lands,” two polities, into a “United State”. Indeed it was the Nubian Kushites of the predynastic age who rose up from the south to civilize the north, thereby ushering in “modern civilization.” This was achieved on the basis of Statecraft—not merely a military monarchy as presumed through the Office of the Pharaoh, but a true republic represented by the nomes of Egypt, which were governed by the body-politic of “priests”. Indeed, the system of “lodges” or “temples” of priests can be likened to the 1 and 50 legislatures of the United States. Such bodies do not negate each other in their allegiance (i.e., “worship”) to Nebraska, or Texas, or California, etc., but these abstract forms, the “deities” of State, are United into one federation governed by civil law; and while one or another state is, so is the United States; as Wasar is Lord of Busiris, so is he “a god” of the state—and moreover, all such states are subject to the sovereign will of all We People. To say, I pledge allegiance to the United States, is to pledge allegiance to the unified ideal or pure form of government in this place we call America, no differently than to pledge allegiance to the idea of a benevolent “god” over society. To give thank offerings to this abstract being is no different than to compliantly render a percentage of your personal income to the coffers of your representative states. So it cannot be that the priesthood legislature, the Court of Djadjat, and the Great White House of the Pharaoh governed a United State of the North and South Kemet for 4000 by “praying to their pagan animalistic gods,” but that they had advanced representation of their polities by and though such efficacious symbols as Wasar, Waset, Heru, even as Uncle Sam for US and St. George for England. Even “Freedom” stands atop the Capitol, and “Liberty” presides over the Gate of New York; do we conflate these “ideas” and “women” with “gods”? Indeed, once we acknowledge that “religion” is so much a construct of the ancestry, values, traditions, methodologies, and paradigms of a polity, we must consider it less as “the superstitions of unlearned people” than “the vetted and codified social and civil policy prescribed for a time and place.” Even Napoleon, that royal Egyptologist, classified the Bible and Quran under “Politics.” Modern people using an historical dialectic approach to politics need not be fooled by the academic dismissal of the Ancient (African and American) Mysteries when Alexander of Macedonia, Muhammad, and Napoleon, upon the foundation of their great states, immediately adventured south down the Nile in search of those very “Mysteries” which would confer upon them “divine rulership.” It was their fault, as is ours, that their consciousness rose not too high above the material remnants of Kemetic culture, failing to look on high to grasp the forms (viz Platonic) upon which foundation such matter lie. But that, truly is the mystery of the unification of the north and south (which Israel has been practicing half right since they rebelled): that the navigator of the ship of state must look on high to govern that which is below. For the mark of effective statecraftmanship may be the ability to evoke in the mind of a polity a specific form of idea for a certain time and place, by and through such words as Democracy, Freedom and Justice, as through the image of an eagle, a flag, or Amun-Ra. But the modern mind is not so acrobatic; therefor, we must address the material dialectic. A society such as ours whose god is Das Kapital is fated to consume their own matter-reality, remaining malnourished in soul and spirit. Therefore the star-gazer must conduct the ship of state; the King must love wisdom, and the philosopher must be King, for who loves Sophia but the Christos, King of Righteousness, Forever in the Order of Maliki Tzaddiq. Truly He shall come to judge the living and the dead, and the Republic of God’s Kingdom shall reign again upon the Earth … A state incorporates to float a company to sea. They go to the river bank to take out liquid currency. They set their sails and sell their sales through materiality. But the Mast must be helmed by the Master who must have eyes to see. 

SECTION § 2. The Battery of the State.

From Crawley’s New Syllabus Code, Ch. 10. REPORT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, May 30, 2018 

1 … Don’t be human capital, be a human being. Invest In A New State of Mind, a Peace of Mind to Free our Minds from Mental Slavery. But exactly what kind of slavery are we dealing with? Let us make use of an allusion. 

2 In banking, a team member such as a bank teller must be insured by a bond (an obligation to repay an incurred monetary loss and interest). Such a bond is issued by a bond company in order to manage risk related to said member’s handling of the bank holdings/assets. This is because in America the security of property must be guaranteed, especially when security bonds (dollars) are issued. 

3 If a team member were to commit a dishonest act it would make them unbondable. In the United States governmental corporation, all human beings are capital bonds, and so-called “free and accepted” humans are government assets who manage said capital.

4 In the same way as in banking, the commission of illegal conduct by an American citizen will render that citizen unbondable under law. Under US social contract, a human being’s license to freedom in America is the bond on that human’s being, so that if one commits a dishonest act, their bond gets revoked and they become subject to incarceration. 

5 Now “license to freedom” is a paradox, because freedom is a natural and absolute right, that is, mutually exclusive to slavery. But in America, as I said, everyone is bonded, and thus enslaved. The price of your bond depends on your color under law. 

6 Blacks by law are a means to capital gains, and are thus afforded minimal freedom and subject to a heavy bonds, while whites by law are assets of the state, being entitled to property, and are thus afforded more freedom to accumulate capital on behalf of the state. 

7 We must always remain aware that black-colored people are not black in fact, but subject to a color of law under the status of civilitus moritus (dead persons), which is of course not a condition of natural personhood or material fact, but merely a condition of contractual obligation. 

8 Importantly, in this social-banking system the United States itself is not the bank, it is the bondsman. Now ask yourself who is the bank? Who holds and circulates the bond notes? Why consider this at all? 

9 Know for yourself that bonds are most important; they are the glue of all matter. Even god bound your spirit in your body when you were born through your mother. Yet in light of this, who has the right to then bind a free-born natural person? 

10 The answer to this question shall reveal the very extent of the system of deception to which we have all been subject. Only an inhuman system shoves natural people into cells and cubicles and farms them for their labor. 

11 In this system of human capital, the United States is a socialized federal prison industry supply chain from farm to marketplace, while the [New Syllabus] is like a granary built above the banks of a riverbed. 

12 A licensed attorney may sell you short, but the … Ombudsman will make you whole.

IX. On Jurisdiction

From Crawley’s NEW SYLLABUS CODE, CH. 11, BEST PRACTICES OF THE LAW, 11 April 2019. 

Abstract: The “Law” is the repository of truth — not necessarily absolute truth, but truth as it pertains to a particular state. Thereby “truth” is the function by which material facts are deposited into words and sentences that represent the position of the state. In other words, the “law” represents a particular state of energy conduction (or battery) among its constituent elements. “Law” thus represents what is “right” or iuris, in the eyes of the state. In other words, the state maintains standing to say (dictate) what is “right” (iuris), hence the state’s jurisdiction. One must therefore be literate to have standing before the state.

REDACTED. See, Code of Law Section 1500.

###

Last Modified 3 Nov 2021. Redacted 18 Jan 2023.