Imagine we could build an AI (Artificial Intelligence) and, assuming it does not almost instantly destroy us all, we task it with answering various questions (how to cure this, how to solve that etc.).
Imagine this near omnipotent intelligence functions in the way we desire, rather than misinterpreting the nature and spirit of our questions, and has the full ability and desire to answer these questions truthfully and conclusively.
Imagine we ask this AI to tell us how we can have true equal rights.
In fact, while I already stated that in this hypothetical scenario the AI would fully understand the spirit of our question and will exclude imprisoning or killing all of us to achieve equal rights, lets add freedom to the request.
So we ask this AI how we can have equal rights and freedom for all.
It is our assertion that the ONLY answer this AI would or could possibly give us is the precise answer that the Nations Of Sanity is presenting - establish the NAP (Non Aggression Principle) as the law, through our 3 part peace agreement.
The NAP is a principle that defines crime by whether or not you are causing harm or loss to another, or threatening or attempting to.
It is not a pacifist principle and allows for the use of force for both self defence and the defence of others. It is only the initiation of force against peaceful people that is prohibited.
That principle and that principle alone can be established as law and applied 100% universally. Nothing else can be.
As soon as you step outside of the NAP with regards to law, you violate it and equal rights becomes mathematically impossible under this corrupted self violating mess, which is law today.
We can make all sorts of claims about how this is better for society, more efficient, more just, preferable, or, as our name asserts, simply the sanest answer we could offer. But when it comes to the question of how to achieve equal rights and freedom for all, the answer we offer is (in the most literal sense) the ONLY answer.
It is not even an opinion, it is an objective fact. A mathematical certainty.
As a matter of mathematical certainty, the only way we can have truly equal rights and freedom for all is to establish the NAP as the law through a peace agreement that applies equally to all. Our universal peace agreement. The law for all lands.
Such an agreement must be made up of 3 basic parts.
Part 1 would be the basic agreement itself, to establish the NAP, and only the NAP, as the universal law or terms of peace between all people.
Part 2 would be the "lines in the sand" where the parameters are set which mark the limits of tolerance over differing interpretations (defining and separating the grey areas from the black and white) and part 3 would establish rightful ownership.
It's an equation for world peace and quite literally the only answer to the question of how we can have 100% equal rights and freedom for all.
The peace agreement would need to have these 3 basic dimensions to it.
The basic answer, to establish the NAP as the law/the terms of peace, and agreeing to that is encapsulated by part 1. But 2 and 3 are necessary for practical application in the real world, where consensus over interpretations on various parameters and definitions will only be achievable through a "lines in the sand" kind of agreement. Setting limits of tolerance and allowing voluntary means of association to deal with the finer ideals and preferences that exist within those limits (separating the black and white from the grey).
Law is about force. Enforcing the NAP is by definition an act of defence, not an initiation of force.
The NAP can be enforced as law without requiring of special rights/powers. No one needs to rule, in fact no one is allowed to rule, the NAP is the only rule and while certain parameters that mark the limits of tolerance will need to be negotiated (primarily through part 2 of our agreement) the principle itself represents the mathematical solution to the issue of equal rights and freedom. While part 2 and 3 represents the additional requirements to the equation that deals with the additional variables of real world application.
Whether we can ever achieve this is a very different question. Whether enough people will recognise the wisdom of using such a basic and objectively universal standard of morality as the basis for law for these terms of peace to be properly established is a massively debatable question.
Even our claims that this is the solution that strikes at the root of the insanity and criminality that plague and rule us can be debated and argued (we invite all to do so).
But there can be no debate when it comes to objective fact and mathematical certainties (though invitations remain open). And our claim, that this is the only way, even theoretically, that we can have equal rights, is a claim of objective truth. A mathematical fact.
2 plus 2 equals 4. It is equally true that 2,846 multiplied by 16 equals 45,536. These are both simple facts and are equally true but the latter is not so immediately obvious and requires more thought (or a calculator) to recognise as a mathematical truth.
It is equally true to say that establishing the Non Aggression Principle as the law/terms of peace, through our 3 part peace agreement, is the ONLY way we can have 100% equal rights and freedom for all. Literally the only way, even theoretically.
That is a mathematical certainty, just as it is that 2 plus 2 does and will always equal 4. It may not be as immediately obvious but it does not require a calculator either. Just a moment of pause and consideration.
The objective truth of this may not be instantly obvious, but any thoughtful consideration of this does reveal the undeniable nature of this claim.
The only law, the only terms of peace, that can be applied 100% equally, in a manner that grants all people 100% equal rights to 100% of the population is that of the Non Aggression Principle, and the only way to deal with the grey areas that could undermine the principle as universal law is by setting limits of tolerance that separate the grey areas from the black and white.
The only demand we can make of others is that they do not do harm to others, or threaten to do so. That is a demand that does not violate freedom (unless you contend that freedom includes the right to harm others) and, as we are trying to emphasise here, can be applied 100% equally.
That is not the end of the story.
Establishing the NAP as the law will give us the sane society we promise but that doesn't mean we should not work for better than simple sanity and the Nations Of Sanity recognises and addresses the need for additional innovations in this regard. But the basis for everything must be this simple and universally moral principle that defines the law that sets the terms of peace between us all equally.
Our other ideas can be improved upon and the wisdom they employ is subjective in many ways, but our answer to the question of how we can have equal rights and freedom for all is not subjective and cannot be improved upon. It is an objective truth. A mathematical fact.
When we say this is the only way to have equal rights and freedom for all, we mean it. This is literally the ONLY way.