1775-76 The NY Farmer & Vattel (DrCon barf alert)

The Devolpment of American Citizenship 1608-1870 | 1978 | Jmaes Kettner

[patlin]

As usual, DrCon lifts my research then lies about it...

Monday, October 25, 2010 4:16:48 AM · 2,124 of 2,837 only excerpts per JSTOR rules The American Journal of Legal History, Vol 18

Americans inherited a complex set of ideas relating to membership, community, and allegiance along with their status as English subjects, and they would adjust, affirm, or repudiate elements of the intellectual whole at different times and in response to varying practical and theoretical concerns. From piecemeal changes and partial modifications, however, a clear line of development emerged as Americans first experienced, then sought to articulate the meaning of their transformation from subjects to citizens.

Responding to the controversies and confusion that surrounded the accession of James I to the English throne, Sir Edward Coke in 1608 in Calvin's Case propounded an explicit set of principles and formulations respecting the nature of membership and community that would dominate English law for the next several centuries. His central conclusion was that subjectship involved a personal relationship with the king, a relationship rooted in the laws of nature and hence perpetual and immutable. The conceptual analogue of the subject-king relationship was the natural bond between parent and child.

The intellectual premises from which Coke derived his conclusions were those of a man standing midway between the eras historians categorize as “medieval” and “modern,” and those premises were destined to fade before the century was out. New conceptions emerged that saw society and government as the product of individual consent and compact, and Coke's quasimedieval ideas that social and governmental organization grew out of natural principles of hierarchy and subordination became increasingly anachronistic.

Americans responded to the problem of conflicting loyalties by developing the doctrine of the right of election. The states by no means moved in unison, but all would eventually agree with one lawyer's conclusion that, “In revolutions, every man had a right to take his part. He is excusable, if not bound in duty to take that which in his conscience he approved.’”40 The personal choice of allegiance had to be made within a “reasonable” period of time, and once the decision was made it could be considered binding. But the initial concession was clear. Citizenship in the new republics was to begin with individual consent.

The status of “American citizen” was the creation of the Revolution. The imperial crisis of the pre-war years and the separation from the mother country formalized in 1776 stimulated the articulation of at least some of the major principles that were to shape and define the new status. Despite some initial confusion, Americans came to see that citizenship must begin with an act of individual choice.

Then later that day DrCon posts this...

Indeed, it is very, very unusual to see Emerich de Vattel cited favorably on the topic of American citizenship. For example, in James Kettner’s 1978 scholarly work, The Development of American Citizenship, 1608-1870, de Vattel is not mentioned a single time!

To which I respond with this..........

[Red Steel]

Media Matter = Media Matters

[bushpilot1]

[bushpilot1]

what have we here..early 19th century...does not look like this could be a natural born citizen. .

[bushpilot1]

In the Roman Law a child born to a Roman citizen and a foreigner was deemed spurious. 19th century American dictionary..the word Genuine..real, natural, not spurious. The words natural born citizen sure does indicate born to citizen parents.

[patlin]

The Nazi collaborating Soros gave Media Matter $1 million dollars

I wonder how mush he has donated to DrCon?

[jamese777]

The Nazi collaborating Soros gave Media Matter $1 million dollars to virtually lie about everything. Furthermore, Soros gave to the Tides Foundation who have also funded Media Matter to the tune of $2 million dollars over the last 5 years. No doubt Soros threw a few peanuts around to Dr. CONspiracy and trolls like Jamese777.
Likely all Soros Money.

---

George Soros has some serious cash at an estimated $11 billion but he’s just one of a group of billionaires who are the big money behind Obama.

From Forbes Magazine:
Special Report
Obama’s Billionaires
Claire Obusan, 01.15.09,
Ever since he ran for the Senate in 2004, Barack Obama has had a wealth of 10-figure tycoons advising—and funding—him.
“By The Numbers: Obama’s Billionaires (And this list doesn’t even include Oprah Winfrey’s measly one billion):”
http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/15/obama-backers-billionaires-biz-billies-inauguration09-cz_co_0115funding_slide_2.html