by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .3,7793,7803,7813,7823,7833,7843,785. . .3,9283,929»

Umakia wrote:The reason why riots are continuing and police response has been subpar is simply because the riots themselves do not represent a genuine social revolution challenging America's soul or anything of the sort. It's a simulated event that started when elites wanted it to start (really, given the number of black criminals who are killed in some altercation with cops every day across America, they could have picked anyone to stand in for George Floyd) and will end when elites want it to end. The sole objective behind all this is to shift public perception to manipulate election results in a few months. For all the fantastic radicalism that has been espoused, everyone tacitly acknowledges that progressives depend upon middle-class self-satisfaction to achieve their ends because bourgeois materialism engenders the flighty race-egalitarianism that supposedly underpins these protests and egalitarianism engenders soft-bellied collective weakness and self-interested, socially myopic complacency. Even the rioters in their bravado have only gotten this far because of lack of opposition and have demonstrated how easily they would crumble if the police mounted an effective resistance. For instance, the "summer of love festival" in Seattle... How long did it take to scuttle that when the stuttering imbecile of a mayor felt threatened by the ruckus? To the conservative who expected a goetterdaemmerung with the forces of anti-civilizational leftism so that he could return to the oppressive inertia of his worthless, small life of charming rusticisms and nostalgic senility, to the communist who might have believed he was getting a proletarian revolution in spite of the overriding character of these revolts as consisting of unshaven, limp-limbed liberal arts university students with no constitution for labor or productive inclinations whatsoever, and to the anarchist who expected the sordid exercise of gangster rule to perpetuate itself ad infinitum in recognition of the ultimate truth that this was indeed the logical conclusion of "liberty," that veritable prostitute among the major political ideals, I regret to inform you that you have been duped by yet another instance of the mediocrity of partisan crisis-formulation which will yield an utterly boring and anticlimactic denoument in the space of a few months' time. When a real revolution happens that is well and truly beyond any establishmentarian party or faction's power to limit, direct, or control, and which stands to bury the decayed remnant of 18th-century liberal humanism called the American republic in the grave marked out for it 100 years prior, and with it the European Union, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the World Bank, the United Nations, and every other institution of moral universalism and international bureaucracy which exists, and which will regenerate Western civilization from the decadence of a corrupted modernity to a forward-looking nationalist future, I'll make sure to let you know.

You had me up until American republic. Yes, there is something very wrong. The problem doesn't seem to be what you think.

The problem with the American Republic is that it succumbed to Marx, Engels, and Sartre in incremental degrees. The answer of course is to return to Liberty and an Objectivist/Objective Realist understanding of reality. I am working for a more general awareness of interested disestablishmentarianism and efficacious removal of the cancer of Statism (despotism) wrought by those who seek to subvert liberty and equity in the Classical Liberal sense in the upcoming decade.

I would encourage you to drop the darkened/smoked shades of your nihilistic lenses and reread some of the Founders and their forebears (Blackstone, Rutherford, Sidney et al.) using their definitions within the context of their worldview (= Weltanschauung) in order to understand it outside of the redefined newspeak of post-Kantian existentialism. Right now you are biting your own tail and blaming the wrong things. The human condition is the problem. Truth, Justice, and Peace measured by objective reality for Liberty and Equality by with and from Classical Liberalism is part of the solution. Nothing else has brought about the end of so much poverty, disease, pain and suffering in such a short period of time -- so much so, that Communists, Fascists, and Socialists of all stripes have to bold face lie in order to promote their cause. They are so out of logical, rational, reasonable solutions that all they can do is shout down their opposition and hope that they can be intimidated into submission to their lies without recourse of discourse, discussion and debate.

Miri islands

Suzi Island wrote:I am fairly confident in saying that the "wall of vets" in Portland are not actually Vets or they are dishonorably discharged malcontents.

They are certainly breaking their word to uphold the Constitution of the United States and to protect and defend it from all enemies foreign and domestic as they swore/affirmed at their enlistment or commission ceremony. They have disgraced themselves and those of us who have worn or still wear the uniform. It makes me wonder just how stupid the Marxists think the American People are (rhetorical quesiton oc).

Republic of minerva

The European Union is the modern version of Charlemagne's empire change my mind.

Republic of minerva

Angela Merkel is a Karling

Republic of minerva wrote:change my mind.

no

You know the old joke: "You'll spend six months as a Minarchist before you become an Anarcho-Capitalist." Well it took me two years, but I've figured out a rebuttal to my last statist justification. I know nobody asked, but you all seem receptive to political revelations.

Skaveria wrote:You know the old joke: "You'll spend six months as a Minarchist before you become an Anarcho-Capitalist." Well it took me two years, but I've figured out a rebuttal to my last statist justification. I know nobody asked, but you all seem receptive to political revelations.

What convinced you to make such a change?

Howdy folks, not getting rid of me that easy

Rateria and Skaveria

Suzi Island wrote:What convinced you to make such a change?

My previous hesitation was my own thoughts on how states originated. Formal governments naturally evolved from tribal societies. Tribes became kingdoms, kingdoms merged into countries, ect.

Those tribal societies originally were clans or families. It can be reasonably inferred that they had concent amongst all their members. When those clans evolved into more sophisticated states, it could then be inferred that the concent carried foward in time, despite the growing size and sophistication.

Previously, when states were small. If someone lacked concent to be governed by a state that was based on concent, it was reasonable that they could leave that state and go homestead, but the problem was that states grew so large that they butted up against one another.

There's nowhere for an Anarchist to go, to leave one state is to enter another. The only option left would be to abolish the state from within. The only problem with that is that those states were established with concent and continue to have broad concent for their continued existence in one form or another. Considering it's a violation of the NAP to abolish an organization that has concent from it's members. To overthrow the state violates the NAP.

Here's what changed my mind, political ideologies are based on what OUGHT, not on what CAN. Even if I didn't believe that ethically achieving Anarchy was possible, that didn't make me a Statist. It made me a very pessimistic Anarchist. Now I support a gradual shrinking of government over time so that a transition into Anarchy would be smooth and with no social upheaval or revolution.

Skaveria wrote:My previous hesitation was my own thoughts on how states originated. Formal governments naturally evolved from tribal societies. Tribes became kingdoms, kingdoms merged into countries, ect.

Those tribal societies originally were clans or families. It can be reasonably inferred that they had concent amongst all their members. When those clans evolved into more sophisticated states, it could then be inferred that the concent carried foward in time, despite the growing size and sophistication.

Previously, when states were small. If someone lacked concent to be governed by a state that was based on concent, it was reasonable that they could leave that state and go homestead, but the problem was that states grew so large that they butted up against one another.

There's nowhere for an Anarchist to go, to leave one state is to enter another. The only option left would be to abolish the state from within. The only problem with that is that those states were established with concent and continue to have broad concent for their continued existence in one form or another. Considering it's a violation of the NAP to abolish an organization that has concent from it's members. To overthrow the state violates the NAP.

Here's what changed my mind, political ideologies are based on what OUGHT, not on what CAN. Even if I didn't believe that ethically achieving Anarchy was possible, that didn't make me a Statist. It made me a very pessimistic Anarchist. Now I support a gradual shrinking of government over time so that a transition into Anarchy would be smooth and with no social upheaval or revolution.

I am from the opposite swing -- from Anarcho-Capitalism to Minarchism because:
1. People at their best can only do what they ought
2. When not at their best (mostly) don't do all if any what they ought even when they know better or desire to do otherwise
3. Most people have not thought themselves through, that no one cannot do what cannot ought be done
4. Those who do not realize point three come up with unworkable Statist pipe dreams inevitably blaming others to the death of millions
5. The best defense to use with eternal vigilance is a minimalist state whose only purpose is to disrupt, disband, and disenfranchise Statists, and anyone else who who would seek to defraud and coerce (as that is what Statism is at heart) others of their life, liberty, and justly gained property first amongst themselves by division, check and balance with swift and severe penalty for misfeasance.

I have been fighting all my life to end the garbage of expansive jurisdiction wrought on Americans by the horrible abuses of LBJ's Great Society that made sure no one can ever "go off the grid" ever again (hippies had the right idea on that one) and be forever subservient to the "rational administrative state", i.e., local, state, and federal bureaucrats. This was cinched tight by the 9th Circuit Supreme Court that the Politburo created soviets to subjugate liberty in Socialist Mother Russia were perfectly suited to be grafted into State, county and municipal government when called by their English name, planning commissions. If America is to survive, we need to remove these abominations unlawfully legislatively adjudicated from the bench during the "Trust Me" Jimmy Carter presidency.

I am hopeful enough to fight for Anarcho-Capitalism to the end, but have been around long enough to realize that Minarchism is a good as it is going to get as long as there are more than 2 people on the island (Caruso and Friday). (Kind of like Batman not being the hero that Gotham wants/needs, but the hero that Gotham deserves -- or something like that). However, I want to live in a country where the Congress consisting of Libertarians and Classical Liberal (whether Liberal or Conservative) argue about how much more laws and regulations can be dispensed with, and boasting how this year is the smallest fiscal year on record.

Nonetheless, I stand with you on working toward maximal Liberty.

Every rooosseee has it's thorns

Muh roads wrote:Every rooosseee has it's thorns

Just like every night has its dawn

Suzi Island wrote:Just like every night has its dawn

Just like every cowboy sings a sad, sad song

Narland wrote:I am from the opposite swing -- from Anarcho-Capitalism to Minarchism because:
1. People at their best can only do what they ought
2. When not at their best (mostly) don't do all if any what they ought even when they know better or desire to do otherwise
3. Most people have not thought themselves through, that no one cannot do what cannot ought be done
4. Those who do not realize point three come up with unworkable Statist pipe dreams inevitably blaming others to the death of millions
5. The best defense to use with eternal vigilance is a minimalist state whose only purpose is to disrupt, disband, and disenfranchise Statists, and anyone else who who would seek to defraud and coerce (as that is what Statism is at heart) others of their life, liberty, and justly gained property first amongst themselves by division, check and balance with swift and severe penalty for misfeasance.

I have been fighting all my life to end the garbage of expansive jurisdiction wrought on Americans by the horrible abuses of LBJ's Great Society that made sure no one can ever "go off the grid" ever again (hippies had the right idea on that one) and be forever subservient to the "rational administrative state", i.e., local, state, and federal bureaucrats. This was cinched tight by the 9th Circuit Supreme Court that the Politburo created soviets to subjugate liberty in Socialist Mother Russia were perfectly suited to be grafted into State, county and municipal government when called by their English name, planning commissions. If America is to survive, we need to remove these abominations unlawfully legislatively adjudicated from the bench during the "Trust Me" Jimmy Carter presidency.

I am hopeful enough to fight for Anarcho-Capitalism to the end, but have been around long enough to realize that Minarchism is a good as it is going to get as long as there are more than 2 people on the island (Caruso and Friday). (Kind of like Batman not being the hero that Gotham wants/needs, but the hero that Gotham deserves -- or something like that). However, I want to live in a country where the Congress consisting of Libertarians and Classical Liberal (whether Liberal or Conservative) argue about how much more laws and regulations can be dispensed with, and boasting how this year is the smallest fiscal year on record.

Nonetheless, I stand with you on working toward maximal Liberty.

For right now, we should just focus on ending the wars and abolishing the Federal Reserve. Those are the real threats, not "muh weed and muh guns."

Narland, Republic of minerva, and Auxorii

Skaveria wrote:For right now, we should just focus on ending the wars and abolishing the Federal Reserve. Those are the real threats, not "muh weed and muh guns."

You’re forgetting crony capitalism, term limits & surveillance.

Auxorii wrote:You’re forgetting crony capitalism, term limits & surveillance.

Yes to ending cronyism and surveillance, but I go back and forth on term limits. If people want to elect the same person over and over again, who am I to tell them no? I understand the incumbent advantage and curruption angle, but those aren't certain. I'm sure in a utilitarian sense we'd have a healthier democracy if we implemented term limits, but I'm a Kantian at heart.

Skaveria wrote:Yes to ending cronyism and surveillance, but I go back and forth on term limits. If people want to elect the same person over and over again, who am I to tell them no? I understand the incumbent advantage and curruption angle, but those aren't certain. I'm sure in a utilitarian sense we'd have a healthier democracy if we implemented term limits, but I'm a Kantian at heart.

I suppose I can see that; I just disagree.

Miencraft, Rateria, and Skaveria

Skaveria wrote:For right now, we should just focus on ending the wars and abolishing the Federal Reserve. Those are the real threats, not "muh weed and muh guns."

I believe that dishonest banking and unsound currency is one of the biggest fights, up there with enforcing the crime of malfeasance (deprivation of rights under color of authority without prejudice (legal term)). I am trying to find reference to the letter -- it was one of the Founding Fathers writing to another about how astounding it was that going to a sound currency turned the fortunes of the people (and increased the productivity of the around faster than any other thing they could devise, as they (the people) could see the reward for their labors almost immediately). Dishonest weights and measures are an abomination -- Keynesian banking is most abominable because the people (especially the working poor) cannot see the rewards of the productivity of their labors that they have been swindled from them by inflation and debasing (of the currency) that they culpably falsify as "stimulus." The US Dollar has lost over 98% of its purchasing power in violation of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 since. It is long past due to rectify this felonious and imnsho felonious abuse.

Finances based on access to a market of competing currencies e.g., a choice between a state currency, and federal currency, the Spanish Milled Dollar, a Dutch Guilder, a British Pound etc. that our Founding Fathers had encourages financiers to utilize and create for themselves only the soundest. The law requiring US Citizens

Auxorii wrote:I suppose I can see that; I just disagree.

On the one hand, the problem with term limits is to be found in human nature. Corrupt politicians will create for themselves a machine in the background to line up sycophants and yes men who will follow the strong man's despotism, such as Putin and Medvedev.

On the other hane, some people say term limits are like a cheap padlock that helps keep honest people honest. Politicians can go back home only a little disgustingly mutated instead of turning into a full blown swamp creature if they are in the Beltway for a decade.

I think it is most important for the judiciary to be strongly reviewed for good behaviour by their respective legislatures and signed off as acceptable by the executive to continue every 20 years as a good check and balance against their oligarchical nature.

I am more likely to vote for a candidate in the primary if one of their distinctive planks in they will limit themselves to x terms because they have to get back to their family business, than someone who wants to make a career out of legislating. or executing other people's lives away.

Muh roads wrote:Every rooosseee has it's thorns

Suzi Island wrote:Just like every night has its dawn

Skaveria wrote:Just like every cowboy sings a sad, sad song

Every rose has its thorn

Yeah it does

Auxorii, Rateria, and Skaveria

Would any nations be willing to serve the Third Republic as Assemblyman?

Rasczaks republic

Auxorii wrote:Would any nations be willing to serve the Third Republic as Assemblyman?

mmm perhaps

Citizens will be required to pledge their committment to running by August 5th, when we will hold a special election for the seat vacated by the unrighteous ban of Umakia, and as I have already stated on discord, the Presidency declares today, August 2nd, 2020, to be recognized as Zendirist Memorial Day throughout all of Libertatem.

Auxorii wrote:Citizens will be required to pledge their committment to running by August 5th, when we will hold a special election for the seat vacated by the unrighteous ban of Umakia, and as I have already stated on discord, the Presidency declares today, August 2nd, 2020, to be recognized as Zendirist Memorial Day throughout all of Libertatem.

1. I am declaring my intent to run for assembly
2. Aren't holidays supposed to be voted on?

Suzi Island wrote:1. I am declaring my intent to run for assembly
2. Aren't holidays supposed to be voted on?

1. Wonderful.
2. There isn’t an official procedure.

«12. . .3,7793,7803,7813,7823,7833,7843,785. . .3,9283,929»

Advertisement