I think you give corporations and the govenment too much credit for the intelligence leve. I think your observation on the limited liability aspect of stock ownership is correct. The real revolution for freedom would come first in actually following the Consitution and then in eliminating the limited liabiitiy aspect of stock ownership. That would limit the size and power of both government and and business.
Iraq is the excuse used. Iraq is one method by which the populace ends up supporting billions of dollars being funneled to connected special interests.
The problem with the whole "eternal vigilance" thing is that people inevitably let their guard down when the state is relatively small and harmless, and only start paying attention when it's large, bloated, and so firmly entrenched that while most people agree that it sucks, most cannot imagine life without it either, so they tolerate the bloated monstrosity.
Our last chance of political freedom in our lifetime, yes. But then, we already knew that it was an iffy proposition, no?
Besides, you can still pursue freedom and happiness, in your own life, which will always be far more effective than anything a politician can do anyway.
Sure you can. Until the politicians decide that destroying your freedom and happiness will help them buy votes and appease the masses. Like I said, ignoring the state is only an option when its minimal. When it's up in your face at all times there's no escape.
I'm not saying that the state isn't bad. You know I'm not. I'm trying to say that, if your sense of personal efficacy and happiness is contingent upon effecting political change for the better, then you're going to be miserable. There are other things, which you can do for yourself and your loved ones, which have far better prospects at making you happy, and which will advance liberty in the meantime.
It's late, but one quick comment: I don't think the answer is to get rid of government because it is easily corrupted when no one is looking. I think the answer is transparency. All the problems we formed government to solve are not going to go away. Government introduces problems, but there are solutions to those as well, like campaign reform and transparency. The need to make government work is becoming more urgent as we understand more about how we are neglecting our life support, the earth.
transparancy doesnt work all that well because most people simply could not give a shit what goes on in politics, they are simply ignorant and apathetic.
And what is the incentive for those with unanswerable power to maintain transparency?
Looking through history, I do not find much evidence to support the assertion that populations have instituted governments to solve problems such as protection against threats near and far, and to supply a method of third-party decision making in disputes. It is a badly-told fairy tale.
Rather, I see a minority gaining the trust or acquiescence of the majority, always backed up with the threat of violence.
I would recommend a fellow by the name of Bruce Bueno De Mesquita who has developed a mathematical political model based upon winning coalitions. Very revealing. What you state is true for winning coalitions that are small. Governments manage to do the right things about stuff that really matters and is visible to the people. We are in the midst of an all out propaganda war by corporations.
No, their favorite spokesman was Reagan, who was originally sponsored by General Electric. Corporations just want to be free. Free to enslave all of humanity.
No, the big corporations do not want a free market. "Regulations" are consistently used to shut out competition. Regan was a fascistic corporatist who increased money given to business interests from the tax till and restructured law to favor many big players. Many of these changes were not a dropping of restriction on business activities, but a re-alignment of the restrictions in specific corporations' favor.
Certainly relaxing the restrictions that corporations sent their lobbyists for. CA got hit big time thanks to Kenny Lay getting the energy market privatized and put in a spot exchange (like a commodity market for energy). The CA energy market was being manipulated from inside Enron Headquarters in Texas. They use the conventional market wisdom to sell their bad ideas. They gloss over the details they don't want you to know about.
The main problem with the state isn't a lack of transparency. The problem is the very nature of the state, in that it's one large and potentially all-consuming externality. Quite simply, if I cast a "good" vote, assuming it matters at all (that is, the majority votes my way) I get only a small share of the benefits and ditto on the costs. As a result, there's no incentive to educate oneself on this issues. Add in some people who want to game the system for their own benefit and you've got...
Not to mention the ruling class will never, EVER allow itself to be threatened. Campaign finance law? Most often it serves primarily to entrench incumbents by, for example, banning various types of political commercials in times close to elections (McCain-Feingold). What better tool for the ruling class than something that keeps the proles in line while convincing them that the ruling class is "keeping itself honest"?
"Eternal vigilance" is for suckers! I don't want an agency that I have to constantly watch, OK? I don't want the eternal threat of theft and murder, looming above myself and my descendants.
I want to have agencies that come to me, whilst I am sitting on my white, hairy ass, and plead with me, explaining to me why I should dare give them my money, and answering my every question and objection, until I am completely certain of their good intentions.
GW is of course not the entire government. Like within any other group of people, a market functions and brings out great efficiency given the circumstances in an internally peaceful environment.
I feel you on that. That's what I always hear people say though - the government is too stupid to blah blah blah - bush is too stupid to blah blah blah - obama is smart so he's going to get away with more blah blah blah
while i see a very efficient machine.
just because it's not good at the task it claims to do, doesn't mean it's not good at what it actually does.
i think half of the people i subscribe to are anarchists.
the only thing that stops me from declaring myself one is my "trying to deal with what we do have" mentality. instead of thinking too much about what i wish we had.
because morally, ideally, you guys are, of course, right.
Ditto. Except I feel that our constitution is designed to retain the essence of anarchism (abolishing a tyrannical government), therefore my answer when asked political affiliation is always constitutionalist/anarchist. The main concept of anarchism that is appealing to me is the question that Thomas Jefferson once pondered. Paraphrased: What right does one man have to tell another what he can or cannot do?
Except that the constitution itself goes against the very notions of equality and consent that Jefferson laid out in the declaration of independence. If you haven't read Lysander Spooner's "No Treason" yet, I highly advise it.
I've gotten into several discussion with anarchists about the constitution but, I've never really received any elaboration on what you just said. More or less when I say constitution, I mean the contract of the bill of rights.
I myself am apolitical, like Alex Jones, and many others.
I don't side with one particular party or "wing," but to sum my view on things, I am conservative where government power is concerned, however, I am liberal in a social sense.
I think you give corporations and the govenment too much credit for the intelligence leve. I think your observation on the limited liability aspect of stock ownership is correct. The real revolution for freedom would come first in actually following the Consitution and then in eliminating the limited liabiitiy aspect of stock ownership. That would limit the size and power of both government and and business.
ram0166 2 years ago
The Constitution:
Because it worked so well the first time.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
lol.
Hellsadvocate 2 years ago
great vid acid
ModelAnarchist 2 years ago
but we know about iraq. So government is not smart eater.
ltlegenda 2 years ago
Iraq is the excuse used. Iraq is one method by which the populace ends up supporting billions of dollars being funneled to connected special interests.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
The problem with the whole "eternal vigilance" thing is that people inevitably let their guard down when the state is relatively small and harmless, and only start paying attention when it's large, bloated, and so firmly entrenched that while most people agree that it sucks, most cannot imagine life without it either, so they tolerate the bloated monstrosity.
nonantianarchist 2 years ago
....democracy in a nutshell.
nonantianarchist 2 years ago
Wow...are you serious about the libertarians who support the drug war?! Honestly, that party is lost in my eyes.
ZamatoElite 2 years ago
Not LP members (as far as i know), just people who call themselves Libertarians. It's the cool thing to do now, "Republican" is sooo 80's.
Nonetheless, the party is still lost in my eyes. It was an interesting experiment, and the results are in.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
Oh well. Our last chance at some form of freedom down the drain. That's what we deserve for trying to bring social change through the system.
ZamatoElite 2 years ago
Our last chance of political freedom in our lifetime, yes. But then, we already knew that it was an iffy proposition, no?
Besides, you can still pursue freedom and happiness, in your own life, which will always be far more effective than anything a politician can do anyway.
PanzerDivisionBOM 2 years ago
Sure you can. Until the politicians decide that destroying your freedom and happiness will help them buy votes and appease the masses. Like I said, ignoring the state is only an option when its minimal. When it's up in your face at all times there's no escape.
nonantianarchist 2 years ago
I'm not saying that the state isn't bad. You know I'm not. I'm trying to say that, if your sense of personal efficacy and happiness is contingent upon effecting political change for the better, then you're going to be miserable. There are other things, which you can do for yourself and your loved ones, which have far better prospects at making you happy, and which will advance liberty in the meantime.
Hope that clears it up. : )
PanzerDivisionBOM 2 years ago
I know, I know, I'm just in a bad mood and venting.
nonantianarchist 2 years ago
Don't forget religious institutions.
TheWiretap 2 years ago
It's late, but one quick comment: I don't think the answer is to get rid of government because it is easily corrupted when no one is looking. I think the answer is transparency. All the problems we formed government to solve are not going to go away. Government introduces problems, but there are solutions to those as well, like campaign reform and transparency. The need to make government work is becoming more urgent as we understand more about how we are neglecting our life support, the earth.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
transparancy doesnt work all that well because most people simply could not give a shit what goes on in politics, they are simply ignorant and apathetic.
TheWiretap 2 years ago
And what is the incentive for those with unanswerable power to maintain transparency?
Looking through history, I do not find much evidence to support the assertion that populations have instituted governments to solve problems such as protection against threats near and far, and to supply a method of third-party decision making in disputes. It is a badly-told fairy tale.
Rather, I see a minority gaining the trust or acquiescence of the majority, always backed up with the threat of violence.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
I would recommend a fellow by the name of Bruce Bueno De Mesquita who has developed a mathematical political model based upon winning coalitions. Very revealing. What you state is true for winning coalitions that are small. Governments manage to do the right things about stuff that really matters and is visible to the people. We are in the midst of an all out propaganda war by corporations.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
Yes, and part of that is the idea that we can influence the corporate arm which we call "government" to act against corporate interests.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
No, their favorite spokesman was Reagan, who was originally sponsored by General Electric. Corporations just want to be free. Free to enslave all of humanity.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
No, the big corporations do not want a free market. "Regulations" are consistently used to shut out competition. Regan was a fascistic corporatist who increased money given to business interests from the tax till and restructured law to favor many big players. Many of these changes were not a dropping of restriction on business activities, but a re-alignment of the restrictions in specific corporations' favor.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
Certainly relaxing the restrictions that corporations sent their lobbyists for. CA got hit big time thanks to Kenny Lay getting the energy market privatized and put in a spot exchange (like a commodity market for energy). The CA energy market was being manipulated from inside Enron Headquarters in Texas. They use the conventional market wisdom to sell their bad ideas. They gloss over the details they don't want you to know about.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
The main problem with the state isn't a lack of transparency. The problem is the very nature of the state, in that it's one large and potentially all-consuming externality. Quite simply, if I cast a "good" vote, assuming it matters at all (that is, the majority votes my way) I get only a small share of the benefits and ditto on the costs. As a result, there's no incentive to educate oneself on this issues. Add in some people who want to game the system for their own benefit and you've got...
nonantianarchist 2 years ago
Not to mention the ruling class will never, EVER allow itself to be threatened. Campaign finance law? Most often it serves primarily to entrench incumbents by, for example, banning various types of political commercials in times close to elections (McCain-Feingold). What better tool for the ruling class than something that keeps the proles in line while convincing them that the ruling class is "keeping itself honest"?
nonantianarchist 2 years ago
"Eternal vigilance" is for suckers! I don't want an agency that I have to constantly watch, OK? I don't want the eternal threat of theft and murder, looming above myself and my descendants.
I want to have agencies that come to me, whilst I am sitting on my white, hairy ass, and plead with me, explaining to me why I should dare give them my money, and answering my every question and objection, until I am completely certain of their good intentions.
That, is what I call checks and balances.
PanzerDivisionBOM 2 years ago
Corporate campaign donations are an investment, eh? Hooray for electoral politics! :barf:
NoDeity 2 years ago
your title makes me think of dubya
he sure did put on a convincing idiot routine.
now cheney is writing a "tell all" book blaming bush for everything. lets hope that doesn't mean he wants to run for prez next.
onlywhenprovoked 2 years ago
GW is of course not the entire government. Like within any other group of people, a market functions and brings out great efficiency given the circumstances in an internally peaceful environment.
I'm done worrying about faces, myself.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
I feel you on that. That's what I always hear people say though - the government is too stupid to blah blah blah - bush is too stupid to blah blah blah - obama is smart so he's going to get away with more blah blah blah
while i see a very efficient machine.
just because it's not good at the task it claims to do, doesn't mean it's not good at what it actually does.
onlywhenprovoked 2 years ago
You seem to be stepping more in my direction, OWP :)
Kbiomech 2 years ago
hey kev, how you been?
you know i been on that fence a long time now.
i think half of the people i subscribe to are anarchists.
the only thing that stops me from declaring myself one is my "trying to deal with what we do have" mentality. instead of thinking too much about what i wish we had.
because morally, ideally, you guys are, of course, right.
onlywhenprovoked 2 years ago
I only laugh because I see me in your mirror. Took me a long time.
To get to where we want to be requires dealing with what we have been stuck with.
I've come to the point where it's not just idealism, but a life's goal. Not a bad place to be. Frustrating, but not bad.
Kbiomech 2 years ago
Ditto. Except I feel that our constitution is designed to retain the essence of anarchism (abolishing a tyrannical government), therefore my answer when asked political affiliation is always constitutionalist/anarchist. The main concept of anarchism that is appealing to me is the question that Thomas Jefferson once pondered. Paraphrased: What right does one man have to tell another what he can or cannot do?
smttysmth02gt 2 years ago
Except that the constitution itself goes against the very notions of equality and consent that Jefferson laid out in the declaration of independence. If you haven't read Lysander Spooner's "No Treason" yet, I highly advise it.
blackacidlizzard 2 years ago
I've gotten into several discussion with anarchists about the constitution but, I've never really received any elaboration on what you just said. More or less when I say constitution, I mean the contract of the bill of rights.
smttysmth02gt 2 years ago
I myself am apolitical, like Alex Jones, and many others.
I don't side with one particular party or "wing," but to sum my view on things, I am conservative where government power is concerned, however, I am liberal in a social sense.
Airportchris2 2 years ago
I am also apolitical, fuck politics, self government is the only option if you want to live free
TheWiretap 2 years ago
If only it were the 18th century.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
forget the ways of old, this is the 21st century, OUR time, OUR age.
TheWiretap 2 years ago