bottom line ron Paul's message is freedom but he is just the start others will follow in his shoes and with all the support he has had just goes to prove how many people are waking up.
I have written a book to establish taking this country back from the machines based upon natural rights being explained in what I call Egonomics which is mans transfers of nature to technology, sort of like the terminator movie or the matrix movie; are you interested?
So to put voting in perspective. It's a slight but only wedge I have every 4 years. The lessor of evils is 3, (not 2)and I am voting for Ron Paul. Let's say voting republican is 45%, democrat 45% and independent 10% and compare that to: 45% death by hanging - 45% death by firing squad or 10% escape scott free. Ron Paul has picked up a lot of momentum and although skeptical I'm going for the long shot
The problem with the average american is not that he/she is stupid but rather, unthinking. I just watched your [Ron Paul is a waste of time] which led me to this video. You are a thinking person, I like to think I am too and I want you to think about this. Voting every 4 years seems to be a ritual of choosing the lesser of 2 evils (cuz an independent will never make it). I stopped voting 3 elections ago because they are bought and paid for long before we get to the polls. Opps outta space...
And in May when you posted this, you might have been right. RP had no chance back then. But winning the majority of the independent vote in IA and 10% total in IA shows he does has significant support. I can't wait to see you proven wrong.
Second to last in IA, IA means nothing, its an activist and religious wacko state. The number of independents in NH far outweighs IA, and the number of christians is also significantly lower. Huckabee does not stand a chance, I am confident RP places in the top 2 in NH.
dude you are no answer to any ones problems, your ideas are shabby, and your logic is, well far from anything realistic.
Educate the people of liberty? Umm ok then what? we take are guns to the capitols? i mean wtf saying lets educate the masses, wtf is that going to do without a follow up action.
AND LMAO. WTF other way is there besides voting to pick a leader. WTF should we just have a gang like society.
Going with guns to the capitol is one option. And ganglike societies are less immoral than governments as we have them nowadays.
As for an 11th generation American, it is likiley that the first generation of your family did exactly that...go to the then government and make it get the fuck out of your life.
Yes, I want government out of my life and that is why i support Ron Paul. Marching to the capitol with guns, is merely make believe and will never happen anytime soon, with the docile American people.
And a gang like society would not bring good, people are naturally evil and along with your gangs will be mass killing, stealing, rapeing, and everything that comes along with gangs now a days.
First of all I'am going to say who the fuck do you plan on voting for Guiliani, you fucking idiot. First, it takes someone like Ron Paul to be in office for anything to even start to change. I know your type, you are one of them people that are against anything positive or good. Hey Captain Caveman, you probably haven't logged off in three years. Go get a fucking haircut then a shower, then get back to your game of Dungeons and Dragons and shut the FUCK UP!
i agree with you but as someone said below - talking sucks! nobody listens to anybody else unless they agree with them! Well, a few boddy language and vocal influences i guess but its fucking pointless - we become more and more childlike as we grow up - its impossible to get children to listen unless you tell them in a way that demands respect so thats why we have goverments etc becuase they are all glam and powerful looking so they demand respect
What about Religion? It seems to spread just fine yet is invariably based in superstition & blind faith--not "factually correct & logically valid". Have you ever seen the movies THX 1138 or 1984? 1984 is probably an obvious reference but I highly suggest THX. "A prison without walls" is the overall idea of THX, very consistent with your statement that our government has no real power. Listen to the director commentary by Lucas & Murch.
True, but not nearly fast enough. Especially when it seems that our christian nation is becoming even more so by the day and our culture is developing to be more and more polarized. I can't say I think things look well for fellow Atheists.
What alternative organization do you suppose will arise among the free anarchists? The Corporation. The international corporate landscape free from the restraint of state limitation has the power to oppress as many if not more people than has the state in the past 100 years. The path to liberty and peace is democratic revival, and a reformist approach. I agree with you when you say we all must spread ideas, and awaken the long dormant political culture in America.
Anarchy may be the only viable way for true liberty, but it is not logical. How does an anarchy organize a defence against enemy states? Failing to do so would put you right back in a state, after all.
Arguments against anarchy aside, I do agree with your take on Ron Paul. Even if he were elected and really does have the best intentions. The President does not make laws or miracles. I wish more people would see that.
Radical abolition can have brutal side effects. Look at the 1860s. "Cold turkey" is one way to go but not the only way. I can't really dispute your anarchist philosophy; I don't quite share it but I do acknowledge its arguability. Bottom line for me is that Ron Paul enlightens people and is at *least* a big move in the right direction.
I've been trying the "just talk to people" method for years; it sucks. Let's do this and see where we can take it.
Whether the state is "legimate" or not is irrelevant. I will use "illegitimate" power any day if I can gain from it. So will almost anyone else. That's why the State will never be eliminated. What's moral or immoral doesn't a matter. This whole idea that the State will be eliminated if everyone comes to realizes it is immoral is pipe dream.
What I WOULD support is active resistance using the methods of "dropping out" where an individual sacrifices wealth to drop below the levels where taxation is no longer an issue. I also support trade via barter or "grey markets" where a protester removes their personal gain from unfair taxation. Both are much harder now than ever before - and you can guarantee that is NOT by accident.
I cannot agree, due to the fact that without a limited government the wolves cull the sheep in an uncontrolled manor. The founders who wrote the constitution understood the function of a limited republic - we lost that with the war on the states and the encroachment of centralized banking - the state has continued to usurp power and gives us the monstrous abomination we have now.
That wasnt your TYPICALL audience DUECHEBAG. RON PAUL brought you extra audience. RON PAUL is exploding and you "felt its effects" of them. None of your videos will get that kind of response as quickly. Sorry dude Your just not that important. I aint either dont feel bad. ROFL you thouhgt you were important to US Ron PAULers?
What tradition? The only tradition I see myself continuing is the one of revealing the hypocrisy of people like you. In fact, there's nothing more entertaining than showing how childish and poor at arguing people like you really are, despite that pseudo-superiority you speak with. You didn't answer my responses with legitimate argument; instead, you labeled me as another one of "those people."
Despite Ron Paul probably filling your exact political requirements, you run and hide in a corner, trying to be more fringe than the other libertarians around you. This kind of childishness is the EXACT reason liberty is dying. The goal of liberty is not some kind of anti-popularity contest, being "weirder" than the political extremist next to you, making creepier videos than the best of them; the goal of liberty is to defend freedom and support those who defend it.
And by the way, you don't have to mention anything about your typical audience. Writing that long ass article and creating dozens of videos on the topic of liberty More than implies that you consider yourself some kind of tuned in, important political person. No one makes videos Not to be watched.
Welcome. Yes you did. Lies. Its in one of your videos; however, none of your videos are worth watching more than once, hence the single star, so I wont try to point it out. Try making something else. Your time would be better spent.
Hey, XOmniverse, that was a really awesome response to what I said; going to delete these comments as well? I know you're afraid of real argument and all.
It is true, though, that the best response when you don't know what the hell you're talking about is to shut your goddam mouth; sucks I had to embarrass you on your own moronic video though.
Is thinking and responding beyond one syllable like a human being of average intelligence far too difficult for your little brain? Yeah, I understand; it's alright.
Hey I liked your video. I agree that realistically it is true and really the President alone can't really do anything meaningful. Still supporting Ron Paul will help make his message better known. Talking to people is a great (and obvious) idea as well.
oliviathecanadian, I don't think it's a matter of stupidity. I'm not stupid, but I still would not be an anarchist if I thought the State was immoral. The mistake XOmniverse is making is assuming that if people think something is immoral they'll refrain from it. The State is just supposed to disappear if everyeone realizes it has no moral legitimacy. That idea is so naive.
I DONT think he said that, he is saying that we need something other than the government to be used in case if someone impinges on others rights. This is because the government has a history of using force on innocent individuals.
Apparently my efforts to get people to not act like immature 14 year olds and actually think before speaking failed miserably. Congratulations, you continue the Youtube tradition of making Ron Paul's fan base look like a bunch of idiots.
I should also point out that I only disabled comments on those specific videos. Notice how you were still able to comment on this one? The one I specifically directed you to from the Ron Paul video? Yeah I'm real cowardly alright.
Yes, I watched all your videos, and from what I gathered from watching both of your Ron Paul videos (multiple times), you AGREED with him on almost every issue, and the issues you disagreed on, you were wrong or uninformed about---likely reading from some inaccurate website on all accounts.
And the implication that a person can't be a Christian (personally) and defend liberty is absolutely disgusting, ignorant, and full of hate. It's just as shallow as the idiotic christians who refuse to give you attention because you don't spread their beliefs.
And as far as disabling comments goes: yes, it was extremely cowardly; you don't criticize something then disable feedback, or enable feedback in a Different area, hiding from argument. Coward.
And as far as This video is concerned, you sitting in your dark room, reading off a computer screen about how the new world order is coming (which, I agree, it definitely is) does positively and absolutely nothing. You are preaching to the goddam choir.
You criticize Ron Paul as being some sort of "waste of time" as you pointlessly sit in your room, growing out your hair, screaming that the government is coming for us. If the government is coming for us (which it is) THEN GET OUT THERE AND FUCKING DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. I can't Stand this kind of political masturbation. At least Ron Paul is doing something good for liberty, and as I may add, HAS been doing something for it for a Very long time.
Voting is not only a waste of time, it's morally wrong. The franchise IS coercion. Saying "pick one of these two guns, point it at your head and pull the trigger." is NOT a valid way to do business. Disconnect and drop out.
The debate held at Free Domain Radio as of rescently is why I changed my mind of why anarcho-capitalist can not support reformers. watch?v=DcdxuxufAKY
I totally changed my mind on supportig Ron Paul. The government needs to go and that is not done by supporting Ron Paul and giving people an option to opt-out from dismantling the government which isn't really going to change anything. Abolishement not Reform!
True freedom is in the mind. We can have all the given liberties from the state and be free or not depending on how free we are from wrong/mistaken/manipulated thinking. Personally, I advocate takine away liberties of all if it means hindering criminals. I do not mind however many cameras are watching me. A state is not intrinsically malevolent. I am speaking in general, not about your currentn government nor about mine in the UK here. The state can be legitimate.
"True freedom in the mind"? And when the state starts burning books and punishing people for expressing certain thoughts? And if the state is in the business of stopping crime, the only moral action it could take is suicide.
I can not see my State burning books. And only in such countries as Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan is someone punished by the State for expressing opinions. But even there, freedom can still be in the mind (if not expressed). Who is going to protect me from your anarchist free for all?
I agree with you on morality. There are many moralities in the State in which I live.
"it's at whose expense do you intend to be protected"?
You could ask the same question under your Market Anarchy, if indeed that MA actually maintains conditions for production, distribution and exchange. There has never existed a state (situation) of MA. It's probably a utopia like Communism.
OK, but not in the modern era. Can you imagine America going over to Market Anarchy? Eventually the States of Canada and Mexico would land grap because they could, or to just create stability.
How would they grab land? There would be armed people on that land who don't want a state.
As far as "not in the modern era", how do you define modern? Human beings have been around for 100,000 years, and civilization for about 10,000. Are you claiming that my examples are invalid because they didn't occur in the last 150 years or so?
No, I am claiming that the State has become necessary in the last 200 years and that alternatives to a State would not survive being next to actual neighbouring States. I think that in practice, your USA without a State would be weak and unable to defend itself if it were Stateless. And let's take having nuclear weapons out of the equation (things incidentally built up by the State). And as for having no States at all, well that would be a State of Nature a la Thomas Hobbes.
I am just saying that in my opinion the State has the "monopoly of violence" becasue it is or is supposed to be of the people, for the people, etc. I do not see private armies looking at the interests of the people, nor do I see them working together effectively. Cohesiveness makes strength. Also, I do not see a safe environment for production, distribution and exchange existing without a stable economy and a State playing mediator and regulator.
A government is just a group of individuals who declare sovereignty over a geographic area and impose their rules with force. What magic powers are wielded by government that could not be either eliminated or provided for in a free market?
A State is a land run as one unit. The government is the body of people that run that State. In my opinion when that State has cohesion, and that government has the will of the people and operates with reason then it is more than a group of people. I think government and the State makes for cohesion which would not be there otherwise. Plus, it has legal and regulatory control, without which bosses would try to produce at any cost (be it lives, welfare, pollution) for maximum profit.
I come up with this from pre and early 20th century Europe, particularly Britain. Before the Labout Party existed in Britain, trade unions were illegal, workers had few rights. It took agitation of worker movemets and the power of the new working class vote to improve conditions for workers. And it did not happen over night. Before the twentieth century government here was dominated by the rich, the landed, and industrialists - that gave no worker's rights
In my opinion, government by the rich, landed and industrialist, which we had before one person one vote, is the same as no government because he/she that has power in with wealth rules in anarchy. It took the vote for everyone to change things.
No, I do not favour mob rule. Benevolent dictatorship would probably be the ideal (!). No, I favour where people can remove a bad government or at least make it change it's ways.
Well, I consider the State and government only came into existence because it didn't work without a central government. As for no government, I do not think that is effective. I see no government being survival of the fittest - i.e, Nazism without a State. And I see Nazism without as State as bad as Nazism with a State.
Godwin's Law, in effect. I guess the discussion is over. There's no logical (or practical) connection between anarchism or Nazism, and I'm not sure what you mean by "it didn't work without a central government." Precious few examples of historical anarchy, and they all worked quite well, the two most common examples having lasted hundreds of years each.
Fyi the sound is all fucked up on your Rand Paul video.
hawanja 1 year ago
bottom line ron Paul's message is freedom but he is just the start others will follow in his shoes and with all the support he has had just goes to prove how many people are waking up.
fuckgreed 3 years ago
I have written a book to establish taking this country back from the machines based upon natural rights being explained in what I call Egonomics which is mans transfers of nature to technology, sort of like the terminator movie or the matrix movie; are you interested?
waypor1 2 years ago
...Continued from...
So to put voting in perspective. It's a slight but only wedge I have every 4 years. The lessor of evils is 3, (not 2)and I am voting for Ron Paul. Let's say voting republican is 45%, democrat 45% and independent 10% and compare that to: 45% death by hanging - 45% death by firing squad or 10% escape scott free. Ron Paul has picked up a lot of momentum and although skeptical I'm going for the long shot
wazooavenue 3 years ago
The problem with the average american is not that he/she is stupid but rather, unthinking. I just watched your [Ron Paul is a waste of time] which led me to this video. You are a thinking person, I like to think I am too and I want you to think about this. Voting every 4 years seems to be a ritual of choosing the lesser of 2 evils (cuz an independent will never make it). I stopped voting 3 elections ago because they are bought and paid for long before we get to the polls. Opps outta space...
wazooavenue 3 years ago
And in May when you posted this, you might have been right. RP had no chance back then. But winning the majority of the independent vote in IA and 10% total in IA shows he does has significant support. I can't wait to see you proven wrong.
Freedumb1105 4 years ago
He was 2nd to last. Yeah I'm being proven wrong alright :P
XOmniverse 4 years ago
Second to last in IA, IA means nothing, its an activist and religious wacko state. The number of independents in NH far outweighs IA, and the number of christians is also significantly lower. Huckabee does not stand a chance, I am confident RP places in the top 2 in NH.
Freedumb1105 4 years ago
Comment removed
RyDCo 1 year ago
dude you are no answer to any ones problems, your ideas are shabby, and your logic is, well far from anything realistic.
Educate the people of liberty? Umm ok then what? we take are guns to the capitols? i mean wtf saying lets educate the masses, wtf is that going to do without a follow up action.
AND LMAO. WTF other way is there besides voting to pick a leader. WTF should we just have a gang like society.
Go piss on someone elses forefathers not mine.
Signed by a 11th generation American
shadowmongoose02 4 years ago
Going with guns to the capitol is one option. And ganglike societies are less immoral than governments as we have them nowadays.
As for an 11th generation American, it is likiley that the first generation of your family did exactly that...go to the then government and make it get the fuck out of your life.
Bardock42 4 years ago
Yes, I want government out of my life and that is why i support Ron Paul. Marching to the capitol with guns, is merely make believe and will never happen anytime soon, with the docile American people.
And a gang like society would not bring good, people are naturally evil and along with your gangs will be mass killing, stealing, rapeing, and everything that comes along with gangs now a days.
shadowmongoose02 4 years ago
First of all I'am going to say who the fuck do you plan on voting for Guiliani, you fucking idiot. First, it takes someone like Ron Paul to be in office for anything to even start to change. I know your type, you are one of them people that are against anything positive or good. Hey Captain Caveman, you probably haven't logged off in three years. Go get a fucking haircut then a shower, then get back to your game of Dungeons and Dragons and shut the FUCK UP!
noylee07 4 years ago
Either you're a complete idiot or you just didn't watch the video.
XOmniverse 4 years ago
@noylee07 You're obviously a statist if you think that we need politicians to change the world.
vaguelyhumanoid 1 year ago
i agree with you but as someone said below - talking sucks! nobody listens to anybody else unless they agree with them! Well, a few boddy language and vocal influences i guess but its fucking pointless - we become more and more childlike as we grow up - its impossible to get children to listen unless you tell them in a way that demands respect so thats why we have goverments etc becuase they are all glam and powerful looking so they demand respect
48C 4 years ago
What about Religion? It seems to spread just fine yet is invariably based in superstition & blind faith--not "factually correct & logically valid". Have you ever seen the movies THX 1138 or 1984? 1984 is probably an obvious reference but I highly suggest THX. "A prison without walls" is the overall idea of THX, very consistent with your statement that our government has no real power. Listen to the director commentary by Lucas & Murch.
VidiotGeek 4 years ago
What is happening to religion now that we have hard science?
Religion was filling a vacuum. Now that the truth is coming out, religion is being ousted.
XOmniverse 4 years ago
True, but not nearly fast enough. Especially when it seems that our christian nation is becoming even more so by the day and our culture is developing to be more and more polarized. I can't say I think things look well for fellow Atheists.
VidiotGeek 4 years ago
What alternative organization do you suppose will arise among the free anarchists? The Corporation. The international corporate landscape free from the restraint of state limitation has the power to oppress as many if not more people than has the state in the past 100 years. The path to liberty and peace is democratic revival, and a reformist approach. I agree with you when you say we all must spread ideas, and awaken the long dormant political culture in America.
ericdhroe 4 years ago
Anarchy may be the only viable way for true liberty, but it is not logical. How does an anarchy organize a defence against enemy states? Failing to do so would put you right back in a state, after all.
Arguments against anarchy aside, I do agree with your take on Ron Paul. Even if he were elected and really does have the best intentions. The President does not make laws or miracles. I wish more people would see that.
richardshort2001 4 years ago
Radical abolition can have brutal side effects. Look at the 1860s. "Cold turkey" is one way to go but not the only way. I can't really dispute your anarchist philosophy; I don't quite share it but I do acknowledge its arguability. Bottom line for me is that Ron Paul enlightens people and is at *least* a big move in the right direction.
I've been trying the "just talk to people" method for years; it sucks. Let's do this and see where we can take it.
ProspectorSam 4 years ago
Whether the state is "legimate" or not is irrelevant. I will use "illegitimate" power any day if I can gain from it. So will almost anyone else. That's why the State will never be eliminated. What's moral or immoral doesn't a matter. This whole idea that the State will be eliminated if everyone comes to realizes it is immoral is pipe dream.
DackBev 4 years ago
What I WOULD support is active resistance using the methods of "dropping out" where an individual sacrifices wealth to drop below the levels where taxation is no longer an issue. I also support trade via barter or "grey markets" where a protester removes their personal gain from unfair taxation. Both are much harder now than ever before - and you can guarantee that is NOT by accident.
wotansmann 4 years ago
I cannot agree, due to the fact that without a limited government the wolves cull the sheep in an uncontrolled manor. The founders who wrote the constitution understood the function of a limited republic - we lost that with the war on the states and the encroachment of centralized banking - the state has continued to usurp power and gives us the monstrous abomination we have now.
wotansmann 4 years ago
That wasnt your TYPICALL audience DUECHEBAG. RON PAUL brought you extra audience. RON PAUL is exploding and you "felt its effects" of them. None of your videos will get that kind of response as quickly. Sorry dude Your just not that important. I aint either dont feel bad. ROFL you thouhgt you were important to US Ron PAULers?
h20Enthusiast 4 years ago
I never said anything about my typical audience, or me being very important.
I see you too are continuing the tradition I mentioned below. Congrats.
XOmniverse 4 years ago
What tradition? The only tradition I see myself continuing is the one of revealing the hypocrisy of people like you. In fact, there's nothing more entertaining than showing how childish and poor at arguing people like you really are, despite that pseudo-superiority you speak with. You didn't answer my responses with legitimate argument; instead, you labeled me as another one of "those people."
snarge 4 years ago
Despite Ron Paul probably filling your exact political requirements, you run and hide in a corner, trying to be more fringe than the other libertarians around you. This kind of childishness is the EXACT reason liberty is dying. The goal of liberty is not some kind of anti-popularity contest, being "weirder" than the political extremist next to you, making creepier videos than the best of them; the goal of liberty is to defend freedom and support those who defend it.
snarge 4 years ago
And by the way, you don't have to mention anything about your typical audience. Writing that long ass article and creating dozens of videos on the topic of liberty More than implies that you consider yourself some kind of tuned in, important political person. No one makes videos Not to be watched.
snarge 4 years ago
Welcome. Yes you did. Lies. Its in one of your videos; however, none of your videos are worth watching more than once, hence the single star, so I wont try to point it out. Try making something else. Your time would be better spent.
h20Enthusiast 4 years ago
Hey, XOmniverse, that was a really awesome response to what I said; going to delete these comments as well? I know you're afraid of real argument and all.
It is true, though, that the best response when you don't know what the hell you're talking about is to shut your goddam mouth; sucks I had to embarrass you on your own moronic video though.
snarge 4 years ago
*yawn*
XOmniverse 4 years ago
Wow! That's an even better comment!
Unintelligent and uninformed coward all at once!
Is thinking and responding beyond one syllable like a human being of average intelligence far too difficult for your little brain? Yeah, I understand; it's alright.
snarge 4 years ago
Hey I liked your video. I agree that realistically it is true and really the President alone can't really do anything meaningful. Still supporting Ron Paul will help make his message better known. Talking to people is a great (and obvious) idea as well.
overmind25 4 years ago
Are you sure the majority would agree with this.., there are alot of stupid ppl out there......you are an ayn rand fan right.......?
oliviathecanadian 4 years ago
oliviathecanadian, I don't think it's a matter of stupidity. I'm not stupid, but I still would not be an anarchist if I thought the State was immoral. The mistake XOmniverse is making is assuming that if people think something is immoral they'll refrain from it. The State is just supposed to disappear if everyeone realizes it has no moral legitimacy. That idea is so naive.
DackBev 4 years ago
I DONT think he said that, he is saying that we need something other than the government to be used in case if someone impinges on others rights. This is because the government has a history of using force on innocent individuals.
oliviathecanadian 4 years ago
By the way, you're a coward for disabling comments. Did people hurt your feelings too much? Aww...
snarge 4 years ago
Apparently my efforts to get people to not act like immature 14 year olds and actually think before speaking failed miserably. Congratulations, you continue the Youtube tradition of making Ron Paul's fan base look like a bunch of idiots.
XOmniverse 4 years ago
I should also point out that I only disabled comments on those specific videos. Notice how you were still able to comment on this one? The one I specifically directed you to from the Ron Paul video? Yeah I'm real cowardly alright.
Did you even watch this video?
XOmniverse 4 years ago
Yes, I watched all your videos, and from what I gathered from watching both of your Ron Paul videos (multiple times), you AGREED with him on almost every issue, and the issues you disagreed on, you were wrong or uninformed about---likely reading from some inaccurate website on all accounts.
snarge 4 years ago
And the implication that a person can't be a Christian (personally) and defend liberty is absolutely disgusting, ignorant, and full of hate. It's just as shallow as the idiotic christians who refuse to give you attention because you don't spread their beliefs.
And as far as disabling comments goes: yes, it was extremely cowardly; you don't criticize something then disable feedback, or enable feedback in a Different area, hiding from argument. Coward.
snarge 4 years ago
And as far as This video is concerned, you sitting in your dark room, reading off a computer screen about how the new world order is coming (which, I agree, it definitely is) does positively and absolutely nothing. You are preaching to the goddam choir.
snarge 4 years ago
You criticize Ron Paul as being some sort of "waste of time" as you pointlessly sit in your room, growing out your hair, screaming that the government is coming for us. If the government is coming for us (which it is) THEN GET OUT THERE AND FUCKING DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. I can't Stand this kind of political masturbation. At least Ron Paul is doing something good for liberty, and as I may add, HAS been doing something for it for a Very long time.
snarge 4 years ago
Voting is not only a waste of time, it's morally wrong. The franchise IS coercion. Saying "pick one of these two guns, point it at your head and pull the trigger." is NOT a valid way to do business. Disconnect and drop out.
Kbiomech 4 years ago
Your Ron Paul information is so weak. Learn to actually research and read; it'd be super helpful.
snarge 4 years ago
Look at this video all you voters: Electronic Voting Machines Whistle Blower
MaxInfidelis 4 years ago
The debate held at Free Domain Radio as of rescently is why I changed my mind of why anarcho-capitalist can not support reformers. watch?v=DcdxuxufAKY
lordmetroid 4 years ago
I totally changed my mind on supportig Ron Paul. The government needs to go and that is not done by supporting Ron Paul and giving people an option to opt-out from dismantling the government which isn't really going to change anything. Abolishement not Reform!
lordmetroid 4 years ago
I still think you should give Ru Paul a chance before you even consider giving Ron Paul office.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
True freedom is in the mind. We can have all the given liberties from the state and be free or not depending on how free we are from wrong/mistaken/manipulated thinking. Personally, I advocate takine away liberties of all if it means hindering criminals. I do not mind however many cameras are watching me. A state is not intrinsically malevolent. I am speaking in general, not about your currentn government nor about mine in the UK here. The state can be legitimate.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
sorry about my typos.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
"True freedom in the mind"? And when the state starts burning books and punishing people for expressing certain thoughts? And if the state is in the business of stopping crime, the only moral action it could take is suicide.
XOmniverse 4 years ago
but then who decides morality?
I can not see my State burning books. And only in such countries as Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan is someone punished by the State for expressing opinions. But even there, freedom can still be in the mind (if not expressed). Who is going to protect me from your anarchist free for all?
fr3thinker 4 years ago
"but then who decides morality?"
Why does an authority figure have to decide this? Morality follows naturally from rational thought.
The question isn't who is going to protect you (a private defense agency, if you're smart). It's at whose expense do you intend to be protected?
XOmniverse 4 years ago
I agree with you on morality. There are many moralities in the State in which I live.
"it's at whose expense do you intend to be protected"?
You could ask the same question under your Market Anarchy, if indeed that MA actually maintains conditions for production, distribution and exchange. There has never existed a state (situation) of MA. It's probably a utopia like Communism.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
Utopia? No. It wouldn't be perfect. Perfection is impossible with regards to a social system.
As far as a market anarchy never existing, I suggest you research:
Medieval Iceland
Medieval Ireland
The American "Old West"
Bronze Age India
XOmniverse 4 years ago
OK, but not in the modern era. Can you imagine America going over to Market Anarchy? Eventually the States of Canada and Mexico would land grap because they could, or to just create stability.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
How would they grab land? There would be armed people on that land who don't want a state.
As far as "not in the modern era", how do you define modern? Human beings have been around for 100,000 years, and civilization for about 10,000. Are you claiming that my examples are invalid because they didn't occur in the last 150 years or so?
XOmniverse 4 years ago
No, I am claiming that the State has become necessary in the last 200 years and that alternatives to a State would not survive being next to actual neighbouring States. I think that in practice, your USA without a State would be weak and unable to defend itself if it were Stateless. And let's take having nuclear weapons out of the equation (things incidentally built up by the State). And as for having no States at all, well that would be a State of Nature a la Thomas Hobbes.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
Why must defense be a state monopoly?
LibertyIsNotGiven 4 years ago
I am just saying that in my opinion the State has the "monopoly of violence" becasue it is or is supposed to be of the people, for the people, etc. I do not see private armies looking at the interests of the people, nor do I see them working together effectively. Cohesiveness makes strength. Also, I do not see a safe environment for production, distribution and exchange existing without a stable economy and a State playing mediator and regulator.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
A government is just a group of individuals who declare sovereignty over a geographic area and impose their rules with force. What magic powers are wielded by government that could not be either eliminated or provided for in a free market?
LibertyIsNotGiven 4 years ago
A State is a land run as one unit. The government is the body of people that run that State. In my opinion when that State has cohesion, and that government has the will of the people and operates with reason then it is more than a group of people. I think government and the State makes for cohesion which would not be there otherwise. Plus, it has legal and regulatory control, without which bosses would try to produce at any cost (be it lives, welfare, pollution) for maximum profit.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
"...government has the will of the people and operates with reason..."
Any examples of this ever happening? Anarchy is largely theory, yes, but empirical evidence speaks volumes against the benevolence of governments.
"...it has legal and regulatory control..."
Through brute force, yes, but without moral basis.
"...without which bosses would try to produce at any cost...for maximum profit..."
Where do you come up with the idea that only states can ensure non-aggression?
LibertyIsNotGiven 4 years ago
I come up with this from pre and early 20th century Europe, particularly Britain. Before the Labout Party existed in Britain, trade unions were illegal, workers had few rights. It took agitation of worker movemets and the power of the new working class vote to improve conditions for workers. And it did not happen over night. Before the twentieth century government here was dominated by the rich, the landed, and industrialists - that gave no worker's rights
fr3thinker 4 years ago
In my opinion, government by the rich, landed and industrialist, which we had before one person one vote, is the same as no government because he/she that has power in with wealth rules in anarchy. It took the vote for everyone to change things.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
So you favor mob rule?
LibertyIsNotGiven 4 years ago
No, I do not favour mob rule. Benevolent dictatorship would probably be the ideal (!). No, I favour where people can remove a bad government or at least make it change it's ways.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
I don't see how your problems with governments correlate to perceived problems with a stateless market.
LibertyIsNotGiven 4 years ago
Well, I consider the State and government only came into existence because it didn't work without a central government. As for no government, I do not think that is effective. I see no government being survival of the fittest - i.e, Nazism without a State. And I see Nazism without as State as bad as Nazism with a State.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
Godwin's Law, in effect. I guess the discussion is over. There's no logical (or practical) connection between anarchism or Nazism, and I'm not sure what you mean by "it didn't work without a central government." Precious few examples of historical anarchy, and they all worked quite well, the two most common examples having lasted hundreds of years each.
LibertyIsNotGiven 4 years ago
Maybe it is just that I am pessimistic about humnaity and that you are optimistic.
But in the 'modern era' - i.e, the last 200 years? Give me an example of anarchy working? Or better still, try it somewhere now.
I am tired too by the way.
fr3thinker 4 years ago
word
CelticRobot 4 years ago
5 stars
scottferrie 4 years ago