Why a Voluntary Society is Preferable

[iOWNme]

For those here who actually like to think about things.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0MPIXfaRbs



There is a Q&A section at 26:20 or so. Gets interesting.

[osoab]

i volunteer not to be a part of society

[Hitch]

i volunteer not to be a part of society

I volunteer to opt out as well. Fuck em.

[EE_]

For those here who actually like to think about things.

There is a Q&A section at 26:20 or so. Gets interesting.

I'm tired of thinking about things, I like doing things!

Uh, there was no Q&A, just Larken running his fat trap.
There was one guy with his hand raised for 10 minutes and never got to ask. Maybe Larken was afraid he might ask a question he had no answer for? Larken doesn't seem to have any answers.

I still have hope that one day all these Larken/Josie/iOWNme videos and posts will produce a solution...

[crimethink]

A "voluntary society" is pure fantasy. It completely denies human nature.

[iOWNme]

I'm tired of thinking about things, I like doing things!

Then why do you keep asking me how YOU are going to run YOUR life without a parasitic ruling class bossing you around and stealing your money? You STILL dont even understand the concepts being discussed here.


Uh, there was no Q&A, just Larken running his fat trap.
There was one guy with his hand raised for 10 minutes and never got to ask. Maybe Larken was afraid he might ask a question he had no answer for? Larken doesn't seem to have any answers.

Umm.....There were several questions asked at the end. But you would have to actually watch the video to know that.


I still have hope that one day all these Larken/Josie/iOWNme videos and posts will produce a solution...

Again, the only idea presented here, is that we shouldnt have a group of people who have the moral right to steal from us, in order to protect us from thieves. We shouldnt have a group of people who have the moral right to murder us, in order to protect us from murderers. We shouldnt have a group of men with the moral right to control our lives and property, in order to protect us from others who may try to control our lives and property.

Can you articulate to me a single idea presented here that you disagree with? Why?

[iOWNme]

A "voluntary society" is pure fantasy. It completely denies human nature.

So YOU PERSONALLY use non-voluntary means in your everyday life? Are YOU PERSONALLY living in a 'fantasy'?

Can you articulate to me a single idea presented here that you disagree with? Why?

I doubt it, because you obviously didnt watch this video, nor are you familiar with the Philosophy of Voluntaryism. Voluntaryism isnt the idea that there are no bad people. Its the idea that we shouldnt create a fictional monster for the bad people to use against us. Individual bad guys can only do so much damage on their own. But trick their fellow man into believing in 'Government' and you have just given the 'bad guys' the only tool they will ever need to enslave everyone.

[EE_]

Then why do you keep asking me how YOU are going to run YOUR life without a parasitic ruling class bossing you around and stealing your money? You STILL dont even understand the concepts being discussed here.

I run my life just fine without any help. I only pay the extortion fee to keep my quality of life and stay alive.
There are always going to be people in this world that will kill you for your money. I do my best to give them as little as possible and stay clear of them.



Umm.....There were several questions asked at the end. But you would have to actually watch the video to know that.

There were no questions in the Q&E part.


Again, the only idea presented here, is that we shouldnt have a group of people who have the moral right to steal from us, in order to protect us from thieves. We shouldnt have a group of people who have the moral right to murder us, in order to protect us from murderers. We shouldnt have a group of men with the moral right to control our lives and property, in order to protect us from others who may try to control our lives and property.

Got it!... Now what happens?


Can you articulate to me a single idea presented here that you disagree with? Why?

I agree with all points except how the world can run with everything being only voluntary.
Please explain how every segment of society works strictly on a voluntary basis. Infrastructure, military, geopolitical relations, national emergencies, violations of your rights, etc.

Here's a very important question for you. Please answer it.
If a criminal thug threatens your life with a gun...if you get the chance, should you shoot him in the face, or just give him what he wants and hope he doesn't harm you?

You may be able to awaken many people to these realities, but there are many many more you will not.

Let's remove the people you will not awaken from the equation and see who's left.

Here's the list:

All government employees, federal and state (the largest employer in the US)
The military
All police
All welfare recipients (25% to 50% of the population)
The ultra-rich (1% of the population)
The rich (10% of the population)
The well off (20% of the population)
The Jews (2% of the population)
The weak, sick and frail
Liberals (72 million)
Republicans (55 million)
Gays (5 million?)
Foreigners living in the US (20 to 40 million)
Illegal aliens in the US (20 to 40 million)

Who does that leave? 5%? -->A bunch of middle class working slobs beating their brains out trying to make ends meet, barely having time to sleep between work, family and obligations.

The funny part of all this is, I've always had answers to the same questions I ask you and I do have some solutions.
You or nobody else here ever tries to discuss them.

[mick silver]

lets try this stay on your dirt and I will do the same

[crimethink]

So YOU PERSONALLY use non-voluntary means in your everyday life? Are YOU PERSONALLY living in a 'fantasy'?

Can you articulate to me a single idea presented here that you disagree with? Why?

I doubt it, because you obviously didnt watch this video, nor are you familiar with the Philosophy of Voluntaryism. Voluntaryism isnt the idea that there are no bad people. Its the idea that we shouldnt create a fictional monster for the bad people to use against us. Individual bad guys can only do so much damage on their own. But trick their fellow man into believing in 'Government' and you have just given the 'bad guys' the only tool they will ever need to enslave everyone.

Your proposed / ideal society is utopian - an idea that cannot be achieved. It is just as impossible as sustained true communism.

Commissioning a government to guide society is the best achievement flawed humans can do. Provided that government can be altered or eliminated, and replaced when it becomes malevolent, as the Declaration of Independence states is our inherent right, such government is the best of a "necessary evil."

The problem over the last two centuries is that the People have allowed the Federal regime, and the States, to amass more and more power without popular authority. The Declaration of Independence is now just a "quaint historical document" rather than the living shrine of eternal, inherent rights recognized as equal to the Bill of Rights. The "case law" of the black-robed whores of the Cult of the Bar have declared the Declaration to be "not law." Allowing the Cult of the Bar to have the power it has was the first, and greatest mistake, arguably more deadly to liberty than allowing "them" to create a central bank.

The idea that each and every social interaction in society can be immediately and solely "voluntary" is naive. While you sit down and have a committee discuss consensus, those with malice will simply act decisively and put you in chains at gun point, or kill you. It is necessary to have an "in-place" organization to deal with such things, with prior authority extended to it.

I don't have a problem with, and support, maximum "voluntarism" in society, with the abolition of coerced support for immorality (including non-defensive war) or even "protection" (police & fire services) in most cases. However, the consequences are not much loved in real life, though - there have been cases where someone refuses to "volunteer" donations to a fire district, and then screams in horror as the fire department allows their property to burn down. You can't have it both ways. Further, the idea that government should legislate free association, such as with "civil rights laws," is an absurdity, and patently anti-constitutional.

The ideal is limited, representative government, as was envisioned, and practiced as humanly possible, by Thomas Jefferson. But can we go from "here" to "there" instantly? Not unless we want to be speaking Mandarin next year.

[Ares]

A "voluntary society" is pure fantasy. It completely denies human nature.

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/5f/2c/b7/5f2cb79f2f0b9a6c3c5e69b38ec661e4.jpg

[crimethink]

6919

[singular_me]

applying your mindset now: then the jews are here to stay


A "voluntary society" is pure fantasy. It completely denies human nature.

which nature, the result of 4000 years of brainwashing?

Since about eons, all cultures and races have attempted to determine and regulate the notions of good and evil while remaining bent on invasions, wars, pillages and oppressing their own citizens by whatever means and for the sake of religious righteousness. Yet there is this widespread consensus that cannot imagine existence without rulers, even the most tyrannical, as if there can't be any other choice. Or should it rather be said that the only solution can't be considered because the same consensus systematically assumes that chaos would ensue. It is thus easy to conceive that the demand for rulers is associated with an inner-fear that just morphs the latter into another threat eventually becoming very real. And this Fear ever perpetuates the Escape from Freedom.

This fear embodies the NWO... yet you are the one describing Voluntaryism as a fantasy. So now we are living a nightmare as a result.

Voluntaryism/empathy or the ant colony/fear... You choose? There is no 'in between' because evil is exponential by nature.

[singular_me]

I only pay the extortion fee to keep my quality of life and stay alive.

we can see the result of paying the extortion fee since the Fed and the IRS are in business.... the extortion fee is EXPONENTIAL, at some point we'll all get sucked in. Coercion is always exponential because it is a lie to start with that requires another one to survive, and so on... more lies/coercion pile up. Anyone really understanding this implication, would choose voluntaryism. It is thinking that evil can be contained the utopia/fantasy.

It is above all a moral and ethical dilemma that everybody must sort out for him/herself. Nobody else can do it for us..... thats the only way out though.

There is no catch 22: it is the individual that shapes the collective/society. Statism works in reverse. Any ideology placing the group first amounts to collective suicide. This because there is an inescapable universal law that nobody can escape "self-responsibility". In short "be responsible" or "suffer man-made depopulation".

free will is God's natural law...

[singular_me]

interesting, of course the "willing to know about the issues" is stretchable as the fear that could shatter faith in government translates differently for each individual.

To summarize, Humans are suffering from a disconnect from the Self directly caused by their repeated attempts to Escape From Freedom.

-----------------

Ignorance Is Bliss: Study Shows People Avoid Information About Complex Social Issues
October 24, 2014 / 1562 views

see-no-evil-hear-no-evil-speak-no-evil

The less people know about important complex issues such as the economy, energy consumption and the environment, the more they want to avoid becoming well-informed, according to new research published by the American Psychological Association.

And the more urgent the issue, the more people want to remain unaware, according to a paper published online in APA’s Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

“These studies were designed to help understand the so-called ‘ignorance is bliss’ approach to social issues,” said author Steven Shepherd, a graduate student with the University of Waterloo in Ontario. “The findings can assist educators in addressing significant barriers to getting people involved and engaged in social issues.”..........

To test the links among dependence, trust and avoidance, researchers provided either a complex or simple description of the economy to a group of 58 Canadians, mean age 42, composed of 20 men and 38 women. The participants who received the complex description indicated higher levels of perceived helplessness in getting through the economic downturn, more dependence on and trust in the government to manage the economy, and less desire to learn more about the issue.

“This is despite the fact that, all else equal, one should have less trust in someone to effectively manage something that is more complex,” said co-author Aaron C. Kay, PhD, of Duke University. “Instead, people tend to respond by psychologically ‘outsourcing’ the issue to the government, which in turn causes them to trust and feel more dependent on the government. Ultimately, they avoid learning about the issue because that could shatter their faith in the government.”

more
http://earthweareone.com/ignorance-is-bliss-study-shows-people-avoid-information-about-complex-social-issues/

[Ares]

6919

LOL that's pretty good. In your model, you elect them. In the model I follow its definitely a big risk. But in yours its all but guaranteed. You live in a state that feels you shouldn't have more than 10 rounds in a magazine. Are you being a good citizen and abiding by the law that your government put in place while real criminals don't adhere to it anyway?

[crimethink]

applying your mindset now: then the jews are here to stay


Evil will continue to exist in our world until He returns. Just like cockroaches.

The best we can hope for is to prevent it from harming as many as it would like.

But then, some individuals in our world would prefer the "freedom" to harm has many as they can.




which nature, the result of 4000 years of brainwashing?


LOL

You deny the basic nature of man: to be selfish. An evolved society - and an evolved individual - aims to limit that selfishness. It is what makes a human being truly human.

"You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight." James 4:2

"For the love of money is the root of all evil." 1 Timothy 6:10




Since about eons, all cultures and races have attempted to determine and regulate the notions of good and evil while remaining bent on invasions, wars, pillages and oppressing their own citizens by whatever means and for the sake of religious righteousness. Yet there is this widespread consensus that cannot imagine existence without rulers, even the most tyrannical, as if there can't be any other choice.


You "anarcho-libertarian" types insist on using the Red Herring of "rulers."

I do not accept "rulers."

In fact, however, many societies have created a model of "consent of the governed." That can be created again. But sincere and active vigilance is necessary to keep from devolution to rulership.

Again, read James 4:2 & 1 Timothy 6:10 about the root of murder and other violence.




Or should it rather be said that the only solution can't be considered because the same consensus systematically assumes that chaos would ensue.


You have no "solution." You only remove us from the frying pan and throw us into the fire.




It is thus easy to conceive that the demand for rulers


There's that Red Herring again. Is this a Jewish thing or something? The inability to accept a "third position" apart from "anarchy" or total government?




is associated with an inner-fear that just morphs the latter into another threat eventually becoming very real.


Only the insane do not fear evil. What you propose only emboldens and empowers the evil.




And this Fear ever perpetuates the Escape from Freedom.


You promise something you cannot deliver. "Freedom"? Of what? From what? For what? To be a predator? To be absolved of responsibility? To have much less fear of accountability?




This fear embodies the NWO... yet you are the one describing Voluntaryism as a fantasy. So now we are living a nightmare as a result.


There is no "voluntaryism" ("anarchy," as in no government) you propose. You propose an utopian (impossible) society yet allege it is achievable.

You serve the Jew World Order as a "useful idiot" (at best - there is another possibility). Your work diverts Goyim away from achievable goals to unachievable nonsense.




Voluntaryism/empathy or the ant colony/fear... You choose? There is no 'in between' because evil is exponential by nature.

I choose the third option. I do not accept rulers, like you, as you are doing with presenting falsely-limited choices.

[crimethink]

LOL that's pretty good. In your model, you elect them. In the model I follow its definitely a big risk. But in yours its all but guaranteed. You live in a state that feels you shouldn't have more than 10 rounds in a magazine. Are you being a good citizen and abiding by the law that your government put in place while real criminals don't adhere to it anyway?

I do not consent to the current regime. Therefore, it is not "my government." Only a dictatorship limits a God-given right. You people insist on pretending there is only "no government" or "total government." I propose a third option.

Let's be honest, shall we? The vast majority of anarchists lust for a society with "no government" because they lust for the ability to be a predator or a swindler without accountability. The predators and swindlers say their predation would be all "voluntary" so "what's the problem?"

[crimethink]

we can see the result of paying the extortion fee since the Fed and the IRS are in business.... the extortion fee is EXPONENTIAL, at some point we'll all get sucked in.


Do you or do you not currently pay taxes?

If yes, how can you claim to be in a position to condemn anyone else who does at figurative or literal gun point?




Coercion is always exponential because it is a lie to start with that requires another one to survive, and so on... more lies/coercion pile up. Anyone really understanding this implication, would choose voluntaryism.


It's all "voluntary" until it's not. That is my point.




It is thinking that evil can be contained the utopia/fantasy.


Control of evil is not only possible, but readily successful. The current "governments" of the world exist because good people, Christians in particular, have refused to act accordingly, failing to be the "salt of the Earth."




There is no catch 22: it is the individual that shapes the collective/society.


Another Red Herring. No one - not me - has alleged that individuals & families are not the foundation of society.



Any ideology placing the group first amounts to collective suicide.


All of human history says you are full of it.

Individual above group success or survival is antithetical to civilization. Every mammal, most creatures in fact, are designed by God to operate as groups - families, tribes, and so on.

You are arguing against God and Nature. You might as well be a Marxist. But then, your position and Marxism do come from the same Source.




This because there is an inescapable universal law that nobody can escape "self-responsibility"....free will is God's natural law...

Another Red Herring. No one - not me - is arguing against free will and personal responsibility.

And while God established free will, He also established government based on authority, not sheer power. Government going good to the righteous, and punishing the wrong doer. The current system does the reverse, and therefore deserves to be overthrown, and replaced with Godly government.

[singular_me]

I dont think there is such a big risk - at least democides would be ended. However, people project what they are into their own environment and when under the influence of high levels of coercion, the environment will mirror their own frustrations with the system.

Such century-old coercion levels (which trigger a repeat of the suffering and cause thinking in circle) are encrypted in the DNA as a low resonance/frequency and passed on from a generation to the next. The DNA memorizes everything, even emotions... but can be overwritten with a new awareness/understanding induced by a better knowledge about the issues...

it is all about wave-lengths... thinking is electromagnetic, that is why a human brain has its own electric circuit. More inner peace translates into a more peaceful society.

the biggest risk if any would be the transition, should voluntaryism gain momentum, but what is coming is not better. So it is a unique chance we have here to make it come true.



LOL that's pretty good. In your model, you elect them. In the model I follow its definitely a big risk. But in yours its all but guaranteed. You live in a state that feels you shouldn't have more than 10 rounds in a magazine. Are you being a good citizen and abiding by the law that your government put in place while real criminals don't adhere to it anyway?

[singular_me]

Sure I have to pay some taxes like anybody who doesnt want to go to jail... but you and I are polar opposites because I advocate for Voluntaryism and you Statism.

forget about the godly government - we all are Godly creatures... and capable to think for ourselves. :)

edit: all perceptions are valuable but killing, stealing and lying/misguiding.

hell no, I am not a marxist... saying that we need a system empowering free will is far from that. Socrates, Krishnamurti and Walter Russells are my favorite thinkers .



Do you or do you not currently pay taxes?

If yes, how can you claim to be in a position to condemn anyone else who does at figurative or literal gun point?




It's all "voluntary" until it's not. That is my point.




Control of evil is not only possible, but readily successful. The current "governments" of the world exist because good people, Christians in particular, have refused to act accordingly, failing to be the "salt of the Earth."




Another Red Herring. No one - not me - has alleged that individuals & families are not the foundation of society.




All of human history says you are full of it.

Individual above group success or survival is antithetical to civilization. Every mammal, most creatures in fact, are designed by God to operate as groups - families, tribes, and so on.

You are arguing against God and Nature. You might as well be a Marxist. But then, your position and Marxism do come from the same Source.




Another Red Herring. No one - not me - is arguing against free will and personal responsibility.

And while God established free will, He also established government based on authority, not sheer power. Government going good to the righteous, and punishing the wrong doer. The current system does the reverse, and therefore deserves to be overthrown, and replaced with Godly government.

[Ares]

I do not consent to the current regime.

Welcome to Anarchy. :)


Therefore, it is not "my government." Only a dictatorship limits a God-given right.

Elected governments do that too. Or did the original United States Republic overlook the fact that slavery is the denial of someone else's god given right? Or how about when the South withdrew consent and decided to leave and the north forced them back into the union at the barrel of a gun under the bullshit guise of "preserving the union".


You people insist on pretending there is only "no government" or "total government." I propose a third option.

Because that's what history has taught us. Mankind cannot be trusted to govern. Rules and limits placed on paper are completely useless.


Let's be honest, shall we? The vast majority of anarchists lust for a society with "no government" because they lust for the ability to be a predator or a swindler without accountability.

Not at all, I don't want to take advantage of anyone. I'm tired of being taken advantage of by cowards who use government to steal from the masses to enrich themselves. Lets be honest shall we? How can a select few enrich themselves while enslaving millions without the help of government?


The predators and swindlers say their predation would be all "voluntary" so "what's the problem?"

The problem is with government you elect predators and swindlers. It matters not what limitations on power you put in place.

[crimethink]

but you and I are polar opposites because I advocate for Voluntaryism and you Statism.


You advocate the Jewish diversion position, and I advocate the Aryan Christian position. :)

The term "Statist" is a meaningless, plastic term - it can be anything you want it to mean - just like "Racist," "Fascist," "Nazi," or the most powerful of all, "anti-Semite." But sorry, all five don't work on me.




forget about the godly government - we all are Godly creatures... and capable to think for ourselves.


The real God established good government. Whatever New Age, Judeo-Freemasonic "god" you worship can go back to Hell.




edit: all perceptions are valuable but killing, stealing and lying/misguiding.


By what authority do you establish this, and how will you impose your beliefs? I thought it's "all voluntary"? :)

What if someone decides for themselves that ripe fruit growing on "your" trees which has not been picked is free for the taking? You're not consuming them, so they believe it's not stealing. Do you claim the atmosphere on "your" property as well? But if not, why should air be free but not the unused fruit?




hell no, I am not a marxist... saying that we need a system empowering free will is far from that.


I didn't say you were a Marxist. I said your clap-trap came from the same Source.




Socrates, Krishnamurti and Walter Russells are my favorite thinkers.

I'm not at all surprised by the last one. But you really should include Alisa Rosenbaum and Ludwig von Mises in your list. Non-attribution - plagiarism - isn't nice. :)

[crimethink]

Welcome to Anarchy. :)


Limited government operating with the consent of the governed is not "anarchy" (no government). And resistance to actual tyranny is not "anarchy."




Or did the original United States Republic overlook the fact that slavery is the denial of someone else's god given right?


The Founders did not consider Negroes to be "men."

But in any case, one or a few flaws does not invalidate the entire system or concept.




Or how about when the South withdrew consent and decided to leave and the north forced them back into the union at the barrel of a gun under the bullshit guise of "preserving the union".


The regime of Lincoln was in no way a representative, limited government. Northerners themselves rioted over Lincoln's tyranny.




Because that's what history has taught us. Mankind cannot be trusted to govern.


But mankind can be trusted to treat everyone with the Golden Rule, which is what your "voluntaryism" is predicated on? LOL. Man, you're not a retard, so why argue such a retarded premise?




Rules and limits placed on paper are completely useless.


Which is why the Second Amendment was included.

The People, however, failed to use it until 1860, decades too late.




Not at all, I don't want to take advantage of anyone.


Maybe not you, but most who advocate your position are the rich who want to amass ever more money, and power, for themselves.




I'm tired of being taken advantage of by cowards who use government to steal from the masses to enrich themselves. Lets be honest shall we? How can a select few enrich themselves while enslaving millions without the help of government?


By establishing a cartel or guild or corporation. Public government was replaced in our country with private government. I want to return to the former; you want more of the latter under a different name. Your system will be just as "voluntary" as the system of paying Federal taxes is "voluntary" - as Harry Reid said.




The problem is with government you elect predators and swindlers.


I do not. But stupid and careless people do. You expect that your proposed system would correct all this. You expect that removing government would magically make everyone smart, self-reliant, and not eager to take advantage of someone else.




It matters not what limitations on power you put in place.

Government is like fire; it can serve you, or you can serve it if you are reckless or careless.

[Ares]

Limited government operating with the consent of the governed is not "anarchy" (no government). And resistance to actual tyranny is not "anarchy."

Opposition to authority is Anarchism.


The Founders did not consider Negroes to be "men."

But in any case, one or a few flaws does not invalidate the entire system or concept.

That's where you're wrong. It totally invalidates the system if it denies someone their god given rights. It wasn't just Negro's who were slaves. You could be white and be a slave. In 1798 thousands of Irish rebels were sold to American slave owners. That's not taught in school but apparently we're only supposed to know only blacks were slaves. :rolleyes:



The regime of Lincoln was in no way a representative, limited government. Northerners themselves rioted over Lincoln's tyranny.

Representative or not, he used the power and authority of government to enforce his will did he not? What good did it do that Northerners rioted? Not one iota.


But mankind can be trusted to treat everyone with the Golden Rule, which is what your "voluntaryism" is predicated on? LOL. Man, you're not a retard, so why argue such a retarded premise?

Nope, absolutely not. I have never said that. You have. I know men cannot be trusted, its the same damn reason I don't want to give them the means to enslave me or my fellow man.. You on the other hand also know mankind cannot be trusted, but want to give them a tool to enslave millions. What kind of logic is that?


Which is why the Second Amendment was included.

The People, however, failed to use it until 1860, decades too late.

Which doesn't do much good when laws are put into place that make the price of ammunition high. The EPA just forced the last lead smelter in the U.S. to shut down last year. Price of ammo has reflected that. All they have to do is stop all shipments of lead from coming into the United States and ammo will be a thing of the past. They don't have to outlaw weapons or ammo, they can just deny the materials which this fascist moron in office has been attempting to do since he got in.



Maybe not you, but most who advocate your position are the rich who want to amass ever more money, and power, for themselves.

Very likely, they are probably the ones who are rich, but aren't 1% rich. Removing a system that enriches the 1% at the expense of everyone is desirable, but you are always going to have individuals who will attempt to gain influence and power. Psychopaths are drawn to such endeavors and its why congressmen, senators, judges and president display the traits of psychopaths.


By establishing a cartel or guild or corporation. Public government was replaced in our country with private government. I want to return to the former; you want more of the latter under a different name. Your system will be just as "voluntary" as the system of paying Federal taxes is "voluntary" - as Harry Reid said.

How would taxes be collected in a volunteer society when there is no force of authority to collect it? You don't pay for a service you don't get to use it.



I do not. But stupid and careless people do. You expect that your proposed system would correct all this. You expect that removing government would magically make everyone smart, self-reliant, and not eager to take advantage of someone else.

Never have I said Anarchism is perfect. You've called it a utopian pipe dream. I have never said it was perfect or would ever solve all of our problems. It would remove obstacles and create new ones. Everything is a double edge sword. Always has been, always will be. But I am a student of history and I see that mankind has been trying this experiment called government in different shapes, forms, models etc with little to no success. The many are always turned into government slaves given enough time. Limited government, or a total dictatorship, I really don't see a difference.


Government is like fire; it can serve you, or you can serve it if you are reckless or careless.

Absolutely agree, why I advocate putting the fire out. It always without fail turns into people serving it.

[Hitch]

Government is like fire; it can serve you, or you can serve it if you are reckless or careless.

That's a great analogy! Except for right now, we seem to have an out of control wildfire that's on path to burn the whole country down.

[Shami-Amourae]

Government is like fire; it can serve you, or you can serve it if you are reckless or careless.

We need to boycott fire. That will make sure fire can never exist again!
:rolleyes:

[singular_me]

You advocate the Jewish diversion position, and I advocate the Aryan Christian position. :)
spare me the senseless jewish sword... it sounds just like saying "i am right because you are a nazi".

Aryan? Race/culture are a dichotomy created by the elites throughout the ages to implement their own visions of supremacy over another nace/culture. Moreover, in every culture it has happened and democide was the result.

A human being IS a human being. Knowledge IS knowledge. Every human knows that killing, stealing and lying is evil. The least coercion within a society the least violence. It is the coercion that morphs people into beasts. Statism cannot work because every mind has its own perspective, one size fit all laws are collectivism in disguise.


The term "Statist" is a meaningless, plastic term - it can be anything you want it to mean - just like "Racist," "Fascist," "Nazi," or the most powerful of all, "anti-Semite." But sorry, all five don't work on me.

Yet you never hesitate to use the 'masonic-jewsh sword" .... You definitely seem to be lacking a lot of data and some serious philosophical input to understand the meaning of Voluntaryism.


The real God established good government. Whatever New Age, Judeo-Freemasonic "god" you worship can go back to Hell.

Hell? The REAL God?... because you think that the Bible isnt also Judaic? ? Here is an advice: research early Christianity, Gnosticism/Gnostics and investigate why the roman church stole their knowledge which they used to write the Bible then persecuted them all. I dare you.

I strongly recommend to drop it here, because it is obvious that you refuse to see that the Bible is masonic/kabalistic/pagan in nature. Worshiping the winter equinox, dec 25, is pagan. Easter is the celebration of Ishtar, pagan. In many mythologies one finds a virgin giving birth, Osiris also resurrected after 3 days... the point is that all religions and myths TELL the SAME things. Where is then the fear of One World Religion coming from? Another divide and rule tactic? Christianity is just another version, filled with ancient esoteric meanings. So who is the new ager now? And lets not forget Christ dying at age 33 while there are 33 masonic degrees... time to wake up, really.


By what authority do you establish this, and how will you impose your beliefs? I thought it's "all voluntary"? :)

another dicthomy...All beliefs do not oppose one another but are complementary. Humans fight for them because they are TAUGHT so, programed to die for their beliefs - and masters. The opposite of what Voluntaryism stands for.


What if someone decides for themselves that ripe fruit growing on "your" trees which has not been picked is free for the taking? You're not consuming them, so they believe it's not stealing. Do you claim the atmosphere on "your" property as well? But if not, why should air be free but not the unused fruit?

what you say here is ridiculous and shows no creativity. Your examples highlight the consequences of 4000 years of elite victimization... and such an approach cannot address Voluntaryism rightfully.



I'm not at all surprised by the last one. But you really should include Alisa Rosenbaum and Ludwig von Mises in your list. Non-attribution - plagiarism - isn't nice. :)

You seem to ignore that I was a pro-von mises-gold standard advocate on Gold Is Money, one of their best posters for about 3 years, and my handle was Goldissima and I have many articles online exposing the PTB... but that was then and there is now...

-----------------EDIT
what every modern christian should be investigating.

Gnosticism was widespread within the early Christian church until the gnostics were expelled in the second and third centuries C.E. Gnosticism was one of the first doctrines to be specifically declared a heresy and gnostic movements were often persecuted as a result. Gnostic groups also suffered under Islamic regimes. The response of orthodoxy to gnosticism significantly defined the evolution of Christian doctrine and church order. After gnostic and orthodox Christianity parted, gnostic Christianity continued as a separate movement in some areas for centuries. However some modern theologians think that several gnostic doctrines were absorbed by Christianity. Gnosticism has reappeared in various forms throughout history and into the contemporary era.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Gnosticism

[crimethink]

Opposition to authority is Anarchism.

I am not in opposition to authority. I oppose illegitimate power. Claimed "authority" when it is not actually enjoyed.



You could be white and be a slave. In 1798 thousands of Irish rebels were sold to American slave owners. That's not taught in school but apparently we're only supposed to know only blacks were slaves.


The Whites were de facto, not de jure slaves. They were not chattel property as with Negroes. Whites could not be "property," only indentured servants bound over for crime or by the choice of a "voluntary" contract.




Representative or not, he used the power and authority of government to enforce his will did he not?


Lincoln's authority over the seceding states ended the moment their acts of secession were enacted. He continued to enjoy only illegitimate power.




What good did it do that Northerners rioted? Not one iota.


What good would it do if a band of "private" Highwaymen came along under your system, and offered you a "choice" of your money or your life, and you said, "but, but, we're a 'voluntary' system"?




Nope, absolutely not. I have never said that.


It is implicit. Your system cannot work even in fantasy without believing people will practice the Golden Rule towards others.



You on the other hand also know mankind cannot be trusted, but want to give them a tool to enslave millions. What kind of logic is that?


Some humans are more intelligent, more virtuous, more selfless than others. The problem with the current system is that those in love with money are in charge. They laugh at and hold in utter contempt civilized values.




Which doesn't do much good when laws are put into place that make the price of ammunition high.


Far more importantly, the American people have chosen not to resist more than once in the 225 years since the Constitutional Second Republic was erected. Americans are sitting on billions of rounds of ammunition right now, and do virtually nothing.




Very likely, they are probably the ones who are rich, but aren't 1% rich. Removing a system that enriches the 1% at the expense of everyone is desirable, but you are always going to have individuals who will attempt to gain influence and power. Psychopaths are drawn to such endeavors and its why congressmen, senators, judges and president display the traits of psychopaths.


Psychopaths in anarchy would no longer have a bureaucracy in their way allowing them to practice their psychopathy freely - indeed, the bureaucracy works both ways, against the common man and as an obstacle to be maneuvered around. Remove the psychopaths altogether and deconstruct the bureaucracy.




How would taxes be collected in a volunteer society when there is no force of authority to collect it? You don't pay for a service you don't get to use it.


A corporatist dream. Imagine paying 500 tolls to drive across America? Pay or don't cross. Amounts set completely arbitrary, with no recourse other than force.

Some "freedom."



Limited government, or a total dictatorship, I really don't see a difference.


Then you are a fool. Thomas Jefferson vs. Joseph Stalin. Does that help?




Absolutely agree, why I advocate putting the fire out. It always without fail turns into people serving it.

And my point is that the fire can be controlled for public good or private, self-serving good, not both, and definitely not neither.

[crimethink]

That's a great analogy! Except for right now, we seem to have an out of control wildfire that's on path to burn the whole country down.

There are many removing the fire extinguishers called the Bill of Rights, and, who are spreading gasoline all over our country, to encourage the fire to expand. Of course, these same stand ready to offer a "solution" once the country is a burned-out cinder.

[crimethink]

spare me the senseless jewish sword... it sounds just like saying "i am right because you are a nazi".


Actually, the senseless opposition to a form of limited government is, indeed, Jewish.

The dialectic in action: absolutely tyrannical total government vs. "anarchy" leading to the desired Jew World Order synthesis of a "kinder, gentler" "globalist" private government over the entire planet.




Aryan? Race/culture are a dichotomy created by the elites throughout the ages to implement their own visions of supremacy over another nace/culture.


Denial of biocultural identity & self-determination to all Goyim is a primary strategy of world Jewry.




Moreover, in every culture it has happened and democide was the result.


Oh noes! It's another Holocaust™!!




A human being IS a human being.


LOL - what a load of crap.

Barack Obama is Mohandas Gandhi is Henry Kissinger is Thomas Jefferson. Sure, WTF ever.

http://cdn.24.co.za/files/Cms/General/d/1963/4845a9197ec84e26b1982e1e27b5807e.jpg

That may be your equal, but it sure isn't mine.




Knowledge IS knowledge.


Knowledge of how to set a broken arm is knowledge of how to bake cookies is knowledge of how to use a squat toilet is knowledge of how to generate electricity. Good God, woman, do you believe this shit?




Every human knows that killing, stealing and lying is evil.


Nope. While most denounce "murder," many do not oppose justified killing. What is "stealing"? Is it taking an automobile from someone? Is it taking an apple from a tree when one is hungry? Is it charging 29.9% APR from a borrower? What is lying? Is it expressing one's perception even though it is not real? Is it an intent to deceive though the stated facts are "true"?




The least coercion within a society the least violence.


Pure assumption.




It is the coercion that morphs people into beasts.


More assumption. Many sadists were and are those pampered, with not a want in the world, never having to answer to anyone.




Statism cannot work because every mind has its own perspective, one size fit all laws are collectivism in disguise.


More horseshit. But then, it could be a slip up. "One size fit all laws"? You oppose this? You mean we should continue to have a multipartite (not multiparty) system where "the Law" is only for some? It's exactly what we have now!

Malum in se law must be for everyone.




Yet you never hesitate to use 'jew"


Care to show how it's inaccurate?




You definitely seem to be lacking a lot of data and some serious philosophical input to understand the meaning of Voluntaryism.


Assumption again. I understand what you propose, and have no qualms about calling it the horseshit it is. I call it horseshit for the same reason I call Communism horseshit - it's a lie, an intent to deceive, proposing something that cannot exist in the real world.




Here is an advice: research early Christianity, iGnosticism/Gnostics and investigate why the roman church stole their knowledge which they use to write the Bible then persecuted them all. I dare you.


Already done. Long ago. Those who want to destroy Christianity by painting it as false have long pushed the "Gnosticism was the basis for Christianity" crap.




I strongly recommend to drop it here


Some sort of idle threat?




because it is obvious that you refuse to see that the Bible is masonic/kabalistic/pagan in nature.


Actually, it is obvious that you refuse to admit that you have an anti-Christian agenda.




Worshiping the winter equinox, dec 25, is pagan.


Not established by Christ.




Easter is the celebration of Ishtar, pagan.


Not established by Christ.




In many mythologies one finds a virgin giving birth, Osiris also resurrected after 3 days


All the figures of religions worldwide healed the sick, too, so I guess that proves Christ was fake or even mythical!




the point is that all religions and myths TELL the same things.


Sure they do. :rolleyes:

Christianity tells people that salvation is a free gift from God, and Judaism tells practitioners sex with babies is not sin. All "the same."




Christianity is just another version, filled with ancient esoteric meanings. So who is the new ager now?


Still you. Just because you think you know the nature of Christianity by watching Jew "Jordan Maxwell" (Russell Pine) videos means nothing really.




And lets not forget Christ dying at age 33 while there are 33 masonic degrees... time to wake up, really.


OK, go ahead, please wake up!

Christ comes first, but Judeo-Freemasonry's adoption of their degree structure in mockery of Christ reflects on Him.




another dicthomy...All beliefs do not oppose one another but are complementary. Humans fight for them because they are TAUGHT so, programed to die for their beliefs - and masters. The opposite of what Voluntaryism stands for.


Did you not get my point, or are you avoiding it?

In your "voluntary" system, by what right or authority do you have to define "killing," "stealing," and "lying"? You are assuming the right! In other words, practicing a primitive form of government.




what you say here is ridiculous and shows no creativity. Your examples highlight the consequences of 4000 years of elite victimization... and such an approach cannot address Voluntaryism rightfully.


What I said collapses your entire "voluntaryism" premise. Everyone must agree on the same definitions of property, rights, crimes, and so on, or else "someone" in your society must assert a standardization. But we know not everyone will agree. That "someone" is a form of government, however ad hoc, de facto, and primitive.





You seem to ignore that I was a pro-von mises-gold standard advocate on Gold Is Money, one of their best posters for about 3 years, and my handle was Goldissima and I have many articles online exposing the PTB... but that was then and there is now...

Thank you for admitting it! I recall it well; I was merely pointing out that you should have Rosenbaum and von Mises included in your list, since they are far more important than Socrates or Krishnmurti to your nonsense, uh, I mean "philosophy."

[singular_me]

crimethink:
The real God established good government..... Then you are a fool. Thomas Jefferson vs. Joseph Stalin. Does that help?
the real question here: is why was the constitution murdered? why are the best intentions in politics always short lived? ................. Power corrupts. The very few that have done a decent job are always by far out numbered by psychopathic predators. 4000 years of this pattern and yet, still people want rulers.

[singular_me]

Crimethink, again, all what you say highlights the consequences of 4000 years of elite victimization. I asked you to drop it because the same themes appearing in all myths and religions is **heavily** documented. And that you took it as a threat is kinda irrational.


What I said collapses your entire "voluntaryism" premise. Everyone must agree on the same definitions of property, rights, crimes, and so on, or else "someone" in your society must assert a standardization
A voluntaryist society would surely allow entire towns for supremacists of all sort races and cultures, so they FINALLY would stay together and stop threatening the whole.. And I'd be so happy for you but you are too blinded by your ideology that you can'T fathom such a golden opportunity. :)

In fact Voluntaryism is in favor of intellectual and/or racial self-segregation if that avoids conflicts. Today we have forced integration and multiculturalism. I am almost sure that communism/democracy would work well for a small town for example if everybody really wants to make it happen.

in all races and cultures, whatever the ideology they abide to, there are less appealing individuals... so that you chose that picture doesnt speaks about the black guy but you.

edit:
My choice would be an area of thinkers, whatever their origins, who can see beyond materialism (dont work to enrich themselves but enjoy the now) and have developed a deep sense of empathy, can understand the root causes of biases and xenophobia and are dedicated to a boundary-less knowledge and do not see God as separated from His creation. And such a profile represents an ever growing trend.


CLOSING:
SINGULAR: A human being IS a human being.
CRIMETHINK: LOL - what a load of crap.


conclusion:
to each his town

[Carl]

I would think that most people don't want rulers, they don't want to be governed, they just want an organized system of law and justice that is consistent, predictable and applicable for everyone alike. A society in which the only people who need to be governed are those who choose to function outside the law to the detriment of others.

[singular_me]

here in NM, there are plenty of hispanic/native supremacists too.

They all can have their own towns or even state with their own laws. I wouldnt mind relocating for the sake of my own security, should voluntarysm be embraced. Even if this implies 1000's of miles away. I am a world traveler anyway (ecuador will be my next stop)

actually crimethink, although against it, makes the perfect case for a planetary voluntaryist model.

What is coming is an unique opportunity to reshape society from scratch. The birth of Voluntarysim cannot happen without a complete destruction of the old model because people are too attached to their lifestyles and they must realize the obvious, that everything they believed in is/was a mega deception and that their thoughts werent theirs, and be ready to consider the UNthinkable as finding themselves completely naked, figuratively speaking. The codes of conducts they will choose from there, if the inner-revolution takes place, will be absolutely minimalistic for the whole, while allowing those who want it, to self-segregate and have their own tighter rules.

People have to begin to see that what they perceive as chaos can also be highly creative. Everything has a dual meaning, and thats where the NWO gets us at every street corner, they are the masters of dualism, hence control all oppositions, but time is running out for them, should we be successful to understand that, that every down side has an upside.

The upcoming shock is a blessing in disguise, but since it is a free will universe... I can just hope people will make the right decision at the right moment.

back to square one and the Tale Of The Eden, each of us standing in front of the Three Of Knowledge with an Apple on it :) The serpent is gone this time and replaced with Free Will.


I would think that most people don't want rulers, they don't want to be governed, they just want an organized system of law and justice that is consistent, predictable and applicable for everyone alike. A society in which the only people who need to be governed are those who choose to function outside the law to the detriment of others.

old thread of mine (2010) from minarchist to voluntaryist
I Want Anarchy In My Life Time Not Capitalism
http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?27549-I-Want-Anarchy-In-My-Life-Time-Not-Capitalism

[Horn]

applying your mindset now: Voluntaryism/empathy or the ant colony/fear... You choose? There is no 'in between' because evil is exponential by nature.

Man's practice in determinism results in Governance,

internalizing Anarchy/voluntaryism applies no practice or results whatsoever, it is in fact anti-empathetic.

[singular_me]

if collective determinism comes first, it will be proven anti-empathetic.

voluntaryism cannot be an option as long as we see it as a egg-chicken dilemma




Man's practice in determinism results in Governance,

internalizing Anarchy/voluntaryism applies no practice or results whatsoever, it is in fact anti-empathetic.

[Ares]

I am not in opposition to authority. I oppose illegitimate power. Claimed "authority" when it is not actually enjoyed.

So for a thought experiment we set up your style of government. A representative Republic like the United States of America pre-1800. Someone like Lincoln comes along and proceeds to take power, how do you stop him? We already know and Thomas Jefferson was also well aware of this. People would not pick up arms against him. How do you prevent representative government from turning into an oligarchy? It's already been established that psychopaths are drawn to influence and power. How do you prevent a Lincoln, a Bush, or Obama taking what is not theirs?


The Whites were de facto, not de jure slaves. They were not chattel property as with Negroes. Whites could not be "property," only indentured servants bound over for crime or by the choice of a "voluntary" contract.

In law during that time, it did not matter if you were white or black. If you were a slave you were treated as property of the slave owner. De facto or de jure did not matter. Regardless it was still a system that denied someone their god given right to be free and actively supported it and profited from it.


Lincoln's authority over the seceding states ended the moment their acts of secession were enacted. He continued to enjoy only illegitimate power.

That may be so, but he still used the vehicle of "representative government" to achieve his ends. You can call it illegitimate power all you want. It doesn't change the fact that he took a once representative Republic and turned it into what we have now. Without that vehicle he never would of been able to achieve anything close to the disaster of the Civil War.



What good would it do if a band of "private" Highwaymen came along under your system, and offered you a "choice" of your money or your life, and you said, "but, but, we're a 'voluntary' system"?

I have the same situation under government. Or haven't you noticed the amount of cops shooting unarmed victims for petty bullshit? So honestly I don't see a difference. At least in a voluntary society I can enact retribution without the state protecting the thug that robbed me at gun point.


It is implicit. Your system cannot work even in fantasy without believing people will practice the Golden Rule towards others.

Neither can your system of government. Or is 2,000+ years not enough evidence for you to see that government fails every time it is enacted and no matter what form it takes?



Some humans are more intelligent, more virtuous, more selfless than others. The problem with the current system is that those in love with money are in charge. They laugh at and hold in utter contempt civilized values.

That they do, but in a voluntary society they would not have state and federal protection and neither would judges.



Far more importantly, the American people have chosen not to resist more than once in the 225 years since the Constitutional Second Republic was erected. Americans are sitting on billions of rounds of ammunition right now, and do virtually nothing.

Yep, I know. I have a good share of ammunition as well as weapons. But why take up arms when I can sit back and watch it implode on itself. You're doing the same thing. I'm sure you're not unarmed. I don't see you in the street shooting state actors anymore than you see me doing it, and for the same reasons. Its self imploding. However the aftermath is what we're both concerned about.



Psychopaths in anarchy would no longer have a bureaucracy in their way allowing them to practice their psychopathy freely - indeed, the bureaucracy works both ways, against the common man and as an obstacle to be maneuvered around. Remove the psychopaths altogether and deconstruct the bureaucracy.

Well without a state, psychopaths could be taken out far more easily with a bullet than by a rigged ballet box.



A corporatist dream. Imagine paying 500 tolls to drive across America? Pay or don't cross. Amounts set completely arbitrary, with no recourse other than force.

Some "freedom."

Could keep the same system for collecting revenue from fuel. You travel, you have to pay taxes to keep the roads maintained and drivable. A society could set up a bidding system where construction companies bid on the contracts and receive bonuses for quality and finding inventive ways to lesson detours. The roads have always belonged to the people, so have toll roads, but states, counties and cities use the tax money to create toll roads while keeping the revenue for themselves or haven't you noticed? Drive through Chicago some time and look at how many toll roads there are that are Crook County owned.



Then you are a fool. Thomas Jefferson vs. Joseph Stalin. Does that help?

Neither, as both models lead to Joseph Stalin. You're a fool if you believe a limited government can survive more than 100 years without being converted by the money powers into their own personal slave plantation.



And my point is that the fire can be controlled for public good or private, self-serving good, not both, and definitely not neither.

No it can't. History has proven that the fire cannot be controlled as it never has been. It always starts with the public good and ends in self serving elite using it as a tool to advance their agenda. Without out fail, every single government the world over has went down this same road. How would yours be any different when history has shown that smarter men than you or I tried and failed.

[Horn]

How do you prevent representative government from turning into an oligarchy?

Enforce government corruption in dictatorship a punishable offense.

If Obamacare was later deemed illegal, the orchestrators would then be treated as traitors including its supporters.

Suitable punishment a large tatooed O on the forehead. :)

[Ares]

Enforce government corruption in dictatorship a punishable offense.

If Obamacare was later deemed illegal, the orchestrators would then be treated as traitors including its supporters.

Suitable punishment a large tatooed O on the forehead. :)

Which goes along with my point. How do you hold government officials accountable? I understand that a lot of people want government for the reasons Crimethink have pointed out. Every system has pro's and cons'.

I'm being totally serious here when I ask this. How do you set up a system of government that cannot be corrupted? I agree with what Horn says with regards to punishing government officials. But how do you enforce it? Look at Obama now. He should of been impeached, if not disqualified from running due to his fraudulent birth certificate. It's out in the open and most people laugh at the fact that our president is an illegal alien who has no right whatsoever to hold office.

When one or all three branches of government fail to adhere to their oath and are bought and paid for by a 2 party power structure, how is it possible to hold anyone accountable when you rely on government to police itself.

Fox guarding the hen house etc. etc.

I'm not being facetious, and I am really curious how do you hold government to account when you depend on government to police itself.

[singular_me]

just an observation: the power game goes too from the bottom up and is even more destructive than which going from the top down... at every step of the ladder people want to feel in control. The celebrity cult, high speed consumerism, porn and relationships turning into trade, spoiling demanding kids, professional envy, showing off, etc ... not to mention all those incentives like student loans that make them think they will get more respect/power once they get their degrees.

The need for control and power is pervasive. Racel and culture just add another dimension to the bottom-up power game which the top doesnt have. The top struggles to secure the control of the world but doesnt give a damn about the culture/race behind the curtain.

sure the elites/NWO have set all that into motion, but for them its a cake walk, they are just harvesting from inertia. And the latter get away with corruption because people are too focused on own their narrow lifestyle and know unconsciously or not they if they ever rebelled, they could lose big.

without the people mastering self-control themselves, political corruption will continue unabated.... and if people could do that, the need for rulers would become history.

In the meantime, we are checkmate.

This pervasive power structure is essentially left brained oriented. The left side of the brain is all about rationality, materialism and survival

[crimethink]

without the people mastering self-control themselves, political corruption will continue unabated.... and if people could do that, rulers would become a thing of the past.

The lack of popular and individual self-control is exactly why limited government devolves into increasingly-total government. People fail to act against government exceeding its authority, and then, people want government to provide ever more for them. The spiral continues until collapse.

The lack of popular and individual self-control is exactly why I oppose private government even more, however. Unless the Golden Rule is practiced by a sufficient majority, barbarism of different varieties is guaranteed regardless of form of government.

[crimethink]

In respect to Ares, I just wanted to say I have little to nothing more to say in advocacy at this point. Sadly, neither of us will ever see our hoped-for system, for the people themselves are too corrupt to return to a limited government except perhaps after generations of brutality, and, as I've made painfully obvious, I do not believe "anarchy" is possible since "government," however ad hoc, de facto, or primitive, must always arise, even if by "private" individuals or groups.

Ultimately, my hope is for a perfect system someday in the future, but that perfect system will be administered by the One who is perfect, not by flawed human minds & hearts.

[singular_me]

if you like the 7min vid, watch the whole presentation. I personally recommend Mark Passio.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1W0HbmaUeE

Break down of the Right and Left Brain Hemispheres Mark Passio (full)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhpJegFLT8Y

have NOT listen to that one, but I basically think that the New Age agenda targets the right brain, and a right brained society is as bad as the left brained one... it is all about inner balance :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU0y_nhALXY
-------------------------------
EDIT
Passio explains what makes one a real new-ager .

[Horn]

This is just a bookmark, goldie


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbvWIJux7f4

[Ares]

In respect to Ares, I just wanted to say I have little to nothing more to say in advocacy at this point. Sadly, neither of us will ever see our hoped-for system, for the people themselves are too corrupt to return to a limited government except perhaps after generations of brutality, and, as I've made painfully obvious, I do not believe "anarchy" is possible since "government," however ad hoc, de facto, or primitive, must always arise, even if by "private" individuals or groups.

Ultimately, my hope is for a perfect system someday in the future, but that perfect system will be administered by the One who is perfect, not by flawed human minds & hearts.

You're right, and I don't believe either system will ever be implemented for the very reasons why you like your preferred system and I like mine. The same reasons is we want to be left alone by government. I take a historical approach and feel another government will lead down the road to just another monster future generations will have to contend with. You feel government can be controlled with the right restrictions put in place. I'm wondering if we just replace government altogether with blockchain technology?

You may laugh, but what is law? Typically its what a vast majority have agreed to with how their city, town, county, state, and federal level should be governed. We both agree that mankind cannot be trusted with law, or even without it. What if we replaced the system with machines? We can pretty much automate everything else in this world, why do we need a inefficient and easily corruptible system of humans running the show?

This is just a thought experiment and nothing more, I haven't worked out any details just pre-alpha stage white boarding if you will.

At 18 years old, you sign into a website. Your parents or guardians use their keys to verify your age and generate your public / private key. Once generated you join the blockchain as a citizen of Imagination Nation. In this nation it is a Republic, but you do not have representatives. Time and time again through out history representatives turn out to only represent themselves. So it's a failed model. You are hereby a citizen and all laws that the citizens agree too are clearly marked in their blockchain. John agrees to lawn care service and is required to pay the tax that he benefits from. If conditions change and the lawn care becomes too expensive John can withdraw consent and is no longer able to be taxed.

It's contractual government without generational wealth stealing. If John decides to use a publicly funded healthcare, retirement fund etc. He is required to pay his share. If Jason who is much younger and does not want to participate in publicly funded health care, and or retirement Jason withdraws consent and is not taxed as he is not participating. That doesn't mean if Jason wrecks his car into John's house that the government cannot get involved because Jason didn't consent. In that regard its a none issue, Jason caused property damage and must pay restitution. If Sally and John have kids and send their kids to a public school they are required to pay for tuition. If they do not have kids, no taxation can occur as they are not using any benefit of the public school system.

Change government authority to only have control over those who consent. If John decides to withdraw consent and no longer wants Publicly funded healthcare or retirement he forfeits any benefit, and is responsible for his own well being. Government authority stops at the moment of withdrawn consent.

Think of it as distributed government, instead of a federalist / anti-federalist like our fore fathers fought over. The power should reside with the people, and a government that they consent too.

All of this can be recorded in a blockchain, which cannot be hacked and cannot be rigged to favor one over another. All transactions, consent / no consent is public knowledge.

This obviously isn't ideal, as punishment will have to be carried to those who violate standard laws. Just not sure at the moment how to fund such an organization or keep it from turning into an industry of locking people up because its profitable. Anyone can feel free to trash this concept, or add to it. Granted I do know I bitch about our current problems, so just trying to think of a way to offer a solution that benefits everyone and not just a few and a system that can't be turned into something that benefits them.

[singular_me]

associating self-control with passiveness is a bad association. By self-control, I am referring to discernment, critical thinking and the basics of self-determination. Example, do you think porn would be such an industry if people knew about the agenda of destroying families? Do you think the banksters would have been capable to bankrupt the planet if people knew what fractional banking is all about... etc?

Self-control, as much as free will, comes along with the access to unbiased data. It has to be first self-evident. If history is any indication, ignorance has always played in the hands of whatever elites to draw people into democides. We have gone too far to change what it is peacefully, it will all depends on how people interpret the aftermath of the society crash down.

I personally know quite many people around me who are very aware of the stakes but wont take action because they are afraid to lose their jobs, when the latter will be gone, it is very likely that some of them will jump into the freedom bandwagon. Most people wish to avoid radical solutions, and it is a good thing for voluntaryism, unless they become desperate. For a system to change one just needs a critical mass, 15-20% of population Id would guess, then it can ripple through very fast. So just imagine that we all help 10 or so people close to us see through the fog but it has to be done with empathy instead of the blame game sword for people to listen otherwise chances are that the message may not go through. Most people dont react well when treated as if they are stupid. They can reject the information.

we never should wait for the next generation to fix the system, avoiding self-responsibility just makes dangers grow bigger. Self-responsibility avoidance is itself evil. My mother, who died 3 years ago, kept saying that too: "I will not see any changes in my life time, so why bother?". We all can do little things at our own level to spread awareness. And all those little things together can make a huge different when the moment has come.



The lack of popular and individual self-control is exactly why limited government devolves into increasingly-total government. People fail to act against government exceeding its authority, and then, people want government to provide ever more for them. The spiral continues until collapse.

The lack of popular and individual self-control is exactly why I oppose private government even more, however. Unless the Golden Rule is practiced by a sufficient majority, barbarism of different varieties is guaranteed regardless of form of government.

[mick silver]

we all ready have Anarchy it called government they can do what they want at any given time are place .

[singular_me]

right, I forgot that one, you remind me of it

as the von mises essay asserts, we cannot get rid of it. it is either that from the top down or the bottom up

DO WE EVER REALLY GET OUT OF ANARCHY?"
https://mises.org/journals/jls/3_2/3_2_3.pdf

top down = tyranny
bottom up = self responsibility


THE UNAVOIDABILITY OF
ANARCHY (revisited)
https://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_1.pdf

I havent read the 2nd link, but its by the same author



we all ready have Anarchy it called government they can do what they want at any given time are place .

it is thus easy to conceive as why the NWO is so bent on twisting/corrupting the meaning of arnarchy... to stay in power.

[mick silver]

If we are not frightened of such anarchy, we do not need the controlling authority. The Internet may be the most successful example of anarchy ever known

[mick silver]

Anarchism is a political philosophy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophy) that advocates stateless societies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stateless_society) often defined as self-governed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-governance) voluntary institutions,[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-1)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-2)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-3)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-4) but that several authors have defined as more specific institutions based on non-hierarchical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchy) free associations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_association_(communism_and_anarchism)).[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-5)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-iaf-ifa.org-6)[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-7)[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-8) Anarchism holds the state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity)) to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-definition-9)[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-slevin-10) While anti-statism is central,[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-11) anarchism entails opposing authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authority) or hierarchical organisation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchical_organisation) in the conduct of human relations, including, but not limited to, the state system.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-iaf-ifa.org-6)[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-12)[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-13)[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-14)[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-15)[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-Ward_1966-16)[17] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-17)[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-18)
As a subtle and anti-dogmatic philosophy, anarchism draws on many currents of thought and strategy. Anarchism does not offer a fixed body of doctrine from a single particular world view, instead fluxing and flowing as a philosophy.[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-19) There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-20) Anarchist schools of thought (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_schools_of_thought) can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism) to complete collectivism.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-slevin-10) Strains of anarchism have often been divided into the categories of social (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_anarchism) and individualist anarchism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualist_anarchism) or similar dual classifications.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-black_dict-21)[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-socind-22) Anarchism is usually considered a radical left-wing ideology,[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-brooks-23)[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-24) and much of anarchist economics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_economics) and anarchist legal philosophy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_law) reflect anti-authoritarian interpretations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism) of communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-communism), collectivism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivist_anarchism), syndicalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism), mutualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory)), or participatory economics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_economics).[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-25)
The central tendency of anarchism as a social movement has been represented by anarcho-communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism) and anarcho-syndicalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism), with individualist anarchism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualist_anarchism) being primarily a literary phenomenon.[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-26) Many anarchists oppose all forms of aggression, supporting self-defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-defense) or non-violence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-violence) (anarcho-pacifism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-pacifism)),[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-ppu.org.uk-27)[28] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-Anarchism_1962-28) while others have supported revolution and propaganda of the deed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_of_the_deed) as means to achieve anarchist ends.[29] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#cite_note-29)
Notably, anarchist revolutions occurred in Spain (Spanish Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Revolution)) and Ukraine (Free Territory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory)), began a process of transforming society, and were heavily tied to the concepts of socialism, communism and the working class. Both were stopped by force.

[palani]

Voluntary society? Isn't this what the 11th amendment is all about?


Amendment XIII
Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

The problem is 'except as a punishment for crime' which is one reason why anyone who objects to the present society become subject to a criminal action (aka TERRORISM). You are then assigned a punishment where involuntary servitude becomes accepted practice.

[singular_me]

... then they invented 'net neutrality'


If we are not frightened of such anarchy, we do not need the controlling authority. The Internet may be the most successful example of anarchy ever known

[crimethink]

The Internet may be the most successful example of anarchy ever known

Anyone who thinks the Internet is "anarchy" is very welcome to try to use any part of it without using Internet Protocol addresses.

[Horn]

Don't mention any of this to the moderators...

[Ares]

Anyone who thinks the Internet is "anarchy" is very welcome to try to use any part of it without using Internet Protocol addresses.

The standard in which computers communicate with one another is not Anarchy. It's a standardized protocol. However the way in which people use the standardized means to communicate has been anarchy. It's a free flow of information sometimes willingly, sometimes reluctantly. Businesses flock to it because it is less regulated even for taxation reasons.

The internet is Anarchy, as there isn't really an effective way to regulate or police it. Each nation attempts to do it haphazardly. I can bounce around all over the world using Tor or IP2. You can't stop someone from doing that. Want an additional layer of protection? Use a VPN service in a country that isn't on friendly terms with the United States, and here lately, they have been pretty easy to find. The "internet kill switch" is a shutdown of the Root DNS servers. So IF Obola wants to shut down the internet, they'll go for the global root DNS servers. Why I advocate everyone here do a ping of your favorite site and keep the IP address so that you can visit your site if Obola tries to shut down the internet.

[crimethink]

The standard in which computers communicate with one another is not Anarchy. It's a standardized protocol. However the way in which people use the standardized means to communicate has been anarchy. It's a free flow of information sometimes willingly, sometimes reluctantly. Businesses flock to it because it is less regulated even for taxation reasons.


A form of government is required for the Internet to work. Imagine if everyone simply assigned their own IP addresses? You have one I want, so I simply use it, as well. Or better, I want to destroy your Internet business, and simply use the same as yours to redirect some or most of your traffic to me.

As for taxation, that is going to be dealt with, eventually. I suspect the Federal regime will simply apply a national Internet sales tax for "interstate commerce," payable to itself. The states will bitch, but there's not much they can do about that. Right now, Quill v. North Dakota is the only reason the states haven't attacked online businesses more harshly.




The internet is Anarchy, as there isn't really an effective way to regulate or police it.


LOL

Cancel the domain name and the assignment of IP address, and it's done. There are many ways to circumvent such censorship, just as there are ways of circumventing the DEA, IRS, FBI, and so on. But that doesn't mean there is no policing or regulation.

I like & admire Kim Dotcom, but he found out the Internet is definitely not an anarchy:

http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/ACTA_Web_Takedown.jpg




Each nation attempts to do it haphazardly. I can bounce around all over the world using Tor or IP2. You can't stop someone from doing that. Want an additional layer of protection? Use a VPN service in a country that isn't on friendly terms with the United States, and here lately, they have been pretty easy to find. The "internet kill switch" is a shutdown of the Root DNS servers. So IF Obola wants to shut down the internet, they'll go for the global root DNS servers. Why I advocate everyone here do a ping of your favorite site and keep the IP address so that you can visit your site if Obola tries to shut down the internet.

Corporations and government institutions control nearly all of the backbone hardware, so, I can assure you, if "they" wanted to badly enough, the Internet could be shut down. The Internet is no more unsinkable than the Titanic. Every single one of the major wholesale Internet services is in cahoots with the NSA, and must be, if they want to do business in Amerika. It's been that way since UUNet was the primary wholesaler (no surprise UUNet HQ was close to the Pentagon, CIA, and NSA HQs).

Rather than keeping lists of IP addresses to circumvent DNS (marginally useful, and totally useless if your connection is simply disconnected ala an updated version of CONELRAD*), I recommend people continue to have a landline phone and a fax machine. "Consumer" Internet could be brought down with minimal effects on what "they" consider important. However, taking down POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) would have massive repercussions.

* just four NSA partners, AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Time Warner, provide Internet service to the vast majority of "consumers" and businesses.

[Horn]

The only place that Anarchy/Volutaryism exists is in the minds of those beholden to it.

For this void based reality, I am diametrically opposed to it's non existent offerings.

It cannot, and will not form a scribble let alone type a sentence.

[Ares]

A form of government is required for the Internet to work. Imagine if everyone simply assigned their own IP addresses? You have one I want, so I simply use it, as well. Or better, I want to destroy your Internet business, and simply use the same as yours to redirect some or most of your traffic to me.

Which shows me you have no idea what you're talking about with regards to IP configuration standards. If you attempt to use an IP address that is already being used, you'll get an error stating there is a duplicate IP on the network and no traffic will be routed to you, nor will the network as a whole service any of your request. All communication will cease to your IP while my IP will never know anything happened as your ISP's gateway (usually a core router) will prevent you from communicating with the broader network.


As for taxation, that is going to be dealt with, eventually. I suspect the Federal regime will simply apply a national Internet sales tax for "interstate commerce," payable to itself. The states will bitch, but there's not much they can do about that. Right now, Quill v. North Dakota is the only reason the states haven't attacked online businesses more harshly.

Agreed,





LOL

Cancel the domain name and the assignment of IP address, and it's done. There are many ways to circumvent such censorship, just as there are ways of circumventing the DEA, IRS, FBI, and so on. But that doesn't mean there is no policing or regulation.

That only works with controlled internet. Try doing that to a .bit address and see what happens. Namecoin was created to decentralize DNS. As far as IP goes, since it's IPv4, we're kind of stuck using a 32-bit address space probably for the next 10 years or so while they work to upgrade the infrastructure to support a 128-bit address space, know as IPv6.


I like & admire Kim Dotcom, but he found out the Internet is definitely not an anarchy:

http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/ACTA_Web_Takedown.jpg

Kim Dotcom has been doing well, and has even sued the New Zealand government for violating his rights at the request of the American FBI. He launched a new site called Mega where even he cannot unlock what was uploaded because they do not have access to the encryption keys.







Corporations and government institutions control nearly all of the backbone hardware, so, I can assure you, if "they" wanted to badly enough, the Internet could be shut down. The Internet is no more unsinkable than the Titanic. Every single one of the major wholesale Internet services is in cahoots with the NSA, and must be, if they want to do business in Amerika. It's been that way since UUNet was the primary wholesaler (no surprise UUNet HQ was close to the Pentagon, CIA, and NSA HQs).

Agreed, but they would also be hurting themselves as they cut off their own revenue if they shut down the product they use to stay in the black. They are not government and cannot print what they need to pay their bills. As far as the major ISP's being in cahoots with the NSA, also agree. Why I advocate and use in cryptography whenever I can. I generate my own keys for my FTP server, I use https anywhere, a handy browser plugin to go look for an https equivalent first before http.


Rather than keeping lists of IP addresses to circumvent DNS (marginally useful, and totally useless if your connection is simply disconnected ala an updated version of CONELRAD*), I recommend people continue to have a landline phone and a fax machine. "Consumer" Internet could be brought down with minimal effects on what "they" consider important. However, taking down POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) would have massive repercussions.

Taking down internet minimal effects eh? It's relied upon by businesses and residents just as much as POTS if not more so now due to the nature of technological advancement. POTS can be taken down just as easily but with the same repercussions. Country grinds to a standstill.


* just four NSA partners, AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Time Warner, provide Internet service to the vast majority of "consumers" and businesses.

Yep, no disagreement from me here.

[Horn]

The internet itself could be classified as a void, as such vacuuming such real political arguments, and debates from seeing the lite of day, relegating them to the ethereal internet, thus permitting all forms of controlled and propagized msm to roam without measures in the "real" world.

Anarchy - Service for the servants.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogsEw7wuimk

I'm of the opinion these "Internet Anarchists" would be perfectly happy,

when and in a time Religion offered them a God who accepted their complaints.

[crimethink]

Which shows me you have no idea what you're talking about with regards to IP configuration standards. If you attempt to use an IP address that is already being used, you'll get an error stating there is a duplicate IP on the network and no traffic will be routed to you, nor will the network as a whole service any of your request. All communication will cease to your IP while my IP will never know anything happened as your ISP's gateway (usually a core router) will prevent you from communicating with the broader network.


LOL

There's that word, "standards," again. Standards established by a form of government. No form of government = no standards = no rules as you illustrate them.

Since you claim I "have no idea what talking about," it appears a basic overview of spoofing is in order for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address_spoofing




That only works with controlled internet. Try doing that to a .bit address and see what happens.


Block such traffic on networks you control.




Namecoin was created to decentralize DNS. As far as IP goes, since it's IPv4, we're kind of stuck using a 32-bit address space probably for the next 10 years or so while they work to upgrade the infrastructure to support a 128-bit address space, know as IPv6.


IPv6 is irrelevant to this discussion - a Red Herring.




Kim Dotcom has been doing well, and has even sued the New Zealand government for violating his rights at the request of the American FBI.


Yeah, sure, he's doing well:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-08-21/kim-dotcom-alleged-internet-pirate-loses-a-round-in-new-zealand

And what about his customers who lost untold amounts of data?




He launched a new site called Mega where even he cannot unlock what was uploaded because they do not have access to the encryption keys.


I'm well-aware of Mega, and he's not in control of it anymore. Further, no one seriously believes the encryption is "unbreakable."





Agreed, but they would also be hurting themselves as they cut off their own revenue if they shut down the product they use to stay in the black.


They exist at the pleasure of the System. The airlines took the hit with the three-day ground stop, and then put up with the insanity of the TSA after 9/11. A "sufficient" event will do the same for the Internet.




As far as the major ISP's being in cahoots with the NSA, also agree. Why I advocate and use in cryptography whenever I can. I generate my own keys for my FTP server, I use https anywhere, a handy browser plugin to go look for an https equivalent first before http.


I don't pretend for a second that encryption of any kind is going to stop the NSA, including HTTP Everywhere, which I also use. It will slow them down, and possibly block "other entities," though.




Taking down internet minimal effects eh? It's relied upon by businesses and residents just as much as POTS if not more so now due to the nature of technological advancement. POTS can be taken down just as easily but with the same repercussions. Country grinds to a standstill.


[I]Consumer Internet. Oh, wow, no one can watch Game of Thrones via IP at home, yeah, country at a standstill. Leaving corporate service online would be low-risk, since you could get the corporate IT people to do your "anti-terrorist" policing for you under threat of having the Internet plug pulled on them.

You believe in the "unsinkable" Internet. I do not. If and when most IP traffic is carried over private, independently-controlled data links, I'll change my position.

[Serpo]

I think a voluntary society is the only true society .

A lot of people cannot see this however and it usually means they are too attached to the present day control system.

This is a system where you have one person telling another what is best for them.

From my point of view I dont need/want/require another person to tell me how I should be living and it is basically a crazy power trip and a falsehood.

This is especially true when corruption takes over at the top ,like we have now, and it becomes life threatening to our very existence.

For one person to have power over another is totally BS which ever way you look at it...................



http://www.personalityresearch.org/intelligence/xhierarchical.jpeg.pagespeed.ic.9Duvku_NXU.jpg

[aeondaze]

I think a voluntary society is the only true society .

A lot of people cannot see this however and it usually means they are too attached to the present day control system.

This is a system where you have one person telling another what is best for them.

From my point of view I dont need/want/require another person to tell me how I should be living and it is basically a crazy power trip and a falsehood.

This is especially true when corruption takes over at the top ,like we have now, and it becomes life threatening to our very existence.

For one person to have power over another is totally BS which ever way you look at it...................

This is singularly the most important piece of common ground we share serpo.

My only fear in living in this type of society is all the superstitious nonsense that I'd have to tolerate. These types are easily spooked by someone who does not share the same beliefs. I see this everyday and imagine that it would be multiplied many times over in a voluntary system.

sorry guys, I think you're belief in all this hocus pocus is the very thing that ties you to this current system. If this so called voluntary society is to come about, a lot of people need to jetison their irrational beliefs. These are the very things TPTB play upon in crafting their control mechanisms.

[Rubicon]

If I have Ebola in a voluntary society, what if I voluntarily choose to continue to gleefully interact with the community?

[Ares]

LOL

There's that word, "standards," again. Standards established by a form of government. No form of government = no standards = no rules as you illustrate them.

Since you claim I "have no idea what talking about," it appears a basic overview of spoofing is in order for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_address_spoofing

I think you need to leave technical analogies alone, as you still haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. IP spoofing is forging the packet header of a different IP address than the one that actually sent the packet. From your own link: "In computer networking, IP address spoofing or IP spoofing is the creation of Internet Protocol (IP) packets with a source IP address, with the purpose of concealing the identity of the sender or impersonating another computing system."

That's not stealing or trying to assign yourself an IP address like you were attempting to elude to in your previous piss poor analogy. Not to mention STANDARDS are the way machines function. Not human beings who have individual wants, and needs. What you want and or need is not what I want and or need. One size does not fit all. Government forces everyone into a one size fits all shoe box.





Block such traffic on networks you control.

Ask China how their "great firewall" is working out for blocking traffic.





IPv6 is irrelevant to this discussion - a Red Herring.

Most of your technical analogies were irrelevant to this discussion for the same reasons I pointed out above. Machines work with standards, and protocols, humans do not. As everyone will interpret the standard and or law their own way to either make it benefit them, or subjugate their fellow man.





Yeah, sure, he's doing well:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-08-21/kim-dotcom-alleged-internet-pirate-loses-a-round-in-new-zealand

And what about his customers who lost untold amounts of data?


Tell them to blame their government. None of that data belonged to them to begin with. But with government, it's only theft if they can charge you with it.




I'm well-aware of Mega, and he's not in control of it anymore. Further, no one seriously believes the encryption is "unbreakable."

Maybe, maybe not. The cryptography he is using isn't bad, but it also isn't the best either. So who knows?






They exist at the pleasure of the System. The airlines took the hit with the three-day ground stop, and then put up with the insanity of the TSA after 9/11. A "sufficient" event will do the same for the Internet.

They've been trying for a while now. I'm sure they'll get something like SOPA through which will kill the internet as we know it.





I don't pretend for a second that encryption of any kind is going to stop the NSA, including HTTP Everywhere, which I also use. It will slow them down, and possibly block "other entities," though.


If you can make your own encryption and generate your own keys, you're pretty much immune to surveillance at that point. The only 100% method of defeating surveillance that I am aware is One Time Pad.




[I]Consumer Internet. Oh, wow, no one can watch Game of Thrones via IP at home, yeah, country at a standstill. Leaving corporate service online would be low-risk, since you could get the corporate IT people to do your "anti-terrorist" policing for you under threat of having the Internet plug pulled on them.

You believe in the "unsinkable" Internet. I do not. If and when most IP traffic is carried over private, independently-controlled data links, I'll change my position.

Which won't happen without government getting out of the way. I just know tech, and there's always another way around. Even if they block my home, I can always fire up an old Microwave transceiver and tie into the link between 2 microwave towers. It uses low grade encryption (if it's used at all) and can sniff the traffic for a usable IP address.

There's always another way.

[Ares]

If I have Ebola in a voluntary society, what if I voluntarily choose to continue to gleefully interact with the community?

Then once you cause injury to another, you just violated someone elses rights. You're open to being sued through an arbitration court for damages up too including your entire estate depending on how many people you infect.

[crimethink]

My only fear in living in this type of society is all the superstitious nonsense that I'd have to tolerate. These types are easily spooked by someone who does not share the same beliefs.


LOL

Those with unwavering blind faith in so-called "science" are just as fanatic - and dangerous - as any Jim Jones type.



If this so called voluntary society is to come about, a lot of people need to jetison their irrational beliefs. These are the very things TPTB play upon in crafting their control mechanisms.

So-called "science" has been behind the most deadly of total governments. Marxism was and is touted as the most "scientific" of social systems. I imagine that those with the "science" religion would be the most vocal in opposing either limited government, or any sort of anarchist "voluntary society" (were it possible).

[crimethink]

If I have Ebola in a voluntary society, what if I voluntarily choose to continue to gleefully interact with the community?

Of course! Ebola is merely a persecuted African immigrant, and, as a symbiont with you, its rights would be tied with yours.

[singular_me]

lets look back at history, when the conquistadors arrived they distributed blankets infected with small pox, and killed indigenous by the 1000's....

they are still at it today, governments bio terror has track records... diseases like AIDS, ebola are very likely man made. They cash in big especially in africa to plunder its resources mainly

such threats shouldnt exist in a Voluntaryist society.

to be able to envision such a society, one must end thinking patterns attached to the current model.

Why does the CDC own a patent on Ebola 'invention
http://www.naturalnews.com/046290_Ebola_patent_vaccines_profit_motive.html





If I have Ebola in a voluntary society, what if I voluntarily choose to continue to gleefully interact with the community?

[crimethink]

Then once you cause injury to another, you just violated someone elses rights. You're open to being sued through an arbitration court for damages up too including your entire estate depending on how many people you infect.

LOL - so you are in favor of government! "Arbitration court," LOL.

Ebola is a naturally-occurring entity, and as such, you have no right to restrict its ability to travel. Rubicon would also have the unlimited right to travel, whether he is infected or not. Any argument of "causing injury to another" is nonsense provided he does not willfully go around injecting people with it (he has the right to breathe, sneeze, touch surfaces, travel, etc.).

It is your responsibility not to get infected. :)

[crimethink]

such threats shouldnt exist in a Voluntaryist society.

You are a real hoot! You are so deluded you think that diseases will stop being diseases in a "voluntaryist society." LOL - nah, ROTFLMAO!

[aeondaze]

Those with unwavering blind faith in so-called "science" are just fanatic

Only an idiot would think genuine science is based on blind faith.


So-called "science" has been behind the most deadly of total governments. Marxism was and is touted as the most "scientific" of social systems. I imagine that those with the "science" religion would be the most vocal in opposing either limited government, or any sort of anarchist "voluntary society" (were it possible).

Yeah, and the crusades, the inquisition, ISIS and the plethora of religious wars were peacefull "love-ins". Marxism had nothing to do with "science". "Social science" is an oxymoron. You have your head screwed on backwards clearly you views can be largely disconted as you have nary an idea what it entails.

Watch out!

The boogyman is coming to get you...:D

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FIGm4W-Xmlg/Ua8Mm-9fmLI/AAAAAAAAEJs/uryiGwhdCCU/s640/Creepy+1920s+Photos+of+The+Boogeyman+(5).jpg

[Ares]

LOL - so you are in favor of government! "Arbitration court," LOL.

Arbitration courts are private.


Ebola is a naturally-occurring entity, and as such, you have no right to restrict its ability to travel. Rubicon would also have the unlimited right to travel, whether he is infected or not. Any argument of "causing injury to another" is nonsense provided he does not willfully go around injecting people with it (he has the right to breathe, sneeze, touch surfaces, travel, etc.).

It is your responsibility not to get infected. :)

If he knowingly goes about his merry way infecting individuals, then he is at fault. However a mitigating factor could be if he was just a carrier and wasn't aware he was infected. Then he couldn't be at fault.

[crimethink]

I think you need to leave technical analogies alone, as you still haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. IP spoofing is forging the packet header of a different IP address than the one that actually sent the packet. From your own link: "In computer networking, IP address spoofing or IP spoofing is the creation of Internet Protocol (IP) packets with a source IP address, with the purpose of concealing the identity of the sender or impersonating another computing system."

That's not stealing or trying to assign yourself an IP address like you were attempting to elude to in your previous piss poor analogy. Not to mention STANDARDS are the way machines function. Not human beings who have individual wants, and needs. What you want and or need is not what I want and or need. One size does not fit all. Government forces everyone into a one size fits all shoe box.


I'm not going to go into detail about how I know what I know about this issue. You want to paint me as "ignorant" and that I am not. The standards are established by a government entity, and the standards can be subverted & overcome. You want to pretend the standards you depend upon were created by unanimous consent - they simply were not.




Ask China how their "great firewall" is working out for blocking traffic.


Exceptions to the rule "prove" that no censorship exists. :rolleyes:





Tell them to blame their government. None of that data belonged to them to begin with.


You are shifting the discussion to blame. I was not discussing blame. I was discussing the fact people lost their data despite your claim (or implication) that the Internet is an "anarchy."




If you can make your own encryption and generate your own keys, you're pretty much immune to surveillance at that point. The only 100% method of defeating surveillance that I am aware is One Time Pad.


Nothing is unbreakable. TrueCrypt may have come close, which is why they were NSL'd out of existence.




Which won't happen without government getting out of the way. I just know tech, and there's always another way around. Even if they block my home, I can always fire up an old Microwave transceiver and tie into the link between 2 microwave towers. It uses low grade encryption (if it's used at all) and can sniff the traffic for a usable IP address.

There's always another way.

Then do it now. Start your independence from government. Or is government-corporate Internet just a lot more convenient? :)

[crimethink]

Only an idiot would think genuine science is based on blind faith.


We agree! Trouble is, what you claim is "science" is usually not genuine science.




Yeah, and the crusades, the inquisition, ISIS and the plethora of religious wars were peacefull "love-ins".


One year of Stalin's "scientific atheism" exceeded all the body counts of those.




Marxism had nothing to do with "science".


That is your opinion, and not the opinion of millions of dedicated Marxists.



You have your head screwed on backwards clearly you views can be largely disconted as you have nary an idea what it entails.


Nah, I just call bullshit on anything that actually is bullshit. And your faith-based "science" is bullshit.




Watch out!

The boogyman is coming to get you...



My only fear in living in this type of society is all the superstitious nonsense that I'd have to tolerate. These types are easily spooked by someone who does not share the same beliefs.

Sounds like you are the one being most spooked about different opinions and ideas, LOL.

[crimethink]

Arbitration courts are private.


Fine, it's "voluntary" and I simply choose not to participate. LOL

And you must respect my right not to participate!




If he knowingly goes about his merry way infecting individuals, then he is at fault.


He has no obligation to protect you from anything. Remember, self-reliance & self-responsibility! :)

(this is really amusing...)




However a mitigating factor could be if he was just a carrier and wasn't aware he was infected. Then he couldn't be at fault.

He isn't at fault at all for having a virus take residence in his body.

(a "voluntaryist" society is all voluntary until it's not...LOL)

[Horn]

For one person to have power over another is totally BS which ever way you look at it...................

This type of antisocial behavior won't get you anywhere, and is falling into the a void.

True Publicans should be concerned with what powers are lawfully expressed over the individual, seeing as that's what most monkeys concern themselves in, expressing their "powers".

This is not a school of fish you're dealing with, humans stepping on each other is the basis of human society.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDnrSLq3NaE

A seasoned witch could call you from the depths of your disgrace
And rearrange your liver to the solid mental grace
And achieve it all with music that came quickly from afar
And taste the fruit of man recorded losing all against the hour
And assessing points to nowhere, leading every single one
A dewdrop can exalt us like the music of the sun
And take away the plane in which we move
And choose the course you're running

[Ares]

I'm not going to go into detail about how I know what I know about this issue. You want to paint me as "ignorant" and that I am not. The standards are established by a government entity, and the standards can be subverted & overcome. You want to pretend the standards you depend upon were created by unanimous consent - they simply were not.

The standards weren't created by unanimous consensus, I never said they were. You assume too much, and obviously know too little. However the free market determined the protocol to use because of efficiency and ease of use. TCP/IP is not the most efficient standard, but it was the most reliable. If not then where are SNA or XNS now?





Exceptions to the rule "prove" that no censorship exists. :rolleyes:

More irrelevant banter.






You are shifting the discussion to blame. I was not discussing blame. I was discussing the fact people lost their data despite your claim (or implication) that the Internet is an "anarchy."

Data loss happens even government controlled situations. I mean really, the IRS was trying frantically to recover those e-mails. But damnit, they just couldn't recover them, so many faulty hard drives and all... :rolleyes:





Nothing is unbreakable. TrueCrypt may have come close, which is why they were NSL'd out of existence.

You can still get the previous version of TruCrypt that is reliable. Just no support outside of fan support forums.



Then do it now. Start your independence from government. Or is government-corporate Internet just a lot more convenient? :)

Sure, you have about a billion FRN's I can use to start it? If I had the financial resources I would.

[singular_me]

no you are the hoot because you cannot even read that I am talking of gov inducing/financing bio terror PAID by taxpayers money.

voluntary self segregation is a protection against many threats, you know.




You are a real hoot! You are so deluded you think that diseases will stop being diseases in a "voluntaryist society." LOL - nah, ROTFLMAO!

[Ares]

Fine, it's "voluntary" and I simply choose not to participate. LOL

And you must respect my right not to participate!

Contrary to your views of anarchy, there are forms of justice and retribution. You can plan not to participate but I can plan to enact retribution for damages. Which would you prefer handle it by being civil or do you want it to get messy?





He has no obligation to protect you from anything. Remember, self-reliance & self-responsibility! :)

(this is really amusing...)

You amuse yourself with your own lunacy Book.





He isn't at fault at all for having a virus take residence in his body.

(a "voluntaryist" society is all voluntary until it's not...LOL)

Nope absolutely not, only with his willful disregard for others if he knowingly infects someone else. Even in a voluntary based society there are rules and laws to live by. But those rules and laws are created by consensus not top down do as I say not as I do bullshit government you advocate for.

[crimethink]

Contrary to your views of anarchy, there are forms of justice and retribution. You can plan not to participate but I can plan to enact retribution for damages. Which would you prefer handle it by being civil or do you want it to get messy?


And there it is!

State-run police thugs are bad but Ares-run police thugs are "good."

Do it my way or it's "retribution."




You amuse yourself with your own lunacy Book.


Book? You're still under the delusion I'm Book?




Nope absolutely not, only with his willful disregard for others if he knowingly infects someone else.


As I have said, he has no obligation to protect you from anything. It is your obligation to protect yourself. "Freedom to," not "freedom from." That's supposedly what you want, right?




Even in a voluntary based society there are rules and laws to live by.


And all "voluntary"!



But those rules and laws are created by consensus not top down do as I say not as I do bullshit government you advocate for.

"Consensus"? What sort of "consensus"? Ares and his self-appointed elite? A free, unanimous vote of everyone? Something else? Surely you're not going to claim everyone is going to agree? If one disagrees, what then? Force your stance on him? "Take retribution" against him?

All along, as I have said repeatedly, your system is impossible, and each & every time you implicitly admit that a form of government is necessary.

[crimethink]

However the free market determined the protocol to use because of efficiency and ease of use. TCP/IP is not the most efficient standard, but it was the most reliable.


Oh boy, more "Free Market" bullshit.

TCP/IP was created by government and put into use by government. Whether we like it or not. Credit where credit is due. There was no serious challenger. Ever. IBM and Xerox were never so stupid as to try to challenge it. The "Free Market" could not come up with a better "private" solution, belying the nonsense "argument" always spewed forth.




Sure, you have about a billion FRN's I can use to start it? If I had the financial resources I would.

For a few thousand dollars, you could put into operation a small microwave network using used/recycled equipment. But your "ideals" are just idle talk, when money comes into play. And only a fool spends money when something works already. Your livelihood depends upon the System, and you do nothing but offer meaningless words on Internet fora to "deconstruct" it. Yet, you have the chutzpah to denigrate & belittle those of us who accept openly what you accept covertly.

[mick silver]

to have anything that would work you all would need to leave the matrix and that's never going to happen they have build to many walls for all

[Ares]

And there it is!

State-run police thugs are bad but Ares-run police thugs are "good."

Do it my way or it's "retribution."

Who said anything about Police? I sure didn't. You don't show up to an Arbitration hearing and I get to cause the damage or injury you caused me. The law of the jungle is harsh. You were that little kid in school who would tease and poke bigger kids than you, then when they went to either get revenge or to hand your ass to you, you would run to the teacher wouldn't you? No wonder you love government to protect your sorry ass.



Book? You're still under the delusion I'm Book?

Because you are. Same inferiority complex as that annoying little miscreant who keeps showing up under different names every time his sorry ass gets banned.





As I have said, he has no obligation to protect you from anything. It is your obligation to protect yourself. "Freedom to," not "freedom from." That's supposedly what you want, right?

How am I supposed to do that if he doesn't tell anyone that he is infected with Ebola?




And all "voluntary"!
:rolleyes:





"Consensus"? What sort of "consensus"? Ares and his self-appointed elite? A free, unanimous vote of everyone? Something else? Surely you're not going to claim everyone is going to agree? If one disagrees, what then? Force your stance on him? "Take retribution" against him?

All along, as I have said repeatedly, your system is impossible, and each & every time you implicitly admit that a form of government is necessary.

In a voluntary society if someone doesn't adhere to the rules, they don't get the benefit that they bring. There is no point in forcing someone to do something against their will. Which is what you prefer not me. Your system of government is impossible and a time tested failure. Each time one gets implemented it completely fails within a short time frame due to corruption, or self implodes due to mismanagement.

[Ares]

Oh boy, more "Free Market" bullshit.

TCP/IP was created by government and put into use by government. Whether we like it or not. Credit where credit is due. There was no serious challenger. Ever. IBM and Xerox were never so stupid as to try to challenge it. The "Free Market" could not come up with a better "private" solution, belying the nonsense "argument" always spewed forth.

Since the DoD open sourced it yes. The free market chose it. No one forced Microsoft to include TCP/IP in and make it a standard with Windows 95. Windows 3.1 didn't even have the TCP/IP stack included you had to install it yourself if you wanted to join it to a workgroup. There was also Appletalk, Token ring etc. TCP/IP proved more reliable that's it.

Ohh I know, the JEWS made the decision to implement TCP/IP. :rolleyes:


For a few thousand dollars, you could put into operation a small microwave network using used/recycled equipment. But your "ideals" are just idle talk, when money comes into play. And only a fool spends money when something works already. Your livelihood depends upon the System, and you do nothing but offer meaningless words on Internet fora to "deconstruct" it. Yet, you have the chutzpah to denigrate & belittle those of us who accept openly what you accept covertly.

What the fuck ever. You belittle anyone who even shakes your tree about not wanting or needing government. The type of system you laid out would be some white trash half assed internet. I'm talking FIBER. Which requires a huge investment. Yet you have the "chutzpah" (How jewish of you ;)) to denigrate and belittle those who know more than you.

Go cry to your nanny state government like the little child that you are.

[crimethink]

Who said anything about Police? I sure didn't. You don't show up to an Arbitration hearing and I get to cause the damage or injury you caused me. The law of the jungle is harsh.


Only a madman wants such a society.




You were that little kid in school who would tease and poke bigger kids than you, then when they went to either get revenge or to hand your ass to you, you would run to the teacher wouldn't you? No wonder you love government to protect your sorry ass.


Actually, I was the little kid who stood up to bullies like you.

It's becoming very clear; those who advocate your "voluntaryist" society are of two types: predators, such as yourself, and the clueless who think delusions are reality.




Because you are. Same inferiority complex as that annoying little miscreant who keeps showing up under different names every time his sorry ass gets banned.


You pride yourself on being in error on so many things.

I'm not sure if Book would take it as an insult or a compliment to be compared to me.




How am I supposed to do that if he doesn't tell anyone that he is infected with Ebola?


That's your problem. You better be on guard at all times. He has no obligation to disclose his personal affairs to you. Or, perhaps you believe in compelling him to tell you?




In a voluntary society if someone doesn't adhere to the rules, they don't get the benefit that they bring.


Then it's not voluntary, but mandatory. Comply or be excluded.




There is no point in forcing someone to do something against their will. Which is what you prefer no me.



You don't show up to an Arbitration hearing and I get to cause the damage or injury you caused me. The law of the jungle is harsh.





Your system of government is impossible and a time tested failure.


It works well-enough so you can make a living from its fruits.

Why don't you give up TCP/IP and try one of the "Free Market solutions" you cited earlier? LOL




Each time one gets implemented it completely fails within a short time frame due to corruption.

Plant a garden, and then do nothing, of course it's going to be overgrown by weeds.

Franklin & Jefferson warned us about how to tend to the garden of limited government, but people got lazy. Limited government didn't fail; the gardeners - the people - did.

[crimethink]

Ohh I know, the JEWS made the decision to implement TCP/IP.


No, it was the A-rabs! LOL




What the fuck ever. You belittle anyone who even shakes your tree about not wanting or needing government.


Your livelihood is dependent upon the fruits of government.




The type of system you laid out would be some white trash half assed internet. I'm talking FIBER. Which requires a huge investment.


I hit a nerve. :)

Microwave is still used when fiber is not cost-effective. You could put your money where your mouth is, but your mouth is just too big and full of it.

Show us how it's done, boy!




Yet you have the "chutzpah" (How jewish of you ;)) to denigrate and belittle those who know more than you.


You actually "know" shit. You are just a predator who wishes he could substitute himself into the role of government, and use "the law of the jungle" to have his way with folks. You don't have a problem with government. You have a problem with the fact that you aren't in charge of government.




Go cry to your nanny state government like the little child that you are.

Just like Alisa "Ayn Rand" Rosenbaum, you're all meaningless talk. "Government is evil, except when it benefits me."

[Ares]

Only a madman wants such a society.

Translated: I can't stand up for myself so I need government to protect me... WHAAAAAA





Actually, I was the little kid who stood up to bullies like you.

LMAO HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA ROTFLMAO HA HA HA HA HA sure you were................. HA HA HA HA HA That's a good one.


It's becoming very clear; those who advocate your "voluntaryist" society are of two types: predators, such as yourself, and the clueless who think delusions are reality.

:rolleyes: Whatever you say Book. Ohh look over there.. There's a Jew!!! The boogeyman is going to get you. But keep giving them the means to enslave you.. Yeah I'm the one who is delusional... :rolleyes:





You pride yourself on being in error on so many things.

I'm not sure if Book would take it as an insult or a compliment to be compared to me.

On being in error eh? What might that be? Showing how stupid government is and shoving everyone into a one size fits all box to be enslaved like cattle? Or pointing out the similarities between you and Book? You cry about the Jewish problem (which is justified) but yet continue to going down the tired worn out path of giving them the means to enslave everyone with... Yeah... silly me.. :rolleyes:



That's your problem. You better be on guard at all times. He has no obligation to disclose his personal affairs to you. Or, perhaps you believe in compelling him to tell you?

So say you're out at the gay bar, and you pick up a friendly chap and you 2 go home and do whatever it is you guys do. He neglects to tell you that he was HIV positive. Since he knew he was a carrier and didn't inform you so that you could make a more informed decision the problem is your fault?? Got it. :rolleyes:




Then it's not voluntary, but mandatory. Comply or be excluded.

It's not mandatory. You don't pay for services, you don't get the benefits. I know, I know. Lets force everyone at the barrel of a gun to fund stealing from their neighbors like your model. That'll work.. :rolleyes:








It works well-enough so you can make a living from its fruits.

Because I know I could go farther without dragging bottom feeders like you with me.


Why don't you give up TCP/IP and try one of the "Free Market solutions" you cited earlier? LOL

:rolleyes:


Plant a garden, and then do nothing, of course it's going to be overgrown by weeds.

Which is the problem, not everyone wants a government or to take part in it. You can't compel anyone to do anything even with government. It's a waste of time, money and energy.


Franklin & Jefferson warned us about how to tend to the garden of limited government, but people got lazy. Limited government didn't fail; the gardeners - the people - did.

People do what they always do. Caught up in life and its pursuits. Some people are lazy, some work themselves to death, and there is the bulk majority in between. Hardly anyone comes goes and says, hey maybe we should make government do what it was designed to do. Those people who do, as you can see are a minority.

[crimethink]

Whatever you say Book....Yeah I'm the one who is delusional...

I think I'll hang on to this...it will be hilarious soon enough.

[Ares]

Your livelihood is dependent upon the fruits of government.

I work in the private sector.


I hit a nerve. :)

Microwave is still used when fiber is not cost-effective. You could put your money where your mouth is, but your mouth is just too big and full of it.

Show us how it's done, boy!

No I think I'll just sit this one out so you can make all the baseless accusations that you want. Come on keyboard commando, show us how to get it done when you're just sitting on your ass all day on here.


You actually "know" shit. You are just a predator who wishes he could substitute himself into the role of government, and use "the law of the jungle" to have his way with folks. You don't have a problem with government. You have a problem with the fact that you aren't in charge of government.

Says the moron who confused IP spoofing with IP stealing... :rolleyes:

Yeah have my way with folks? When have I said that I would force anyone to do anything? That's your department Mr. Government man. Who pays your paycheck? You on the dole like 40%+ of other americans and you don't want your gravy train to go away? Is that it?



Just like Alisa "Ayn Rand" Rosenbaum, you're all meaningless talk. "Government is evil, except when it benefits me."

:rolleyes: I already pointed out the fallacy of your meaningless bullshit. Ayn Rand was a government stooge and her political leanings are more towards Libertarians than Anarchist. But little things like facts can't get in the way of throwing shit on a wall and hoping something sticks for you does it?

You keep bringing up Ayn Rand, but she hated Anarchy and uses your same argument. You really are fucking clueless aren't you?

"Anarchy, as a political concept, is a naive floating abstraction: . . . a society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare. But the possibility of human immorality is not the only objection to anarchy: even a society whose every member were fully rational and faultlessly moral, could not function in a state of anarchy; it is the need of objective laws and of an arbiter for honest disagreements among men that necessitates the establishment of a government." - Ayn Rand The Virtue of Selfishness

Yeah keep bringing up Ayn Rand.... BOY!

[singular_me]

some 101 voluntaryist principles every kid should be learning in elementary school. It is above all about education. The current system has to be dismantled.

*evil is exponential. One lie/crime calls for another and so on.

*the more awareness of the issues, the more Reason/Wisdom will take over. Biases are self-defeating. Poor historical knowledge brings about violence between races/cultures and will cause more Divide and Conquer, and eventually call for the need of a police state.

*Coercing the others' thoughts is futile, as each human has his own perceptions and life experiences, sharing in a civil manner is best. Live and let live

*Learning to live within ones means deters from being manipulated or manipulating.

*on a social and individual level, nobody can escape self-responsibility or s/he will pass it on to his/his own kids. Or simply put her/himself in jeopardy.

*Every upside and a down side and otherwise, hence boosts creativity and conflict resolutions.

*helping those really in the need is encouraged, should be regarded as a life insurance.

*Various types of insurances can address damage done to others accidentally . Do not kill and steal.

*voluntary self-segregation is best for people to set up the rules they want to go by.



When our knowing exceeds our sensing, we will no longer be deceived by the illusions of our senses. -- Walter Russell

[Horn]

some 101 voluntaryist principles every kid should be learning in elementary school.

If you're paying and sending to private school, the indoctrination is course curriculum directed strictly towards capitalized money making,

any other curriculum simply fails in logic and reasoning, given the monthly bill due to teacher.

[Serpo]

If I have Ebola in a voluntary society, what if I voluntarily choose to continue to gleefully interact with the community?

People need to reach a state of mind for a true society to work ............

The ONLY reason for someone to have power over another is to get something out of them by stealth or trickery.

Sure we live in a for profit society and its almost impossible to see a society become free.

If I had ebola in this type of society that exists through honest cooperation spreading ebola isnt a choice we would want to do because of the different values we would have, basically the opposite of fear.

You either value freedom or wait for an answer from the IDIOTS at the so called top, which is the bottom in the way I look at it.

[singular_me]

thanks for the good laugh, Horn... I mean it... hahahahahahahahahaaa... it is just too cynical.


If you're paying and sending to private school, the indoctrination is course curriculum directed strictly towards capitalized money making,

any other curriculum simply fails in logic and reasoning, given the monthly bill due to teacher.

[Serpo]

HOW TO CREATE THE FREE SOCIETY, AND EXTRACT FROM "THOUGHTS OF AN ANARCHO-PACIFIST"

by Derrick A Pike 2 THE ELIMINATION OF POVERTY AND WAR


The serious radical who wishes to eliminate poverty and war soon discovers that he or she is faced with three main problems: What is the exact nature of our present society that produces these social evils; what is the nature of a peaceful society that will serve the needs of everyone; and how exactly are we to abolish the former and produce the latter. It is comparatively easy to discover at least some characteristics of our society and to realise that the state creates and perpetuates all the social evils including war itself. For that reason, it is not new to say that the state must be abolished. Ana rchists have been saying just that for years. It is more difficult to discover the nature of the ideal society because such a society can be designed only after we know the true nature of human beings. Perhaps the most serious problems, however, are those concerned with the revolution. We must know how to behave to produce our ideals. In view the above, it will be realised that if we are to understand pacifism completely then the number of subjects to study is vast.


When I was a young man and began collecting books for my study, I soon found that, except those concerned with biology and most divisions of technology and science, I had books on almost every subject. The subjects concerned with peace and other desirable social ideals are many, and although I am now going to attempt to give a short summary of the answers to the three main problems mentioned above, those who really care for society must discover much, much more for themselves. Let us start with the nature of our society. We live in a state society and in it there is a separate group of people called a government. The government exists ostensibly to direct affairs, but its real main and overriding purpose is not to work for the people's welfare but ensure its own continuous existence. Governments cannot do any job unless they exist.


So rulers are always loath to give up office and every government will fight a war to the end, although all their people may be destroyed while they do so. The secondary purpose of governments is to divide labour and wealth unequally. As a result, there are a few idle and rich people and many workers and poor people. To ensure their survival and to achieve their secondary purpose, governments strive to fulfil several minor purposes, which means that they control the lives of the people in almost every way. Because governments control all people, society as we know it is the result of that control.


The way governments want people to behave is called the law. Obedience to the law is achieved by the combination of the carrot (money and other rewards), the stick (violence of one form or another), and the control of belief (propaganda and censorship). These three elements I call the power machinery, and it is used so that an unjust and pyramidal society is created. Because reward and privilege for some people and groups within society are so great, and because society is very complex, it is extremely difficult to decide who has the real power and who has not. In Britain, the real rulers are not only the men and wom en at Westminster but also the large power groups such as the bankers, the clergy, and the armed forces. These groups can dictate to the government and this they do. They control the government so that it serves their interests, and in so doing are in charge of affairs. Because the state pattern of society is so hopelessly inefficient, even comparatively simple social problems remain unsolved. This being so, most people would refuse to support any government were they not under the continuous threat of violence. People are bribed and bamboozled and when that fails violence is used upon their person.


Violence, as Tolstoy said, is the keystone of power. Support the status quo, obey the law, or you go to prison. Nevertheless, even with the threat of violence no government could exist without war. Like frightened animals most people believe that they must be prepared to fight. Believing this, they accept that they need a central government to direct and plan their defence against any foreigners who might attack them. For governments, war is the ultimate method of obtaining obedience; no state can exist without war and the threat of it. It can be proved that people are innately good in the sense that it is their nature is to cooperate with and help others rather than be forever at variance with them. When people behave evilly, as they do today, it is because their true nature has been perverted and because they find themselves in a deleterious environment. So the society we want to create will make use of people's need to cooperate. It will not have a government, but it will have groups of people who advise others on the use of technolo gy and on the best way to manage social affairs. These people will have no authority backed by violence.


Their advice will be taken because it is given with love and the desire to obtain the best for all. There will be planning and direction without government because people will govern themselves. There will be an abundance of wealth because it will be produced by everyone and for everyone, because it will not be produced for profit, and because none will be wasted on governments and their violence. To create our ideal society, we must remember that the end never justifies the means. This is so because the means we use shape the ends we achieve.


We cannot travel backwards and arrive at a point up ahead. It follows that we must start now as we intend to go on - behave now, as far as possible, as if we were already in our ideal society. We must not do anything that we would not do were we in our utopia. This means that we must not join any revolutionary group, violent or nonviolent, and we must not make a living by working for any group that is an essential part of the state pattern. We must not work in the police force or the military or in the artificial economic groups, such as those connected with banking and insurance.

We must not work to give some people unnecessary luxuries. By the judicious dissemination of our ideals, all our activities will become worldwide. We shall recognise no national barriers because there will be none in the future. Anyone who considers all this to be complicated and airy-fairy should realise one very simple fact: The states can be abolished simply by refusing to do violence. States cannot exist without war, so if we abolish war we shall abolish the states. It is not simply that wars will cease when people refuse to fight. The states rest on the keystone of violence, and so when people refuse to support the violent component of the power machinery, the states will collapse. As we destroy all the undesirable elements in our present society, we must simultaneously build our new organisations. We must start now to build our ideal groups and communities in which the amount of our labour is diminished by the proper use of science and technology, in which there are equal shares for all, and in which people have the time and inclination to enjoy a cultured leisure.

If people do all the things I have described to produce the anarchist society, they will have the necessities and luxuries of life, and they will live in peace, loving one another instead of killing one another. 15 CREATING THE FREE SOCIETY Many people want to reduce the suffering in the world and they want to do it by making changes in society. Unfortunately, only the anarchists realise that to obtain good conditions for everyone we must exchange our present form of society for an entirely new one. Only they want to destroy the state and replace it with a truly free and rational society. Now, what does this involve? The population of the world is divided into about one hundred and seventy groups - the number varies. The people in each group all organise their social life in the same way, so that they make up what is called a state. The word 'state' is a description of a certain pattern of behaviour.

There is no reason the world has to be divided like this or why each group within it has to be a state. Therefore when we say that the state must be destroyed, we mean only that the population of the world must be divided differently, or not all, and that people must organise their social life in an entirely different way. Within each state is a government that is supposed to exist to plan and create an ordered society that will serve everyone. But governments do not exist to fulfil this purpose, and they fail to plan society so that most people do not have the essentials of life. And worse, governments are the cause of destruction, suffering, and death. Therefore, because the state makes the existence of governments possible and needs these social evils to exist, it must be destroyed.


The state exists only because people behave in a certain way; therefore, it will be destroyed when people behave differently. It follows that the destruction of the state is possible without killing anyone. We can destroy the state simply by changing our behaviour. Only certain objects now used by the state will be destroyed; many others will be put to a new use. When people behave in a different social way, they will live a different kind of life and make use of different kinds of objects. While the state is being destroyed, people and things will be destroyed only if people attempt to use violence to make the change or resist it.

Anarchists will fail to change society if they try to do so by violence because their violence would have to be organised, and that would mean setting up a group that was constructed in the same way as the state. They would create the very pattern o f society they were striving to destroy. The argument that they could use violence and then after victory convert their society into the ideal is fallacious. Their rulers would cling to power for the same reasons they cling to it today. Even to assume tha t the anarchists would be victorious is to be in error. Governments have many fighting men and an abundance of weapons so that in any revolution their victory is assured.

The anarchist's only hope would be to influence more than half of their government's fighting personnel so that they had them fighting with them at the barricades. Clearly, that would be impossible. Governments can, by threatening death, always make men fight for them. And men will fight even if it means the certain death they were promi sed if they did not. That is why in the battle of the Somme, during WW1, more than a million men went 'over the top' only to be mowed down by the machine guns. ('Over the top', for those too young to understand, is to leave the trenches and advance across no-man's-land) Because mass violence needs a form of government to direct it, and for other reasons, we must not attempt to abolish the state by having any kind of violent revolution. No form of violence will produce the ideal society.


Therefore there must be no violent demonstrations, no political assassinations, and no bizarre form of violence, such as poisoning food in shops. The way to destroy the state is not by using violence but by refusing to use it. Governments cannot retain their power unless they employ police to force people to obey and service men and women to fight their wars. The states would collapse without wars to unify them.

So anarchists, whether they object to violence on principle or not, should refuse to fight. Like the anarcho-pacifists, they must, as far as war is concerned, be conscientious objectors. Refusing to fight in war is just one aspect of refusing to support the state. To produce the ideal society, people must refuse to support all aspects of it. They must never be part of the government or take any kind of employment that the state offers. T hey must also refuse to work for the institutions that support the state, such as the banks, the insurance companies, and the churches. The state pattern will be destroyed when people no longer make use of it. So anarchists must, by spreading their philosophy, make more anarchists. When there are enough people ignoring the state and not making use of it, it will disappear.


There is another valid argument for not making use of the state. In the state, we do not decide our own destiny or direct our own affairs. Like little children who cannot look after themselves, we take orders from others. That is bad enough, but there is more. The people from whom we take the orders, the real rulers and their minions, are often people of a very low intelligence and morality. Many are unhealthy, senile, adulterous and corrupt.

They are utterly contemptible. To allow such people to plan ou r society and to force us to fight for them is damn stupid. And what make the stupidity even worse is the fact that we are taking orders from people who have, on their own, no real power. Often they are old and weak individuals who could not force anybody to do anything. They can rule us only because we give them the power to do so. The people themselves actually provide the power for governments to rule. Therefore, to take the power from the rulers no violence is necessary, all we have to do is refuse to give it to them. When the states no longer exist, people will still have to live in an organised society.


Therefore, while destroying the state, anarchists must build their free society. They must create independent communities where people organise themselves and live in freedom. Because the state cannot be destroyed without at the same time replacing it with the free society, it is judicious to refer to its destruction as the creation of the new society.

http://www.spunk.org/texts/writers/pike/sp001295.txt

[singular_me]

Evolve or die... develop empathy or suffer tyranny.That is the vortex we are dealing with

Walter Russell is one of the greatest thinkers of our time and completely ignored by the academy, easy to see why as he applied electromagnetism to just everything and which reveals the inner workings of the divide and conquer destroying mankind. Something that is not good to teach students at all.

It is however interesting to see that the Universal Law he describes prevents any accumulation of wealth (aka power and control).

-----------------
Walter Russell on credit, debit, money, balance, electricity, bank, and banking

Our zero universe of equilibrium demands two opposed conditions in order to simulate that which our senses interpret for motion and change. These to needed conditions are plus and minus equilibrium; positive and negative electricity.

Plus zero means a credit of pressure borrowed from the universal equilibrium to compress a large volume into a small volume. Minus zero means an equal expansion to balance the borrowed compression.

A thousand dollars borrowed from a bank is a plus condition of credit which is balanced by an equal debit of one thousand dollars. The central zero represents the bank. The extended zeros represent credit and debit. Both are equal but opposite. A credit of one thousand dollars equals zero [for the bank]. When the credit is paid in part or in full the debit is proportionately voided simultaneously with the credit. [Terms of interest disturb this system inevitably.]

These two opposite conditions of credit and debit correspond with the two opposite conditions of compression and expansion in Nature upon which motion is dependent. When an equilibrium pressure is divided into opposite conditions from the zero from which both are extended, motion between the two becomes imperative. They must interchange with each other to void their unbalanced conditions. This is the principle of the electric current.

--------------

In the business world, unwise men take more that they give. They do not realize that they are breaking the Universal Law which will eventually break them to an equal extent. It may not be balanced in the form of dollars and cents but in the loss of good-will upon which their future business depends.

Man’s ignorance of the Law of Love in personal and world relationships will not serve as an excuse to save him from disaster. Wealth cannot be acquired from others by might, for wealth thus taken will impoverish him who takes anything which is not given. Nor can power be thus acquired, for the weakness of the despoiled will prevail against the might of the despoiler.

Everywhere in the world this law is seen working out its inexorable certainty. Empires built by might are dissolving. Rich world treasuries are disgorging their gold and piling up debt. The blood of every man killed by the sword has been paid for by ten – perchance ten times ten – of those who killed. Nations which have fattened on the food taken from others are starving amid the ruins of palaces in which they feasted.

A new world – one world – cannot grow out of a universe built on the foundations of hate and fear by unbalanced taking.
A new world must have new foundations. An eternal foundation is not built as one whole – it is built lovingly stone by stone. Thus must man rebuild his world.

Walter Russell

[Horn]

We can destroy the state simply by changing our behaviour.

Violence befits the Anarchist's prescription.

Once befitted will not be forgotten. Live by the seed of destruction, die by the seed of destruction.

States will come and go, collective egos and singular egos the same.

Doing otherwise, is building sand castles just above the beach break.

[singular_me]

by destruction, to me its clear that the author means **self-implosion**...



Anarchists will fail to change society if they try to do so by violence because their violence would have to be organised, and that would mean setting up a group that was constructed in the same way as the state.

[crimethink]

I work in the private sector.


There is no "private sector" in your field.

You are part of the Military-Industrial Complex.




Yeah have my way with folks? When have I said that I would force anyone to do anything? That's your department Mr. Government man. Who pays your paycheck? You on the dole like 40%+ of other americans and you don't want your gravy train to go away? Is that it?


I'm independently wealthy. Selling booze, smokes, and cheap whores to "voluntaryists" like yourself, LOL. ;D

Everyone knows the gravy train is in government contracts, not government welfare. Well, it is corporate welfare...the contracts that support your profession and employer.




I already pointed out the fallacy of your meaningless bullshit. Ayn Rand was a government stooge and her political leanings are more towards Libertarians than Anarchist. But little things like facts can't get in the way of throwing shit on a wall and hoping something sticks for you does it?

You keep bringing up Ayn Rand, but she hated Anarchy and uses your same argument. You really are fucking clueless aren't you?

"Anarchy, as a political concept, is a naive floating abstraction: . . . a society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare. But the possibility of human immorality is not the only objection to anarchy: even a society whose every member were fully rational and faultlessly moral, could not function in a state of anarchy; it is the need of objective laws and of an arbiter for honest disagreements among men that necessitates the establishment of a government." - Ayn Rand The Virtue of Selfishness

Yeah keep bringing up Ayn Rand.... BOY!

Alisa Rosenbaum was honest that a form of government is necessary. Like her fellow tribesman, Karl Marx, she told half-truths, not blatant lies.

As for whether she is closer to yours or my ideals and ideas, it's damn clear that she advocated a predatory system, as you do. She promoted the anti-civilization ideas of "no responsibility to the community," "greed is not a sin," "everyone wins when I become filthy rich," and other immoral, unethical horseshit. While she admitted anarchy is unworkable, she did indeed promote so-called "voluntaryist" ideas ("I 'volunteer' to take as much as I can, and ignore what has helped make my life"). The very name of the book of hers you cite is blatantly that of a predator: "The Virtue [sic] of Selfishness."

Don't cry, my dear Ares, it's OK, we can still be best pals. Your friend, "Book."

ROTFLMAO

[crimethink]

People need to reach a state of mind for a true society to work ............

The ONLY reason for someone to have power over another is to get something out of them by stealth or trickery.

Sure we live in a for profit society and its almost impossible to see a society become free.

If I had ebola in this type of society that exists through honest cooperation spreading ebola isnt a choice we would want to do because of the different values we would have, basically the opposite of fear.

You either value freedom or wait for an answer from the IDIOTS at the so called top, which is the bottom in the way I look at it.

I believe both you and Goldissima (singular_me) are sincere in your "voluntaryist" principles. It doesn't make you right, but it makes you respectable. Other parties have other motives.

You are right about the state of mind being the foundation of a society. And, sadly, humans cannot have the perfect state of mind where "an-archy" might work. You both have great confidence in human beings, which I cannot share. I wish my cynicism were just a defect, but I believe I am correct, based on my experiences. Most people are corrupt most of the time...that might even be optimistic. The Good Samaritan is always a small minority. If society is not established based on ideals where evil is minimized (e.g., malum in se law), and the form of government is not staffed by those with the highest virtues and altruistic interests, great sorrow and often great horrors follow.

[Ares]

I'm independently wealthy. Selling booze, smokes, and cheap whores to "voluntaryists" like yourself, LOL.

Yeah uh huh. Everyone on the internet is a millionaire. :rolleyes:


Everyone knows the gravy train is in government contracts, not government welfare. Well, it is corporate welfare...the contracts that support your profession and employer.

Oh yeah? Who is my employer?


Alisa Rosenbaum was honest that a form of government is necessary. Like her fellow tribesman, Karl Marx, she told half-truths, not blatant lies.

As for whether she is closer to yours or my ideals and ideas, it's damn clear that she advocated a predatory system, as you do. She promoted the anti-civilization ideas of "no responsibility to the community," "greed is not a sin," "everyone wins when I become filthy rich," and other immoral, unethical horseshit. While she admitted anarchy is unworkable, she did indeed promote so-called "voluntaryist" ideas ("I 'volunteer' to take as much as I can, and ignore what has helped make my life"). The very name of the book of hers you cite is blatantly that of a predator: "The Virtue [sic] of Selfishness."

Wow you spewed all of that bullshit from a book title?? Good job back tracking on using Ayn Rand's same bullshit argument. Yet trying to turn it around with more baseless bullshit.


Don't cry, my dear Ares, it's OK, we can still be best pals. Your friend, "Book."

Can't blame me for confusing you two. Same fear of the Talmud worshipers, and pointing out a Jew everywhere. Same debating style of making shit up and trying to back track once being called out for being an idiot.

But whatever helps you sleep at night.

[crimethink]

Can't blame me for confusing you two.



Book? You're still under the delusion I'm Book?




Because you are. Same inferiority complex as that annoying little miscreant who keeps showing up under different names every time his sorry ass gets banned.


Can't you just man up and admit you were completely wrong? "Can't blame me"? Who should we blame? Are all you anarchists unable to accept personal responsibility for errors?

[Ares]

Can't you just man up and admit you were completely wrong? "Can't blame me"? Who should we blame? Are all you anarchists unable to accept personal responsibility for errors?

Sure thing, when you can admit you were wrong using Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, and Milton Friedman as individuals I model my belief system after.

Come on, just admit it. You were WRONG. :)

[crimethink]

Sure thing, when you can admit you were wrong using Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, and Milton Friedman as individuals I model my belief system after.

Come on, just admit it. You were WRONG. :)

Unable to discern difference of opinion from factual errors. LOL

I never referred to Friedman as a model for your system. That's very interesting...guilty conscience about your affinity for his ideas?

[Ares]

Unable to discern difference of opinion from factual errors. LOL

I never referred to Friedman as a model for your system. That's very interesting...guilty conscience about your affinity for his ideas?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander right?

[Horn]

Poor Anarchists of Far Arden, come home.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYCZ4JeRIqg