Doug Casey: Why Do We Need Government?

[Ares]

Rousseau was perhaps the first to popularize the fiction now taught in civics classes about how government was created. It holds that men sat down together and rationally thought out the concept of government as a solution to problems that confronted them. The government of the United States was, however, the first to be formed in any way remotely like Rousseau's ideal. Even then, it had far from universal support from the three million colonials whom it claimed to represent. The U.S. government, after all, grew out of an illegal conspiracy to overthrow and replace the existing government.

There's no question that the result was, by an order of magnitude, the best blueprint for a government that had yet been conceived. Most of America's Founding Fathers believed the main purpose of government was to protect its subjects from the initiation of violence from any source; government itself prominently included. That made the U.S. government almost unique in history. And it was that concept – not natural resources, the ethnic composition of American immigrants, or luck – that turned America into the paragon it became.

The origin of government itself, however, was nothing like Rousseau's fable or the origin of the United States Constitution. The most realistic scenario for the origin of government is a roving group of bandits deciding that life would be easier if they settled down in a particular locale, and simply taxing the residents for a fixed percentage (rather like "protection money") instead of periodically sweeping through and carrying off all they could get away with. It's no accident that the ruling classes everywhere have martial backgrounds. Royalty are really nothing more than successful marauders who have buried the origins of their wealth in romance.

Romanticizing government, making it seem like Camelot, populated by brave knights and benevolent kings, painting it as noble and ennobling, helps people to accept its jurisdiction. But, like most things, government is shaped by its origins. Author Rick Maybury may have said it best in Whatever Happened to Justice?,

"A castle was not so much a plush palace as the headquarters for a concentration camp. These camps, called feudal kingdoms, were established by conquering barbarians who'd enslaved the local people. When you see one, ask to see not just the stately halls and bedrooms, but the dungeons and torture chambers.



"A castle was a hangout for silk-clad gangsters who were stealing from helpless workers. The king was the 'lord' who had control of the blackjack; he claimed a special 'divine right' to use force on the innocent.



"Fantasies about handsome princes and beautiful princesses are dangerous; they whitewash the truth. They give children the impression political power is wonderful stuff."

IS THE STATE NECESSARY?

The violent and corrupt nature of government is widely acknowledged by almost everyone. That's been true since time immemorial, as have political satire and grousing about politicians. Yet almost everyone turns a blind eye; most not only put up with it, but actively support the charade. That's because, although many may believe government to be an evil, they believe it is a necessary evil (the larger question of whether anything that is evil is necessary, or whether anything that is necessary can be evil, is worth discussing, but this isn’t the forum).

What (arguably) makes government necessary is the need for protection from other, even more dangerous, governments. I believe a case can be made that modern technology obviates this function.

One of the most perversely misleading myths about government is that it promotes order within its own bailiwick, keeps groups from constantly warring with each other, and somehow creates togetherness and harmony. In fact, that's the exact opposite of the truth. There's no cosmic imperative for different people to rise up against one another... unless they're organized into political groups. The Middle East, now the world's most fertile breeding ground for hatred, provides an excellent example.

Muslims, Christians, and Jews lived together peaceably in Palestine, Lebanon, and North Africa for centuries until the situation became politicized after World War I. Until then, an individual's background and beliefs were just personal attributes, not a casus belli. Government was at its most benign, an ineffectual nuisance that concerned itself mostly with extorting taxes. People were busy with that most harmless of activities: making money.

But politics do not deal with people as individuals. It scoops them up into parties and nations. And some group inevitably winds up using the power of the state (however "innocently" or "justly" at first) to impose its values and wishes on others with predictably destructive results. What would otherwise be an interesting kaleidoscope of humanity then sorts itself out according to the lowest common denominator peculiar to the time and place.

Sometimes that means along religious lines, as with the Muslims and Hindus in India or the Catholics and Protestants in Ireland; or ethnic lines, like the Kurds and Iraqis in the Middle East or Tamils and Sinhalese in Sri Lanka; sometimes it's mostly racial, as whites and East Indians found throughout Africa in the 1970s or Asians in California in the 1870s. Sometimes it's purely a matter of politics, as Argentines, Guatemalans, Salvadorans, and other Latins discovered more recently. Sometimes it amounts to no more than personal beliefs, as the McCarthy era in the 1950s and the Salem trials in the 1690s proved.

Throughout history government has served as a vehicle for the organization of hatred and oppression, benefitting no one except those who are ambitious and ruthless enough to gain control of it. That's not to say government hasn't, then and now, performed useful functions. But the useful things it does could and would be done far better by the market.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-17/doug-casey-why-do-we-need-government

[Shami-Amourae]

To keep shitskins out.

[Ares]

To keep shitskins out.

With no government, there would be no one to whine too to force them into your neighborhood after being kicked out.

[palani]

To avoid excesses and to manage shortages.

So to avoid government try to keep from obtaining excess and hope they are there when shortages pop up.

[Jewboo]

The origin of government itself, however, was nothing like Rousseau's fable or the origin of the United States Constitution. The most realistic scenario for the origin of government is a roving group of bandits deciding that life would be easier if they settled down in a particular locale, and simply taxing the residents for a fixed percentage (rather like "protection money") instead of periodically sweeping through and carrying off all they could get away with. It's no accident that the ruling classes everywhere have martial backgrounds. Royalty are really nothing more than successful marauders who have buried the origins of their wealth in romance.

Romanticizing government, making it seem like Camelot, populated by brave knights and benevolent kings, painting it as noble and ennobling, helps people to accept its jurisdiction. But, like most things, government is shaped by its origins. Author Rick Maybury may have said it best in Whatever Happened to Justice?


"A castle was not so much a plush palace as the headquarters for a concentration camp. These camps, called feudal kingdoms, were established by conquering barbarians who'd enslaved the local people. When you see one, ask to see not just the stately halls and bedrooms, but the dungeons and torture chambers.


"A castle was a hangout for silk-clad gangsters who were stealing from helpless workers. The king was the 'lord' who had control of the blackjack; he claimed a special 'divine right' to use force on the innocent.

"Fantasies about handsome princes and beautiful princesses are dangerous; they whitewash the truth. They give children the impression political power is wonderful stuff."



This part is creative thinking. The rest not so much.

:)

[Carl]

That's a good piece of propaganda. I like the subtle ways in which it attempts to direct your thinking.

[Ares]

That's a good piece of propaganda. I like the subtle ways in which it attempts to direct your thinking.

Care to offer a rebuttal on the reasons why we need government?

[Shami-Amourae]

With no government, there would be no one to whine too to force them into your neighborhood after being kicked out.

Without a government an invading army/navy/air force would wipe you out really fucking fast. Under a anarchist system things would quickly revert to feudalism as people would align themselves to local billionaires who would fund/operate private armies. You'd have to pay a tax to these billionaire warlords, and you'd be right back at square one. People would get sick of the warlords fighting with another so they'd form a federal government over a large region so there would be peace.

Anarchism cannot work. It's a pipe dream. You have the failed assumption everyone has your values, and has trust in their fellow man.

[Neuro]

Without a government an invading army/navy/air force would wipe you out really fucking fast. Under a anarchist system things would quickly revert to feudalism as people would align themselves to local billionaires who would fund/operate private armies. You'd have to pay a tax to these billionaire warlords, and you'd be right back at square one. People would get sick of the warlords fighting with another so they'd form a federal government over a large region so there would be peace.

Anarchism cannot work. It's a pipe dream. You have the failed assumption everyone has your values, and has trust in their fellow man.
Yes, unfortunately you are correct, too many are prepared to sell themselves to the highest bidder or who gives them the impression that can provide them with greater security and income...

[Shami-Amourae]

I think the optimal society is National Libertarianism. It mixes the tenats of Libertarianism with strong borders and enforced racial demographics.

This is literally what the United States was founded to be, but was changed over time with Jews taking over. That's why America has always been 90%+ White, up until the 1960s.

The United States was a really awesome country up until the 1960s, and that is the optimal system we should return to.

[Carl]

Care to offer a rebuttal on the reasons why we need government?

I'm just commenting upon his phraseology, very leading.

[Ares]

Without a government an invading army/navy/air force would wipe you out really fucking fast. Under a anarchist system things would quickly revert to feudalism as people would align themselves to local billionaires who would fund/operate private armies. You'd have to pay a tax to these billionaire warlords, and you'd be right back at square one. People would get sick of the warlords fighting with another so they'd form a federal government over a large region so there would be peace.

Anarchism cannot work. It's a pipe dream. You have the failed assumption everyone has your values, and has trust in their fellow man.

No failed assumption at all. You have a failed assumption that the idea you laid out would actually take place.

A Billionaire you say? A Billionaire in what? What is the medium of exchange in your reason why government is needed scenario?

[Ares]

I think the optimal society is National Libertarianism. It mixes the tenats of Libertarianism with strong borders and enforced racial demographics.

This is literally what the United States was founded to be, but was changed over time with Jews taking over. That's why America has always been 90%+ White, up until the 1960s.

The United States was a really awesome country up until the 1960s, and that is the optimal system we should return to.

It was a fantasy reality. You still had the military and government lying to the citizenry, creating false flags and an oppressive tax system.

You say Anarchism is a fantasy, while I say Statism is a fantasy as no one in the history of man kind has had one work to the benefit of all who reside in said state. Show me 1 example.

[singular_me]

that is exactly the mindset that propels the NWO... shami, neuro, etc. embrace your termination now, one cannot have centralization without the corruption of Knowledge, AI couldnt go anywhere without agenda 21. statism requires a FEAR based thinking, reptilian left brain, which allows evil to work its way through.

voluntarysim, far to the contrary (what statists, iike neuro, shami believe) isnt about lawless societies... but FULL decentralization

alas, society isnt ready... 10 years to make a decision. Die by AI or live free

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmM9f_aOo4k








Originally Posted by Shami-Amourae View Post
Without a government an invading army/navy/air force would wipe you out really fucking fast. Under a anarchist system things would quickly revert to feudalism as people would align themselves to local billionaires who would fund/operate private armies. You'd have to pay a tax to these billionaire warlords, and you'd be right back at square one. People would get sick of the warlords fighting with another so they'd form a federal government over a large region so there would be peace.

Anarchism cannot work. It's a pipe dream. You have the failed assumption everyone has your values, and has trust in their fellow man.
Yes, unfortunately you are correct, too many are prepared to sell themselves to the highest bidder or who gives them the impression that can provide them with greater security and income...

[Shami-Amourae]

that is exactly the mindset that propels the NWO...

The opposite of Globalism is Nationalism.

They aren't afraid of you, but they are afraid of me.

[Shami-Amourae]

It was a fantasy reality. You still had the military and government lying to the citizenry, creating false flags and an oppressive tax system.

You say Anarchism is a fantasy, while I say Statism is a fantasy as no one in the history of man kind has had one work to the benefit of all who reside in said state. Show me 1 example.

I did. Pre-1960's America.



Intact White families...
http://www.returnofkings.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/d-corson-1950s-family-of-four-walking-towards-camera-with-beach-balls-umbrella-picnic-basket-and-sand-bucket.jpg


Only father had to work to support entire family...
https://timeopinions.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/wp-114225242.jpg


Mail order guns...
http://www.reedercustomguns.com/gunnotes/pic%2028.jpg


Niggers knew their place...
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Duluth-lynching-postcard.jpg




Statism works in homogeneous White countries without Jews in control. If Whites control our own government it's fucking as close to utopia as you can get. You've been raised in a heterogeneous dystopia, so you've been conditioned to hate the government, since you only work to serve the interests of Jews and Shitskins who want you dead.

The problem isn't the government. It's the Jews and Shitskins.

[JohnQPublic]

...I don't know that the third one is necessary. The first two I go with.

[Shami-Amourae]

No failed assumption at all. You have a failed assumption that the idea you laid out would actually take place.

A Billionaire you say? A Billionaire in what? What is the medium of exchange in your reason why government is needed scenario?

My example has happened countless times thoughout history when major governments/empires fall. Perfect example is the fall of the Roman empire. There was feudalism after that, which led to the formation of new empires after.

Billionaire is just a substitute for any very wealthy person. Don't fuck with word semantics. You know what I meant.

[palani]

Everyone needs government. Moderation in all things is beneficial. If you cannot govern yourself then maybe you should outsource your government. These private governments succeed for a while but generally all fail eventually so in your contract with private governments you should have a provision for bailing when they dissolve.

Perhaps you have a problem discerning a public government from a private one. This is understandable. Here is a clue. Private governments use fiat money while public governments use specie.

In your travels around the world you are likely to run into many private governments. You don't want to enter into an agency contract with them at all because then they are going to presume that they are your government. To avoid this problem best have something to present them. A good present is a quit claim deed to their capital. Give it back to them and avoid the presumption that you are signed up with them. After all, this doesn't cost you much at all and they appreciate the gift ever so much.

[Shami-Amourae]

Everyone needs government. Moderation in all things is beneficial. If you cannot govern yourself then maybe you should outsource your government. These private governments succeed for a while but generally all fail eventually so in your contract with private governments you should have a provision for bailing when they dissolve.

Perhaps you have a problem discerning a public government from a private one. This is understandable. Here is a clue. Private governments use fiat money while public governments use specie.

In your travels around the world you are likely to run into many private governments. You don't want to enter into an agency contract with them at all because then they are going to presume that they are your government. To avoid this problem best have something to present them. A good present is a quit claim deed to their capital. Give it back to them and avoid the presumption that you are signed up with them.

Wat?

[palani]

I did. Pre-1960's America.



Wat?

[Ares]

I did. Pre-1960's America.



Intact White families...
http://www.returnofkings.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/d-corson-1950s-family-of-four-walking-towards-camera-with-beach-balls-umbrella-picnic-basket-and-sand-bucket.jpg


Only father had to work to support entire family...
https://timeopinions.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/wp-114225242.jpg


Mail order guns...
http://www.reedercustomguns.com/gunnotes/pic%2028.jpg


Niggers knew their place...
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Duluth-lynching-postcard.jpg




Statism works in homogeneous White countries without Jews in control. If Whites control our own government it's fucking as close to utopia as you can get. You've been raised in a heterogeneous dystopia, so you've been conditioned to hate the government, since you only work to serve the interests of Jews and Shitskins who want you dead.

The problem isn't the government. It's the Jews and Shitskins.


Except for the fact that your assumption is based on a complete and fabricated LIE. The 1950's is used by whites for nostalgia purposes and apparently for the basis and support of statism. If what you claim were true, then the Civil War should not of happened. It was a white world, ruled by white men.

The problem is and always will be government encroachment on individual liberty and rights. Trying to pick and choose who leads does not change the outcome.

[Ares]

My example has happened countless times thoughout history when major governments/empires fall. Perfect example is the fall of the Roman empire. There was feudalism after that, which led to the formation of new empires after.

Billionaire is just a substitute for any very wealthy person. Don't fuck with word semantics. You know what I meant.

Words have meaning, in this scenario in support of a state I need to know what warlord is going to be a billionaire and how? There are warlords in Africa who are supported by the almighty American Tax Slave. A state is nothing and completely dependent upon peoples recognition of it to exist. The boarders are imaginary, it's jurisdiction is imaginary, its power is totally 100% imaginary.

Yet people flock to this fantasy and call Anarchist crazy for telling them this thing they worship does not actually exist.

[Shami-Amourae]

muh fedora


http://s14.postimg.org/iuxzg5229/1444843269223.png

[Ares]

https://liberalsbackwardsthink.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/detroit-then-and-now-after-eighty-years-of-democrat-rule.jpg?w=300&h=225

[Shami-Amourae]

https://liberalsbackwardsthink.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/detroit-then-and-now-after-eighty-years-of-democrat-rule.jpg?w=300&h=225

The problem is RACE, not GOVERNMENT.
http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/DetroitHiroshima.jpg

[Ares]

http://s14.postimg.org/iuxzg5229/1444843269223.png

No, what we currently have is Anarchy but with nations. Each one of those systems in your picture already exist. So how exactly are you defending your position of needing an almighty state?

The state will kill you just as quickly as any of the "bad guys" in the picture above.

You are on your own, you always have been. No state protects its populace.

[Ares]

The problem is RACE, not GOVERNMENT.
http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/DetroitHiroshima.jpg

Well your half right.

That government exist to pander to its preferred race.

[Shami-Amourae]

http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1432/78/1432782881352.jpg

[Shami-Amourae]

Well your half right.

That government exist to pander to its preferred race.

No.
If you swapped all the people from Detroit and Nagasaki instantly, then came back 20 years later Nagasaki would look like Detroit, and Detroit would look like Nagasaki.

Government is just a product of the demographic(s) of the people. If you have a bunch of savage Shitskins, you'll get a tyrannically Shitskin government.


That's why our government is getting worse and worse as the White population is decreasing.

[Ares]

The old west was pretty much Anarchy, government was too far and too weak to enforce it's laws and most were territories at that point in time anyway. You didn't see the violence, but you also got to see a lot of mob justice running undesirables out of town.

Instead with statism if you are a fuck up undesirable the state will protect you from being run out of town and you get Detroit.

But keep preaching the need for a state, I'm enjoying the humor of actually watching someone worship the very thing that would slaughter them without a second thought. Keep paying your taxes they'll protect you from the evil boogieman... LOL

[Ares]

No.
If you swapped all the people from Detroit and Nagasaki instantly, then came back 20 years later Nagasaki would look like Detroit, and Detroit would look like Nagasaki.

Government is just a product of the demographic(s) of the people. If you have a bunch of savage Shitskins, you'll get a tyrannically Shitskin government.


That's why our government is getting worse and worse as the White population is decreasing.

Except for that small fact of the Whiskey Rebellion, Civil War.... Yeah sure... :rolleyes:

[Shami-Amourae]

The old west was pretty much Anarchy, government was too far and too weak to enforce it's laws and most were territories at that point in time anyway. You didn't see the violence, but you also got to see a lot of mob justice running undesirables out of town.

Instead with statism if you are a fuck up undesirable the state will protect you from being run out of town and you get Detroit.

But keep preaching the need for a state, I'm enjoying the humor of actually watching someone worship the very thing that would slaughter them without a second thought. Keep paying your taxes they'll protect you from the evil boogieman... LOL

That's cuz it was all White people, and they were killing Siberian Americans left and right.

Limited government only works with White people. Whites are the only ones with High Trust biologically so we are the only ones who can have limited government.

In the modern world where millions of Shitskins can arrive at your doorstep this isn't possible.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XoMJIXhfy64/maxresdefault.jpg

[Shami-Amourae]

Except for that small fact of the Whiskey Rebellion, Civil War.... Yeah sure... :rolleyes:

Wars would exist with or without anarchism. Do you seriously think anarchism is some unicorn and rainbow utopia? It's a vacuum for the next tyrant. That's it.

[Shami-Amourae]

The old west was pretty much Anarchy, government was too far and too weak to enforce it's laws and most were territories at that point in time anyway. You didn't see the violence, but you also got to see a lot of mob justice running undesirables out of town.

Instead with statism if you are a fuck up undesirable the state will protect you from being run out of town and you get Detroit.

But keep preaching the need for a state, I'm enjoying the humor of actually watching someone worship the very thing that would slaughter them without a second thought. Keep paying your taxes they'll protect you from the evil boogieman... LOL

I'm not for or against the State. I'm arguing it's inevitable no matter what. I can't think of anytime in recent history where there has anarchism, unless you go back to cave man times. It's something we can never get rid of. The best thing to do is figure out a way to limit it and/or make sure it works out for our interests as much as possible.

Statism is more successful than Anarchism, which is why you see it everywhere over Anarchism where you see no where.

ANARCHY DOESN'T EXIST.

[Ares]

Wars would exist with or without anarchism. Do you seriously think anarchism is some unicorn and rainbow utopia? It's a vacuum for the next tyrant. That's it.

Nope, it is not. But I'm also not naive enough to believe that paying a racketeering outfit protection money is going to do any good either.

[Ares]

I'm not for or against the State. I'm arguing it's inevitable no matter what. I can't think of anytime in recent history where there has anarchism, unless you go back to cave man times. It's something we can never get rid of. The best thing to do is figure out a way to limit it and/or make sure it works out for our interests as much as possible.

Statism is more successful than Anarchism, which is why you see it everywhere over Anarchism where you see no where.

ANARCHY DOESN'T EXIST.

You are living Anarchy now. The state does not create you, or own you. You submit to its will.

Live on your knees for all I care. I will not.

[Shami-Amourae]

Nope, it is not. But I'm also not naive enough to believe that paying a racketeering outfit protection money is going to do any good either.

You're never going to get rid of the government. Even if our government collapsed, refer to this pick:
http://s14.postimg.org/iuxzg5229/1444843269223.png

[Ares]

You're never going to get rid of the government. Even if our government collapsed, refer to this pick:
http://s14.postimg.org/iuxzg5229/1444843269223.png

Duly noted, and I'm well aware of that fact.

But limited government is also a pipe dream.

When the government steps outside its control who or what exactly puts it back into it's place?

[Shami-Amourae]

No, what we currently have is Anarchy but with nations. Each one of those systems in your picture already exist. So how exactly are you defending your position of needing an almighty state?

Because there will always be a State. It's human nature.



The state will kill you just as quickly as any of the "bad guys" in the picture above.

No not really. As long as I obey the laws, my chances of being killed are quite low.


You are on your own, you always have been. No state protects its populace.

That's why we pay taxes. For police, firemen, ambulances. Also muh roads.

The government protects people all the time. They do a shitty job, but that's not an excuse to wish them away, because they are NEVER going away. If you focused your energy on reforming/improving the government instead of wishing for something that will never happen, things might get done.

A government is just as good as the people running it. If shitty people stop having a government, they will continue being shitty.


I can't believe I used to believe this anarchy shit myself. It's stupider than Communism.

[Shami-Amourae]

Only modern political ideology Created by White People

http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1408/54/1408543538357.jpg


Everything else is just Jewish
http://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1388/85/1388852603143.png

[Shami-Amourae]

But limited government is also a pipe dream.

When the government steps outside its control who or what exactly puts it back into it's place?

Limited government can exist, but it requires a vigilant population. Typically what happens is it creates a ton of wealth for the population, and the huge wealth facilitates the growth of an empire.

That's why limited government Republics like Rome and the early United States created empires.

Humanity is just an endless tale of struggle. There is no solid solution to anything, but there are better solutions.

Focus on the better solutions, rather than a permanent solution that can never come to pass.

[Shami-Amourae]

You are living Anarchy now. The state does not create you, or own you. You submit to its will.

Live on your knees for all I care. I will not.

I'd rather not live in fear and die a martyr for a cause that is already failed.

Pay your taxes, obey the law, and fly under the radar.

[Ares]

No not really. As long as I obey the laws, my chances of being killed are quite low.

3 words. Civil Asset Forfeiture. Make sure you obey the law. ;)



That's why we pay taxes. For police, firemen, ambulances. Also muh roads.

Police are technically unlawful according to our own Constitution. They didn't even exist prior to cities, states, counties reorganizing into corporations. So can't say I would agree with that one. The only lawful authority in the Republic of the United States is the Sheriff.

Fireman in my area are mostly volunteer. There are a few state run fire houses, but no where in the vicinity of my home the closest is almost 2 hours away. The ambulances are private for hire services. They'll be dispatched and will charge your insurance for the ride to the hospital.

I fail to see that a private enterprise could not do roads and infrastructure better and at a cheaper cost. Unless you call decaying bridges, pothole filled roads a success for state oversight?


The government protects people all the time. They do a shitty job, but that's not an excuse to wish them away, because they are NEVER going away. If you focused your energy on reforming/improving the government instead of wishing for something that will never happen, things might get done.

Only when it benefits them. Civil Asset Forfeiture currently steals more wealth from people than robbers nationally. You can be shot or beat up by a cop with no repercussions to the police officer. I know that one first hand. I was arrested at 18, my friend is the one when questioned by the cop admitted to doing what he accused all of us of doing, the cop threw him on the back of my car and clocked him in the back of the head with his mag light. Split his head open requiring 10 stitches. Mind you we were all white, my friend was white, the officer was white and the infraction was throwing a bottle out the passenger side window. This happened in 1996, he not only got the ticket for 500 dollars for littering he also got a 1,500 dollar hospital bill for the stitches and ambulance ride to there. He went to file a lawsuit against the officer, prosecutor wouldn't touch it (also white by the way), and when he hired a private attorney to go after the cop, the judge threw it out anyway. The state always protects its own from you little people.

You can keep your state


A government is just as good as the people running it. If shitty people stop having a government, they will continue being shitty.

A government is nothing more than a big club, and you nor I are in it. You cannot reform what you cannot control. Voting is an illusion to pacify the ones to stupid to see that they have already picked the ones you are to vote for.



I can't believe I used to believe this anarchy shit myself. It's stupider than Communism.

I still can't believe you think a form of government will ever be representative of the people.

[Ares]

I'd rather not live in fear and die a martyr for a cause that is already failed.

Pay your taxes, obey the law, and fly under the radar.

I do pay what I owe. :)

[Ares]

Limited government can exist, but it requires a vigilant population. Typically what happens is it creates a ton of wealth for the population, and the huge wealth facilitates the growth of an empire.

That's why limited government Republics like Rome and the early United States created empires.

Humanity is just an endless tale of struggle. There is no solid solution to anything, but there are better solutions.

Focus on the better solutions, rather than a permanent solution that can never come to pass.

Agree, so have people think about Anarchy but compromise on limited government. That's my goal anyway.

[Shami-Amourae]

I still can't believe you think a form of government will ever be representative of the people.

My core argument is that I'm saying that we will never get rid of government.

I feel like I'm debating myself from 2 years ago on this forum.

I had an AnCap avatar and everything back then.


I accepted that government is here to stay. Now I view my mission as to find a way to make sure the government fucks us the least, and works the best in our interest.

If we don't do this it will work completely against us.

[Ares]

My core argument is that I'm saying that we will never get rid of government.

I feel like I'm debating myself from 2 years ago on this forum.

I had an AnCap avatar and everything back then.


I accepted that government is here to stay. Now I view my mission as to find a way to make sure the government fucks us the least, and works the best in our interest.

If we don't do this it will work completely against us.

You've got 3 options of accomplishing those goals.

Get rid of the 14th Amendment, 17th Amendment and the revocation of corporate person hood.

Would you like for me to tell you your odds of success on anyone of those options?

[palani]

I'm saying that we will never get rid of government.

If you refuse to govern yourself be fully aware that others will step in to govern you.

The responsibility is yours and yours alone whether you choose to govern yourself.

[Shami-Amourae]

If you refuse to govern yourself be fully aware that others will step in to govern you.

The responsibility is yours and yours alone whether you choose to govern yourself.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fibDNwF8bjs

[palani]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fibDNwF8bjs
Sorry

I don't watch too many videos and don't accept them as a bona fide response.

If you cannot write something I suggest you take lessons.

[Shami-Amourae]

Sorry

I don't watch too many videos and don't accept them as a bona fide response.

If you cannot write something I suggest you take lessons.

It's a comedy sketch which demonstrates why anarchy doesn't work.

[palani]

It's a comedy sketch which demonstrates why anarchy doesn't work.

Ok. Thanks.

But I don't know what anarchy is and don't think I want to be involved with it.

I do prefer to be my own state which makes every other state that ordains a government foreign to me. Ignorance of law becomes ignorance of a fact when dealing with the rules of foreign governments. Ignorance of a fact is never criminal. It is just ignorance.

They must be foreign because I don't believe in killing and news these days is nothing if not about governments involving themselves with killing.

By the way ... you know that thing about juries being the judge of fact and judges being the arbiters of Law? Foreign law is fact. Juries can stay in their domain of judging facts when they are told that the defendant (if you care to cast yourself in this role by all means consider it done) is not a member of their society. They then should be able to dabble in the Law domain with impudence and not tolerate any interference from the actor in the black robe seated 4 feet above the floor.

[Jewboo]

I can't believe I used to believe this anarchy shit myself. It's stupider than Communism.



https://d1ai9qtk9p41kl.cloudfront.net/assets/mc/kmw/2010_10/homeless.jpg

Still a few "ABOLISH GOVERNMENT" tards here at GSUS.


:) save your breath

[Jewboo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fibDNwF8bjs

Shami's video nails it perfectly.

[Shami-Amourae]

https://d1ai9qtk9p41kl.cloudfront.net/assets/mc/kmw/2010_10/homeless.jpg

Still a few "ABOLISH GOVERNMENT" tards here at GSUS.


:) save your breath







I used to believe it myself, so I think it's only fair. You and a few others on this forum helped me see the light.

A large percentage of the Ron Paul Libertarian peoples are now White Nationalists. Many will continue to join when Muh Fedora doesn't pan out for them and Muhammad is raping their sister. The entire Libertarian/Anarchist movement is being flooded by SJWs, forcing any somewhat rational people out. If you watch Stefan Molyneux for example, he's basically a White Nationalist now, without admitting it since he is steering his audience in that direction.


One of the major Libertarian publications, ReasonTV is now pushing Rapefugees. Read the comment section, it's amazing how many people are revolting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oezRXaRoB4

[JohnQPublic]

One of the major Libertarian publications, ReasonTV is now pushing Rapefugees. Read the comment section, it's amazing how many people are revolting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oezRXaRoB4

They have lost any ability to REASON. When the refugees are all single young males, this ought to a reasonable person suspicious. Even families are a problem, but it is just too obvious, at least in Europe (where Merkel perhaps wants to restart the population machine, German women willing or not).

[Ares]

They have lost any ability to REASON. When the refugees are all single young males, this ought to a reasonable person suspicious. Even families are a problem, but it is just too obvious, at least in Europe (where Merkel perhaps wants to restart the population machine, German women willing or not).

Yeah I think that shit will becoming to an end here shortly or she's going to be swinging for a lamp post.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlGeNXg54RU

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlGeNXg54RU

[madfranks]

This is a very education thread for me, and thank you to Ares and Shami for an actual debate on the merits of anarchy vs. national libertarianism vs. name-calling and fanaticism. I admit, I'm currently conflicted on the matter, because for years I have identified as libertarian, then slowly into anarchy, and now I am seeing myself swayed by Shami's arguments. I appreciate where Ares is coming from, and in many ways I agree (for example, above Shami postulated that if a country lost its government and went to anarchy, the people would seek out rich individuals to protect them, etc, etc. Robert P. Murphy wrote a really good book called Chaos Theory in which he takes this same scenario and foresaw private insurance companies taking over the job of property defense. They begin with individual policies to insure individual properties, then as the coverage grows, it becomes cost-effective for the insurance companies to invest in large-scale defensive capabilities in case of attacks from other nations, etc. These insurance led defense projects would be very cost-conscious and limited to defensive use because offensive use would be unprofitable. Then you have multiple insurance companies just like today ensuring competition and good customer service, blah blah). But, I am beginning to be attracted to the idea of living in a community/city/country of like-minded people like me (white, good moral character (primarily Christian), hard working, family-oriented, honest, etc) and then the idea of a government run by people like this doesn't sound so bad. Like Shami said, the Jewish and non-white races infecting our government with their harmful policies may be the real issue here, not the fact that government exists at all.

[Spectrism]

Why Do We Need Government?
Because it is nearly impossible for everyone to get raped on their own.

[madfranks]

I also wanted to add, in the Bible it tells the story of the Israelites, after leaving Egypt and settling in their lands, living without kings or government of any kind. This is inferably the way God intended it to be, because when the people declared they wanted a king to rule over them the way the other nations did, God was upset and told them (through Samuel) that if they get their wish, they won't like it because their king will grow to oppress them, which sure enough happened. To me this is an argument for a type of Christian Anarchy, where a society of Christians live together with God as their king, but no human ruler. Society, culture, industry, business, etc would still exist, but in this society of honest moral people. But, to Shami's point, it won't last, because the people (human nature) want a king, they want government, which leaves us back to where we are.

[Ares]

This is a very education thread for me, and thank you to Ares and Shami for an actual debate on the merits of anarchy vs. national libertarianism vs. name-calling and fanaticism. I admit, I'm currently conflicted on the matter, because for years I have identified as libertarian, then slowly into anarchy, and now I am seeing myself swayed by Shami's arguments. I appreciate where Ares is coming from, and in many ways I agree (for example, above Shami postulated that if a country lost its government and went to anarchy, the people would seek out rich individuals to protect them, etc, etc. Robert P. Murphy wrote a really good book called Chaos Theory in which he takes this same scenario and foresaw private insurance companies taking over the job of property defense. They begin with individual policies to insure individual properties, then as the coverage grows, it becomes cost-effective for the insurance companies to invest in large-scale defensive capabilities in case of attacks from other nations, etc. These insurance led defense projects would be very cost-conscious and limited to defensive use because offensive use would be unprofitable. Then you have multiple insurance companies just like today ensuring competition and good customer service, blah blah). But, I am beginning to be attracted to the idea of living in a community/city/country of like-minded people like me (white, good moral character (primarily Christian), hard working, family-oriented, honest, etc) and then the idea of a government run by people like this doesn't sound so bad. Like Shami said, the Jewish and non-white races infecting our government with their harmful policies may be the real issue here, not the fact that government exists at all.

Thanks Madfranks, and yes I do agree with what Shami has said. Ideally I'm just here and on other boards presenting an extreme circumstance of no government and work to compromise on a limited one.

Either scenario in modern times I think is completely unworkable (Anarchy vs limited white government) due to how broken our current system is as fractured our society as a whole is. Race traitors, welfare queens and zionist with their fingers in every aspect from economic, entertainment to political section of our nation.

People will always flock to the state they know nothing else. Our job is to show how limited it really should be.

[madfranks]

Either scenario in modern times I think is completely unworkable (Anarchy vs limited white government) due to how broken our current system is as fractured our society as a whole is. Race traitors, welfare queens and zionist with their fingers in every aspect from economic, entertainment to political section of our nation.

In which case I wonder which one is easier and more realistic to work towards? No government at all, or a limited government? I like this quote from John Adams:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

The moral and religious people of America are now a minority, and the original form of government for this country has been irreparably altered by the people you mention in your post. The government of early America and the government of today aren't even close to being the same.

[madfranks]

One of the reasons I really like Gary North is he injects discussions of MORALITY into economic discussions. Economists tend to avoid moral arguments (i.e. taxation is theft, theft is wrong). Here's a good article: http://www.garynorth.com/public/14693.cfm


It starts with a moral problem. It starts with a violation of the commandment not to steal. We have a modern civilization that is built on a systematic violation of this commandment.

The overwhelming majority of voters today are convinced that the present economic order in no way violates this principle. Virtually all of the pastors in the pulpits are convinced of this. They don't preach against the organized theft of modern Keynesianism. They don't think it's part of their calling to point out the obvious ethical implications of the system of government that compels people to support other people, merely because the other people don't want to go out and get a job.


When individuals use violence or the threat of violence to interfere with market processes, they don't look at the long-term consequences of these interferences. Somewhere down the road, there is going to be hell to pay. There is going to be a great default. There is going to be something that disrupts the lives of those voters, as well as their victims, who vote in favor of the expansion of governments into the lives of citizens. The defenders of organized theft deny that there are these built-in negative sanctions against any society that follows these practices, but, as I've said, the defenders are economic imbeciles.
If incorrect ideas and bad ethics did not produce bad results, the case for liberty would never get off the ground. People would simply ignore the arguments. But, there really are built-in negative sanctions that will produce disasters in those societies that extend the influence and power of civil government into market processes. The public will be astounded when these sanctions arrive. Millions of voters are going to go looking for answers. In that period of confusion, consternation, and enormous capital losses, which is going to destroy the dreams and schemes of generations of complacent thieves, the thieves are going to want to know how this happened.

[Ares]

In which case I wonder which one is easier and more realistic to work towards? No government at all, or a limited government? I like this quote from John Adams:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

The moral and religious people of America are now a minority, and the original form of government for this country has been irreparably altered by the people you mention in your post. The government of early America and the government of today aren't even close to being the same.

No unfortunately they aren't. That's due to the flaws in every government. There is no way to keep the government in check. The founders tried with the system of checks and balances but that system has decayed into this oppressive tyrant is what we are left with today..

Ideally the judicial system should be completely separate with also enforcement powers of it's own. We saw during Andrew Jackson's reign that even though he lost the case with the U.S. Supreme Court he still did what he wanted to do which was move the Cherokee. I believe his words were "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832)

How long that would last?? No idea. No one but property owners should be allowed to vote as they have a vested interests in how the government is run. There are a bunch of others that should take place to severly limit and prolong the government from growing oppressive.

[Jewboo]

Seems we all now agree that government IS needed. Even churches are "governed" and have their so-called "tithing" taxes. Best part of this thread so far is Shami dismissing the Anarchy nonsense so Ares and Madfranks and others can proceed with addressing how we can now obtain the needed GOOD government in 2016.

I've come to the conclusion that our society is being systematically destroyed to the point of mass retardedness on purpose and reversing this trend is now impossible.

[Ares]

Seems we all now agree that government IS needed. Even churches are "governed" and have their so-called "tithing" taxes. Best part of this thread so far is Shami dismissing the Anarchy nonsense so Ares and Madfranks and others can proceed with addressing how we can now obtain the needed GOOD government in 2016.

I've come to the conclusion that our society is being systematically destroyed to the point of mass retardedness on purpose and reversing this trend is now impossible.




Why I made the point to say that neither solution is completely workable now.. (Limited government or Anarchy) The population is just too stupid and brainwashed to get anything close to a limited functioning Republic. When state governors start calling for a Constitutional Convention I shutter at the thought of how much worse our society could become when they completely eviscerate the remainder of the Constitution.

[Jewboo]

Why I made the point to say that neither solution is completely unworkable now.. (Limited government or Anarchy) The population is just too stupid and brainwashed to get anything close to a limited functioning Republic. When state governors start calling for a Constitutional Convention I shutter at the thought of how much worse our society could become when they completely eviscerate the remainder of the Constitution.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/O'Connor,_Sotomayor,_Ginsburg,_and_Kagan.jpg


Maybe it would demonstrate our own mental health to finally admit that our "Constitution" has been irrelevant since at least the 1960s. Irrelevant.

Time to seriously start identifying WHO actually controls "our" existing Government:



http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/mt/2015/04/original-2/lead_960.jpg?1430144048






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2InGCYmkRwQ
"Our" constitutionally elected Government

:rolleyes:

[madfranks]

Seems we all now agree that government IS needed. Even churches are "governed" and have their so-called "tithing" taxes. Best part of this thread so far is Shami dismissing the Anarchy nonsense so Ares and Madfranks and others can proceed with addressing how we can now obtain the needed GOOD government in 2016.

I've come to the conclusion that our society is being systematically destroyed to the point of mass retardedness on purpose and reversing this trend is now impossible.




I would like to point out that the tithe is only 10%, and it truly is voluntary. You won't be arrested and jailed if you don't pay your tithe.

[mick silver]

I was born a 150 years to late ... cowboy days here I come only if I had a time machine . when my law was the law you f over me and family i give back twice what you gave me

[Jewboo]

I would like to point out that the tithe is only 10%, and it truly is voluntary. You won't be arrested and jailed if you don't pay your tithe.



https://i1.sndcdn.com/avatars-000172242194-niezpr-t500x500.jpg
Deadbeats are parasites and are unwelcome everywhere



:)

[midnight rambler]

https://i1.sndcdn.com/avatars-000172242194-niezpr-t500x500.jpg
Deadbeats are parasites and are unwelcome everywhere



:)




lol And of course Book worships the state as HIS god. Oh the irony.

[palani]

it behooves us to remember that men can never escape being governed. Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others. If from lawlessness or fickleness, from folly or self-indulgence, they refuse to govern themselves then most assuredly in the end they will have to be governed from the outside. They can prevent the need of government from without only by showing they possess the power of government from within. A sovereign cannot make excuses for his failures; a sovereign must accept the responsibility for the exercise of power that inheres in him; and where, as is true in our Republic, the people are sovereign, then the people must show a sober understanding and a sane and steadfast purpose if they are to preserve that orderly liberty upon which as a foundation every republic must rest.”

[President Theodore Roosevelt; Opening of the Jamestown Exposition; Norfolk, VA, April 26, 1907]

[Jewboo]

https://i.imgur.com/xPREVGF.jpg

College campus in the USA.

[Shami-Amourae]

Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others.


That's true, but to govern yourself you either have to completely disappear into the wilderness (increasingly impossible,) or have more guns/show of force against the State.


Most people just take the easier route and pay their taxes, obey the laws, and enjoy life as much as they can.

[singular_me]

The opposite of Globalism is Nationalism.

They aren't afraid of you, but they are afraid of me.

both extreme sides of the spectrum means same. This is ignorance of the polarity principle embedded in law of electricity itself, it all comes down to physics.

Action and reaction are equal and opposite, and are expressed simultaneously. Sequentially they are repeated in reverse, the reaction becoming the action and the action the reaction.
Walter Russell


People who do not grasp that the Law of Electricity governs everything (and which proves that the Universe is conscious), the mind included, are siding with the death cult. Such a Natural Law is a deep occult knowledge, occult meaning hidden, (correction) that has been used to enslave mankind one century at the time. Natural Laws, they are 7 of them, is not about "belief" but KNOWING since they are immutable. One cannot defeat something that is immutable. we are not animals because we have the gift to understand this if we wish to. If we dont we can only become worse than animals.

Nobody will never control the whole (unless one is a death cult concealing knowledge), one just can control oneself and this self control benefits the whole. Any governing elites is thus by definition against the Natural Order of the Universe.







Niggers knew their place...
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/Duluth-lynching-postcard.jpg


the problem shami, and this that you expose your ideal as a complete delusion, this picture shows that your are mentally not able to connect the dots. The mentality that led to the lynching of those blacks is the same that condones their massive exportation in the first place. You are into self-defeat mode. Ideas can only be judged by the way they are implemented.

Your heart is filled with hatred, and that makes of you a NWO pawn. Describing people's behaviors due to brainwashing is one thing and must be done, but encouraging murder shows how low you have fallen morally.

And I dont think much of those agreeing with your stance in this thread after this picture and very comment. You are morally totally bankrupt.

Do not do to others what you would hate to be done to you IS a Natural Law, immutable, or expect it to fire back in a big way. Like many in this world, 85%,you are part of the problem. Learn how to stand on your own two feet, trusting your higher self or die.

No wonder that many excellent posters like Hatha are gone.

I am done with this thread, really

[palani]

That's true, but to govern yourself you either have to completely disappear into the wilderness (increasingly impossible,) or have more guns/show of force against the State.
I wouldn't leave home without a front man.


Most people just take the easier route and pay their taxes, obey the laws, and enjoy life as much as they can.
If you are enjoying life so much then why the complaints? After all, you are the one who made the decision.

There are options if you choose to examine them. None of these options involve violent overthrow of any government or terminal shootouts in a target rich environment. Feel free to try different approaches but personally I don't care to be locked into any single approach.

If government is a weed then think of your attempts to control it as 2-4D. When it comes down to it the weeds are only in your head and that is where you will find the cure.

[singular_me]

The Ku Klux Klan opens its door to Jews, homosexuals and black people in bizarre recruitment drive

White supremacist group Ku Klux Klan is re-branding as 'the new Klan'
Founder wants Jews, black people, gays and those of Hispanic origin to join
Rebranded 'Rocky Mountain Knights' claim to stand for 'a strong America'
New recruits will have to wear the white robes, masks and conical hats

By Jenny Awford for MailOnline

Published: 06:05 EST, 10 November 2014

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2828425/The-Ku-Klux-Klan-opens-door-Jews-black-people-homosexuals-new-recruits-wear-white-robes-hats.html#ixzz3xnyi9BGZ
----------------------------------

??? Albert Pike, national KKK chief judiciary officer and Grand Dragon of the Arkansas Klan after the Civil War.... . Pike was Grand Commander of that masonic group when he and his confederate clique organized the KKK. ???

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

CONCLUSION:
every group will end up being infiltrated in due time if not started up by an undercover agent/insider/controlled opposition, it is how the NWO reverses the tide when deeming that the time has come. This is a 4000+ year old game that is now bringing the world onto its knees.


Thank you collectivists (group and orders followers/statists).


Only a massive decentralization can fix this. Too late or not. Truth will stand by itself in the face of the upcoming (and during) chaos.







https://i1.sndcdn.com/avatars-000172242194-niezpr-t500x500.jpg
Deadbeats are parasites and are unwelcome everywhere



:)