Recent comments

  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    How can liberty be work? Paleolithic people in the Original Affluent Society (Sahlins, 1974) were "autonomous and sovereign" individuals "who bow to no external political leaders" (Service, 1975) and they were quite lazy. "The redskinned Indians are naturally lazy..." ~Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo y Valdes, 16th century In Praise of Laziness by Jason Godesky | 5 June 2007 http://rewild.info/anthropik/2007/06/in-praise-of-laziness/ The Abolition of Work Bob Black http://www.primitivism.com/abolition.htm The Idle Theory of evolution, human life, technology, trade, money, ethics, law, and religion, proposes that life does the least work it can. http://idletheory.info/
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    You're a member of that political corporation, and you conform to many of its rules. Any dispassionate observer would note how much you submit to it; to say you don't is pure evasion. Go ahead, disprove me wrong by openly growing and selling marijuana or raw milk off your front porch. Let me know how quoting Black's Law Dictionary works for you when the cops show up. Like Bob Black* says, "believing you are invulnerable to bullets puts you in more, not less, danger of being shot." But thanks for your lesson in Latin Legal Liturgy. It's another common behavior of those gyrating to the White Man's Ghost Dance. ____________________________ *"CONSTITUTIONALISM": THE WHITE MAN'S GHOST DANCE by Robert C. Black http://www.spunk.org/texts/writers/black/sp001650.html
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    If you want to study triangles, you should stay with in the realm of triangle axioms. When you start positing claims that can be checked in the real world, only an intellectual fraud would claim something provably false was somehow "a priori" knowledge. When Mises states: "The natural condition of man is extreme poverty and insecurity....Primitive man was always haunted by the specter of death from starvation," he's parroting the falsehoods of Hobbes. By observation, anthropologists, archeologists, evolutionary biologists, medical historians, etc. have all debunked such Hobbesian lies created to apologize for the oppressive hierarchy of city-Statism (civilization.) Then you further your intellectual fraud by trying to abandon those you were defending just, what, yesterday? Do you think I'm as stupid as you? Not hardly, pilgrim. You're the only one who keeps talking about culling -- because you're hiding the fact that you want to cull the "parasite" sub-humans who aren't followers of your Totalitarian Capitalist ideology that you falsely posit as "free." And then you'll commit the intellectual fraud of calling genocide "self-defense." You'll cook up some fraudulent excuse how they "deserved it." In fact, you buddy here already said that in his Totalitarian Capitalism, those without enough money deservedly "starve to death." Yep, that's what he said. "Starve to death," with nary a shred of human empathy. Oh right, to you, evolutionary biologists are as evil as they are to Fundamentalist Biblical Literalists. Humans are created in your a priori image! There can be no observable data, across many species, about behavior that demonstrates morals and empathy and altruism, because you don't want it to be! And those intellectual smarty-pants who are smart enough to observe such, well, they're just parasites to you, right? Send them to hell to burn forever and ever, amen! Maybe that's too silly these days, let's try a different rationalized tack: "“Sweep aside those parasites of subsidized classrooms, who live on the profits of the mind of others and proclaim that man needs no morality, no values, no code of behavior!" ~Ayn Rand There's your Fundamentalist Preacher who , and you sound just like it: an intellectual fraud. A fraud who wants people to ignore their senses, their powers of observation, in favor of believing your ideology about the real world is as axiomatic your simple-minded triangles.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Those who cleave to data charts--the thing between their shoulders--assume that I cleave similarly but I shrugged (long ago....) Some call it "shrieking" and just follow the "leader", but really that says more about them than I ever could... It's not necessary for me to take my protractor and check the internal angles of a triangle. They are 180 degrees. Some say to hell with logic but again that says more about their premises than I ever could or would want to... Logic vs Empiricism--opens up a world that separates Mises from Keynes (Krugman). And yet in many ways Rand, presaged Mises because she wrote about what she had yet to become and did not have to wait for her students to go full tilt into the realm of self-rule... Got blame? Take it up with Lincoln and Sherman (DiLorenzo had not written "The Real Lincoln" in her time. Holding her responsible for something a certain poster here missed himself says volumes more than I ever could... Me? I'm not a Misean nor Ran-dian nor Anarchist. I am "Indomitus" and I cannot even use the word "system" as it relates to freedom because there is no system for freedom...another posting already... I cannot free the UNFree. They must find their own way. I have gleaned some fine ideas that I have made my own (some can misconstrue this, let them take my auto-didactism and chart its course and miss the point)! The primitives posit that a culling of the "We" must take place before they can be free. They would love to be a war profiteer--so the data chartist premise--but logically and morally it is much more important to ensure you and I dear reader don’t become casualties of such...
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 32 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/39185824/The-Not-So-Wild-Wild-West
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Claims of "a priori" are a fraud when a premise can be checked against empirical data. That's what I keep telling you; your religio-economic priesthood keeps spouting premises that are easily debunked. You're just trying to weasel, equivalent to a fundamentalist claiming divine inspiration for his scriptures. If Mises states that fresh water freezes at 28 degrees, and one empirically checks his statement and finds it doesn't, then only an intellectual fraud would try an end-run around reality and claim such a person is a positivist (he may or he may not be, it matters not) to deflect the the reality that the premise is checkable against empirical data. An honest man would admit his mistake. Not an economist though! Economists probably shouldn't be making "a priori" statements that are checkable against empirical data if they want to stay in the realm of "a priori" deductive thinking. But Mises and Rand and Rothbard made many such statements, easily checkable. They were flat-out wrong. You won't admit it, because truth doesn't matter to you; protecting your religio-economic dogma does. You won't even follow your Dear Leader's advice to "check your premises."
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    This guy needs a drink. Sounds as if he's trying to sober up. Can't have that. Sam
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Perhaps the most distinctive feature of the economics of Ludwig von Mises is his insistence on the a priori approach. For Mises, economic "laws" must be logically deduced from antecedent axioms, so that—assuming the initial assumptions are true—the conclusions reached are just as valid as any result in Euclidean geometry. This stands in sharp contrast to the method of the positivists, a camp that includes most of today's practicing economists and a certain resident empiricist and primitivist. In their opinion, economics can only be "scientific" if it adopts the procedures used by the natural scientists. Roughly, the positivists--such as Krugman and Keynes--feel that economists should form hypotheses with testable implications, and then collect data to measure the accuracy of their predictions. "The necessary result of the adoption of this *empiricist* epistemological and methodological model was that social scientists would always be behind the curve of any emerging social phenomenon." http://direct.mises.org/daily/4529/Gathering-Data-while-Washington-Burns
  • Peter McCandless's picture
    Peter McCandless 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Stupidity Reigns
    Page Paul Hein
    Those that think we can solve the economic woes in this country and elsewhere by printing money (so-called economic "stimuli") might think we can solve a shortage of doctors by simply handing out more medical diplomas. In other words the stupidity to which Hein elequently refers is not restricted to the topic of money. Parents tell their kids all time, "You need to bring up your grade in X." Rarely do they say (and one wonders if any many mean it), "you need to learn more" and the student's grade will then reflect that (assuming the grade is actually a measure of learning and not just attendance or "busy work"). We live in a society where the symbol standing for something is confused with the something for which it stands, be that "something" money, learning, or even love.
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 3 years 32 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    In context its always so much clearer, he had a valid point in many ways. I will be the first to say that liberty, true liberty consists of hard labor. It is neither easy nor is it a holiday, in fact when discussing this with minarchists or monarchists I find it necessary to consistently dismantle the idea that by wanting absolute liberty I am in some way desiring to be a lazy cad. :)
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 3 years 32 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    well said, and will do thank you!
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    Scott, I tried to answer those very questions in the first few paragraphs of the article. Can't improve on them. Worth a re-read?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    "The life of an Indian is a continual holiday, compared with the poor of Europe; and, on the other hand it appears to be abject when compared to the rich." ~ Thomas Paine
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 3 years 32 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Dkiller88 True, and unfortunately I noticed that after it had gone to print, Wild Bill was part of the Show for a bit, he did not in fact start the show- WhiteIndian I would say that the meme regarding Indians lives are incorrect. They worked very hard, sure they didnt have televisions and more, but they worked constantly and regularly or they starved. It was not until we caged them on reservations that they became "lazy" and were on "holiday." As for the "huge pile of skulls" I wont disagree, though you will find that those "massacres" and the indian holocaust were a direct result of STATE intervention. And btw that is the focus of my third part of the series, (Liberty-) the first two parts seen here on Strike-The-Root -
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    You're still bent out of shape because simple observation in the real world debunks your make-believe premises. Which makes Paul Krugman pretty much like you: another agricultural city-Statism (civilization) swindler. So, you continue to lie to cover up your evasion of empirical data. (Hardly surprising from your hustlin' type.) I've said several times that I do not advocate "going back to primitivism" because it is impossible to do. But the critique of civilization against 2 million years of our primitive ancestors' Original Affluent Society (Sahlins, 1974) still stands true as ever. If you dare to not evade reality. And your dear leader, Ayn "Pol Pot" Rand was the one who dreamed of eliminating most people on earth. Oh wait, she dehumanized them like all genocidal tyrants do into mere "parasites." They're not people at all; just parasites, Objectivistly rationalized. "Sweep aside those parasites..." Yeah, Pol Pot sounded pretty much the same, and his goal was "restarting civilization" at "year Zero." Maybe Pol Pot read Ayn Rand? She had the same murderous fantasy: blow the whole thing up and start over. That's what Atlas Shrugged is all about, a Mathusian novel to get the earth's population back to its Objectivist carrying capacity. So let's compare these two batshit crazy kooks: Pol Pot wanted to: 
(a) "restart civilization"
 (b) by cleansing civilization of liberal influences
 (c)and punishing and starving out people he regarded as subhumans 
(d) at Year Zero. Ayn Rand wanted also to:
 (a) restart civilization 
(b) by cleansing civilization of liberal influences 
(c) and punishing and starving out people she regarded as subhumans 
(d) with a wave of the dollar brand cigarette. Not much difference. But what else would you expect from a philosophical movement inspired by a serial child killer?
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    The biggest laughs of them all come from Paul Krugman of the New York Times. Krugman, as anyone with a functioning cerebrum knows, is nothing but a court jester or sideshow act of the collapse. Insane, Homeless Man Finds Suit in Trash. He looks like an insane, homeless man. And, I realize I just insulted insane, homeless men around the world. Adding to the laugh factor, everything he says sounds like what an insane, homeless man would say! It’s hard to know where to even begin with him. And yet Paul Krugman most resembles a certain resident data modeling empiricist/positivist on this site with his primitivist teachers. Gak! With all their attendant problems that they model so well. Hardly in the same camp with those Miseans who show how logic trumps both statistics and its spurious conclusions and patterns. I think Tom Woods asks The Right Question--and certainly the most logical--and that he comes to the right conclusions and solutions (hint it's not more of the same insanity that got us into this mess nor does it require the culling of the masses before some backward-looking failures can practice their primitivists ways). But don't take my word for it. Check out the posts above, Dear Reader...
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    They busted into his house when he was asleep just because he had a few cannabis plants? The cops brought this on themselves.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 32 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    Hey Sam, Here's Doug Stanhope on Freedom. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTOQhPd2Xh4
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Science (observation + inductive thinking) isn't perfect; but those with false premises (upon which rests their fragile deductive house-of-cards syllogisms) hate it. Especially economists. Or charlatans. Either term is pretty descriptive of either Mises or Krugman, or the like. And their True® Believers.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    ...In order to move beyond making subjective statements of belief about how parts of the world work, the scientist would either need to become omniscient himself or consult someone who is omniscient, or else he would need to move beyond gathering and interpreting empirical evidence. Because the former options are, presumably, not open to him, the scientist's only viable option is to discover "facts" about the world, or parts of the world, that cannot possibly be thought to be false, and which are not open to misinterpretation. In other words, the scientist would have to transform himself from an empiricist into a "rationalist" who was concerned to discover fundamental truths about the world (i.e., a priori truths about the world) and elucidate them by means of a deductive and rationalistic method.[4] Only then would the scientist be in a position to say that he has found "facts" about parts of the world that are "indisputably true." By dogmatically endorsing the "scientific method" as the only means to acquire knowledge about the world, the empirically minded scientist tacitly admits that it is possible to discover fundamental truths about the world without going out and "testing" them. For, the proposition "all hypotheses and theories must be 'tested' against empirical experience" purports to be objectively and universally true, yet the proposition itself has not and can never be "tested." Therefore the proposition is self-contradictory and thus false, a fact that establishes that it is indeed possible to discover irrefutable and demonstrable truths about the world without going out and testing them. Thus, absolute certainty in science cannot be acquired by means of the "scientific method" and/or the collection and interpretation of empirical evidence. For beings that lack omniscience, collection and interpretation of empirical evidence can only yield imperfect and subjective beliefs about how the world "works." Instead, absolute certainty in science can only be acquired by discovering propositions about the world that can be known to be true a priori — propositions that cannot possibly be thought to be false. *This observation, in a nutshell, forms the foundation and is the great strength of (Mises) Austrian School of economics, which stands virtually alone in the contemporary world as a bastion for thinkers who are unsatisfied with imperfect and subjective approaches to science...* http://mises.org/daily/5860/What-Is-a-Scientific-Theory
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Ya think? Genesis 34:10 "You can settle among us; the land is open to you. Live in it, trade in it, and acquire property in it.” How many wars are mentioned after Genesis 34:10? (Hint, I'm quoting the Bible literarily, not literally.) Now, purchase ye a good book on war. I've got it sitting in my lap right now: The Origins Of War: From The Stone Age To Alexander The Great by Arther Ferrill http://www.getcited.org/pub/102389214 You'll find out Mises is as full of bunk as anybody mainstream; i.e., agricultural city-Statism (civilization) cheerleaders. • Domestication (domination over other species) = violence to our own species. • Agriculture (intensive domination over other species) = intensive violence to our own species. It's just that simple; the Marx and Mises city-statist broz missed it. You have too.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Apparently enough are seeing thru the difference between The Austrian School at Mises Vs Mainstream economists/political scientists and their abject failure-- perpetual wars and debt bailouts. See post above that starts "At the very least one must be able to see thru the political myths men have lived by since Neolithic times. The Root of the Problem--If one digs--excavates--into the matter more deeply, future social scientists will ultimately arrive at the fundamental cause of the *appalling failure of today's social scientists' to predict or offer solutions to the disaster*: they decided *to adopt empiricism as their method for studying man* much like *main stream economists and political scientists* and a certain empiricist on this site.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Those who want a quieter "Western Life" far from Mordor-on-the-Potomac had better hope the map begins to close. A Pirate’s Life for Me II: Opening the Map by Jason Godesky | 22 May 2007 rewild.info/anthropik/2007/05/a-pirates-life-for-me-ii-opening-the-map/ P.S. Funny stuff how putting "http" in front of "rewild" makes this post "spam." LOL Let the libertarian censorship games begin!
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Who listens to economists? LOL! Peak Oil scientists predicted this 30 years ago. Come on, give me a Cornucopian* economist retort, a.k.a., that idiot Julian Simon, the losin'est bettor in the economic field. __________ * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornucopian
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    ...The mainstream political scientists and economists of this generation were completely useless for predicting the disaster we now confront, and continue to pour forth nothing but *the most worthless empirical studies of yesterday's least consequential issues*." At some point in the future, however, after failure upon failure, social scientists will get around to looking at why they *keep failing to predict these important social events*. At that point, we can only hope that nothing will interest them more about this dark period of history than the failure of their predecessors, and that they may finally seek out an alternative to empiricism that can transform them from backward-looking failures into true social scientists... Gathering Data while Washington Burns... Mises Daily: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 by Mark R. Crovelli http://direct.mises.org/daily/4529/Gathering-Data-while-Washington-Burns
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Quote scholarly sources if you're going to use scholarly terms like "neolithic." OK? Quoting religio-economic ideological sources who eschew empirical data is less that honest. I bet lewrockwell.com and mises.org hardly have a self-styled scholar who would admit that humans are primate mammals - animals. That's stupid multiplied by stupid.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 32 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    At the very least one must be able see thru the political myths men have lived by since Neolithic times. Today it is easier to attack a politically correct shadow with a pitch fork than the statue that darkens the landscape. And thereby avoid the controversial causes and any taint of stigma. I recommend Tom Woods and Stefan Molyneux Take On Wall Street to begin to understand this issue! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXNOxnn7_uA&feature=youtube_gdata Woods asks the Right Question: Would there likely be Less Wars and Bailouts--that enrich the military-industrial complex and politically connected fat cats--Or More if the Fed Gov had a magical money machine? This is not a hypothetical question. They--all the above--Do have such a machine and access to it: it is called The Federal Reserve System. As Hayek points out money is half of every transaction economy wide. And Woods makes a cogent connection: Is there a chance that this magic printing machine has a tinsy chance of creating economy wide up and down boom, bust volatility and classes of people herded, corralled and enriched by Govt? This is not the same as the pyramid of ability or comparative advantages of a division of labor society. What's changed? There is now more impoverishing Wars and the same for Bailouts than can be supported or hidden. There is only one entity that can pit the poor against the rich, the young against the old, the white against the black, this country against another and thrive thru divide and conquer. Woods and Molyneux further discuss: Seeing thru the duality of what is bad, evil and corrupt in the private sector magically rendered good in the public sector. It can only occur on the scale we have via a "coercive" monopoly that can be wielded by the politically connected to bypass the competition of free market. Although I was taught to accept this inverted moral code (until I read Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", Royce's "Holgoram of Liberty", DiLorenzo's "The Real Lincoln", etc), rising prices are not normal . And saying the people running the system are bad and that we need to get Big Bird and Barney the Dinosaur to run the system is also not the answer. The System (Fascism) must be abandoned. Indeed US Fascism is a most insidious mixture of the key ingredients while maintaining the necessary nuance to snooker the masses, the media, and the respectable folks across the spectrum. http://mises.org/daily/5634 Too many say, yes but surely too much freedom needs an authority system to step in is justified? After all Deregulation caused these chaotic issues? And look what happened? Yet the same people who are so-called anti-establishment standing up to prevailing wisdom never ask themselves why do they accept the prevailing wisdom put forth by the same who did not see the crisis coming nor the causes? As long as there are elected politicians, *politically connected* businessmen, banksters and members of the military-industrial complex will *Game the System*--and bypass competition and productive work. Here I think the OWS has a legitimate gripe! But one size does not fit all. Do not throw the baby out with the bath water. *There are honest innovators and entreprenuers who are not politically connected...How does one separate out the two?* The Occupy Wall Street know so much but only go so far. As Butler Shaffer points out: Running to one wing or the other of the same bird of prey is not the answer to undo the effects of that wing. The Repeal of Glass Stegall Banking Act (1933) is a red herring as is the failure to pro-actively regulate. Red herrings put out there by those Gaming the System. Obviously after the fact you can see that the housing bubble blew up. No kidding! The issue is where are the regulators and their chiefs when this is going on! They were the ones telling us everything was fine. And forcing rising interest rates down and thereby covering up the mkt feed back signals that would have stopped the housing bubble. The Banks were ALWAYS allowed to securitize mtgs and hold those mortgages as investments. Nothing changed in that regard. The problem was banks did traditional banking things badly. Why? Because they knew they would be bailed out by the Fed Reserve! http://lewrockwell.com/woods/woods183.html Finally there are bad leadership in the financial institutions but why is it so hard to get rid of them? The people who are protesting now are cut from the same cloth as the people who want and introduced more regulation. The Williams Act...and other legislation against so-called hostile take overs is basically the CEO Protection Act of 1986. Individual share holders have since found it very difficult to discipline bank or corporate management. There are very strict limits on how much institutional investors can own of a bank or financial company. It is 1% at most. The investor's natural oversight--of wanting a company to do well and not do crazy things--as a natural regulator is artificially debilitated and scattered by govt regulators and regulations! Again and again it can be seen that it is Govt consistently protecting the bad and fat cats! Not helping to bring them down. No worries if there is problem the bankers will be made whole with a Greenspan or Bernake put (magic printing press) The banks know they can act more recklessly than they otherwise would!! They have a sugar daddy waiting in the wings. Why don't you see this in the fishing companies nor book publishing? The FED reserve was manipulating interest rates making housing investing look sensible and better investment than it really was! Every time the economy tried to tell people stop spending this is a bad investment the Fed Reserve intervenes and turns those red lights off and make them green! Regulators are not far seeing. They are time serving drones. Stop praying to them and attributing to them super human powers... Stop defending the semi socialist position of OWS nor making the Fed Reserve Bank more socialistic via the US Govt. The problem is The Fed--Central Planing--Reserve system embedded in the free market and drawn up not to increase wealth and prospects for you and me but designed to be The Great Bailout Banker System Extraordinaire that we have today. They are false alternatives... *In some sense Occupy The Federal Reserve would make more sense*. Specifically: Occupy Liberty Street (OLS)! (The Federal Reserve Bank of New York) http://lewrockwell.com/north/north1051.html *Marginalization is the better and to me only solution. Government is marginalized when it is ignored, when individuals eschew the political process*. http://mises.org/daily/5758/Depoliticize-Everything Reference: *The "central bank" is not a real bank. Everything about it is permeated with government power. At the heart of the financial and monetary system of a nation that is supposed to be an exemplar of free markets is a government money-bureau*. http://lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff364.html
  • dkiller88's picture
    dkiller88 3 years 33 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Very nice article. I would like to point out that it was not Wild Bill Hickock's Wild West Show; it was Buffalo Bill Cody's. The author seems to have mixed his wild west icons.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 3 years 33 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Looks like an interesting book, Jesse. Thanks for the perspective. Definitely worth adding to anyone's reading list. It has been only a couple of generations since getting hurt on the farm could be life threatening and even just a few generations ago that young adults of the "old" age of 12 were driving teams pulling heavily-loaded wagons down steep canyons.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    More white man's Ghost Dance* word magic: "...American [as opposed to UNITED STATE's]..." * "CONSTITUTIONALISM": THE WHITE MAN'S GHOST DANCE by Robert C. Black http://www.spunk.org/texts/writers/black/sp001650.html
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    The other question, (unrelated to the one above), I have of you, is, once you cross the "10% Rubicon" and anarchy has become the "predominant[1] philosophy" [not in your lifetime, my friend], what are you going to do about the unrepentant percentage who still want a government, a parens patriae, to take care of them from "cradle to grave"? ______________________________________________________ [1] Quick definitions from Macmillan Dictionary (predominant) adjective ▸the most common or greatest in number or amount ▸most important or powerful Sounds a bit like a democracy, in its purest form, to me.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    "...the current American [as opposed to UNITED STATE's] population is a rough 312 million persons...", and a handful of nonpersons (non-members). But that aside, you wrote: "Before I begin to turn this into some kind of bizarre murder mystery, one point begins to come clear: There really is no way I or you can establish ownership of anything except in one of two ways. Either we extend ownership of personal property to each other by way of mutual consent, or we establish ownership by means of brute force." Let us begin with this; you are of the opinion that I must have, "mutual consent...or...brute force", to establish ownership of my self? If you are willing to discuss this, we will take if from there. No sense muddying up the waters too soon.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    G'day Sam, Yes, I thought you might, WOW!, like I did, at the first nine tenths of that youtube video. Maybe he's not quite ready to do away with government altogether yet, but he's edging closer every day. And, don't forget, he also said this; "What if the heart of the government policy remains the same no matter who's in the White House?" Would that not possibly negate the Ron Paul questions at the end? They were just questions, after all.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    The problem is not capital. Capital is simply the resource you will need to open a shop. If you plan to produce widgets you'll need some sort of resource useable to vendors and laborers to purchase the machinery, equipment, labor, sales and raw materials to get widgets on store shelves so people can buy them. Since those individuals who have formed monopolies on coercion ("The-Government") have declared, under threat of violence, that you must use their fiat "currency" (called "dollars" in this part of the planet), that is the resource you will need. The problem is ISM. Once ISM enters the picture, the idea of free market becomes totally befuddled in the minds of those who do not understand the nature of getting a business financed and off the ground in order to provide employment for those who wish to do an honest day's work and receive an honest day's pay. ISM implies interface with those people who make up the monopoly on force. Those are the sociopaths who proceed under the reification of "The-State". They would prefer you call them "our rulers" or "our policy makers" (what a criminal misnomer) to absolve them of responsibility for the ISM (this ISM we're discussing, in case you've forgotten, is "capitalism"). And be sure to get out the vote. Through violent incursions into the free market by way of taxation, regulation, OSHA and other invasions far too numerous to list here, it is damned difficult to know whom to blame, because it's difficult for an honest businessman to seek out honest lenders to finance an honest enterprise because of the prerequisite for him to sleep with and pay prostitute fees to those holding the monopoly on violence. If anybody were to ask me for a one-word definition of government, I would answer, "obfuscation". That sez it all. So they protest. And they occupy. Anything and everything. Which plays directly into the hands of those who maintain the legitimacy of state agents. The talking heads of state media love it. It calls for more government action -- more redistribution of "wealth". Gimme, gimme, gimme! There is a solution. Ask me some day -- although those of you reading this already know. Sam
  • wkmac's picture
    wkmac 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Not that Forbes should get a pass on Crony Capitalism but I quote the following from the op-ed: "Where I think the OWS folks go off the rails is their assumption that this sort of cronyism represents the true beating heart of capitalism...." I'm not willing to say the OWS are off the rails completely on that point but then unlike the author I'm not making the mistake of equating capitalism and free market as the same thing either. Capitalism's mother in mercantilism and it's grandmother in fuedalism was all about state power and there's no reason to see the child having abandoned the dogma and traditions of the family matriarchs! Some of the OWS folk do IMO misconstrue real free markets with the fakery that calls itself such but I can understand why too.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Agriculture wasn't started because people were hungry (push factors) as commonly surmised. Anthropology has hotly debated that, and the preponderance of evidence is that agriculture was deliberately started for religious-ritualistic-feasting episodes by "Big Men" or "emergent elite." (pull factors) Control freaks started controlling other species (domestication, and ensuing agriculture) to increase their social control over their own species, humans. Agriculture has always been a Bernie Madoff level scam of deficit-spending the "banked" bounty of the soil -- one, unfortunately, upon which lives now depend. At least as long as the scam goes. For a good summary of the anthropological data, see: Thesis 10: Emergent elites led the Agricultural Revolution. by Jason Godesky http://rewild.info/anthropik/thirty/ P.S. I'm all for gardening (permaculture/horticulture,) as a way to step away from the unsustainable Bernie Madoff-ish scam of totalitarian agriculture.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    If I didn't know better I'd think from the first 3/4 of his video Napolitano was edging toward anarchy. But alas, at the end he confirms his belief that by engaging in politics and electing a Ron Paul "we" can, in fact, tame the beast. Abstain From Beans. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    I've misplaced my note on a line from one of James Michener's novels where a black man was observing the impudence of the white man's ethnic cleansing practices toward the natives of a given area, then publishes his history books with prevarications like "...Columbus 'discovered' America..." (and erects monuments and statues commemorating the "event"). So I'm in agreement with your take on the murderous behavior of granting homesteading "rights" to stolen land. And I've not been an avid Ayn Rand fan. Even Murray Rothbard toward the end scuttled her along with her ship as I understand it. I'll certainly agree with this statement from the article: Government’s role in making and keeping people poor is just one of the factors that make poverty endemic and make it hard to survive while poor. I will disagree with the author's reification: "Government" has no roll in keeping people poor. Agents OF government fill that roll -- individuals who should know better but choose to ignore truth for the sake of authoritarianism. As Mr. Davies so colorfully outlined in a recent piece, government ("the state") is pie in the sky. I am curious to hear, however, who the "one honest capitalist..." might be. Sam
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Now, that, is what I call really "weighing in"!! Thank you, Mark Davis. Well said.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Nice story around one man's opinion: Looking about for easy game and abundant grub is more fun than farming. Gee, nobody ever thought about that, what a revelation. All those good ‘ol boys that go fishing or hunting every weekend never thought of just doing it every day. Assuming this opinion is some kind of revealed universal truth that all people must agree with, it still begs the assumption that human populations will not increase past the point of universal abundance such that there will never be scarcity of, or competition for, resources. That's biologically and physically impossible. Bacteria, rodents, insects and men will reproduce to the point of resource depletion unless resource supplies can be increased fast enough. I don't see waves of mass starvation to keep populations low as all that nice a place to be. Not to mention I really like my bed and a roof over my head. But I digress, you see, my planting my own plants and raising my own animals to manage supply, harvest on schedule and eat as I please allows me to control my destiny more so than trusting to providence and perpetual abundance while we reproduce to our hearts delight. The agricultural scenario makes me happier than the alternative of "gamboling about" and apparently a lot of other people too. The position of assuming that the world owes me a living, especially when I'm no longer a young man physically able to "gambol about" is not as wonderful as you make it appear. For example, I have a cabin in the mountains on a little 10-acre farm that I am retiring to when I get tired of the beaches and toiling for The Man here in Florida. My land abuts a large forest of 1,000s of square miles that is owned by an Indian tribe and various state agencies, that are 99% uninhabited and in a natural state. My neighbors and I (and our families and friends) have a clear choice daily of whether to work in the garden, milk a goat, get eggs from the chickens, trade or exchange produce, books and stories with each other, make a fire in the fire-place or take a nap in my cozy abode. At any time we could all choose to gather together and start foraging for food, forsake our beds, roofs, shoes, computers and books to avoid working in the garden. I don't know anybody that would prefer "hunting and living off the land" to farming for longer than a weekend, maybe a week when younger. Anyone that can't see why people took up agriculture has never really tried living off the land, especially in the winter.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    "Commonwealth employees are immune from liability due to intentional misconduct, so long as the employee is acting within the scope of his or her employment," [Chief U.S. District Judge Gary] Lancaster wrote. Interesting! How can "intentional misconduct" be "within the scope of his or her employment"? 'Sounds' like an oxymoron, but then, I'm not a "white...mendacious...domestic...foppish whore", so it probably would seem that way to me. If there are any "white...mendacious...domestic...foppish whores" in the house, maybe we could 'hear' from you next?
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Butler Shaffer had a good piece over on Lew Rockwell a few months ago: http://lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer239.html In reading Butler's article again, I can see that "environmentalists" can be some violent folks. Sam
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    They claimed that "...the officers were intending to serve the purposes of their 'master,' the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania..." according to the court's summary. Say, who is this person, "Commonwealth of Pennsylvania"? Is this so-called 'master' fiction or non-fiction? If (s)he is non-fiction, I would like to talk to him, or her, and, NO, THANK YOU, I do not want to talk to his, or her, 'agent(s)' or 'representative(s)', I want to talk to him, or her, face-to-face. I want to look this non-fiction 'master' in the fricken eye when (s)he falsely accuses me!
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 33 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    "Techno-porn." ~Rice Farmer (Japan) News Links, January 7, 2012 http://www.ricefarmer.blogspot.com/ (Rice Farmer lives out in the hills, growing rice and veggies organically.)
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 33 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    One could just as easily say "individualism, when its you attempting to induct me into civilization which I have not chosen to participate..." Apparently pronouns aren't the real problem. Domestication and living in large groups beyond human neurobiological limits, whether collectivism or individualism is the political flavor of the day, are the problems. Domestication is the beginning of human violence, as extremely well documented by anthropology and archeology. Large groups require hierarchy, which is the beginning of the state. If you like violence and the state, you'll just love domestication and large groups.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 33 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    "We", when it's you attempting to induct me into a group in which I have not chosen to participate, is the most dangerous word in the world (watch the video at the end of the article unless your ears are tender to foul language). My world. Jim, this is another quotable classic of yours, alongside many dozens of others. The term I hear ringing through your essay is "reification". To reify is to treat an abstract as though it were a living, breathing entity -- to create an image of something out of nothing. Conquerors and their admirers have used this tactic incessantly throughout the ages to maintain legitimacy of state in the minds of people. In early history, once the hordes came to see there was no enduring profit in "scorched earth" practices (raping the women, massacring the entire cities and leaving the corpses to rot in the desert and the cities in smoldering ruins), they would keep the inhabitants alive as slaves...er, producers ("taxpayers", "citizens"); and, led by the kahn, let them Join-the-Family-of-Nations. Have their own flag in which to pledge allegiance. To what? To the Khan, of course. "My country 'tis of thee..." The genius of "democracy" (any party of two robbing any party on one) came much later in history. Thanks for the article! Sam
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 33 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    I look forward to studying your voluntary city, or "Free State," if it happens. I predict it will not ever happen, because you're evading the reality of how large groups of people actually behave, no matter what religion, constitution, covenant, or magical incantations they sign, pray to, or swear allegiance to, or pretend to not do any of that.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    A realistic demonstration would be to publicly grow and publicly advertise marijuana or raw milk, or just put up a shingle to cut hair. But you're really not free. Not free to do that or a million other things prohibited by the government of agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) I appreciate your (and Browne's) trying to find ways to cope with mass society. One is "free" to do many things in prison, some even find great enlightenment in prison. But they're still in prison. And still not free in the sociopolitical sense of being free of coercion.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 33 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Actually I do not advocate agri city statism. I have actually been demonstrating that it is possible to live free in a unfree world.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 33 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    I only need to find those who are compatible with me. This is not hard to do. There will always be those who will be attracted to what I stand for. The Covenant of Unanimous Consent makes it possible for all to know what I love and stand for.