Recent comments

  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    People disestablished from the land (and it's always by aggressive TAKING*) are forced to either submit and work for the agricultural city-Statism (civilization) juggernaut or starve to death. It's just that simple. That's Totalitarian Agriculture, or Totalitarian Capitalism, as one author here during the holidays wrote: people without money can just "starve to death." Our system of private property in land FORCES landless men to work for others; to work in factories, stores, and offices, whether they like it or not. Wherever access to land is free, men work only to provide what they actually need or desire. Wherever the white man has come in contact with savage cultures this fact becomes apparent. There is for savages in their native state no such sharp distinction between "work" and "not working" as clocks and factory whistles have accustomed the white man to accept. They cannot be made to work regularly at repetitive tasks in which they have no direct interest except by some sort of duress. Disestablishment from land, like slavery, is a form of DURESS. The white man, where slavery cannot be practiced, has found that he must first disestablish the savages from their land before he can force them to work steadily for him. Once they are disestablished, they are in effect STARVED into working for him and into working as he directs. ~Dr. Ralph Borsodi This Ugly Civilization (1929, Simon and Schuster) “You’ll know you’re among the people of your culture if the food is all owned, if it’s all under lock and key. But food was once no more owned than the air or the sunshine are owned. No other culture in history has ever put food under lock and key—and putting it there is the cornerstone of your economy, because IF THE FOOD WASN'T UNDER LOCK AND KEY, WHO WOULD WORK?" ~Daniel Quinn My Ishmael (1998, Bantam) * "[The Native Americans] didn't have any rights to the land ... Any white person who brought the element of civilization had the right to take over this continent." ~Ayn Rand, US Military Academy at West Point, March 6, 1974 The RIGHT. To TAKE. Finally, an honest (if only for a moment) Totalitarian Capitalist.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    It's not a waste of time when the empirical data from the history of humanity debunks your premises upon which you base your deductive syllogisms. The point is: you're wrong because your premises are wrong. It matters not what's possible, you're wrong about many assumptions right now, which Stephen Jay Gould refers rather nicely "just so stories" in the excerpt below. P.S. Gambol comes from the following excerpt: Why agriculture? In retrospect, it seems odd that it has taken archaeologists and paleontologists so long to begin answering this essential question of human history. What we are today—civilized, city-bound, overpopulated, literate, organized, wealthy, poor, diseased, conquered, and conquerors—is all rooted in the domestication of plants and animals. The advent of farming re-formed humanity. In fact, the question "Why agriculture?" is so vital, lies so close to the core of our being that it probably cannot be asked or answered with complete honesty. Better to settle for calming explanations of the sort Stephen Jay Gould calls "just-so stories." In this case, the core of such stories is the assumption that agriculture was better for us. Its surplus of food allowed the leisure and specialization that made civilization. Its bounty settled, refined, and educated us, freed us from the nasty, mean, brutish, and short existence that was the state of nature, freed us from hunting and gathering. Yet when we think about agriculture, and some people have thought intently about it, the pat story glosses over a fundamental point. This just-so story had to have sprung from the imagination of someone who never hoed a row of corn or rose with the sun for a lifetime of milking cows. GAMBOLING about plain and forest, hunting and living off the land is fun. Farming is not. That's all one needs to know to begin a rethinking of the issue. The fundamental question was properly phrased by Colin Tudge of the London School of Economics: “The real problem, then, is not to explain why some people were slow to adopt agriculture but why anybody took it up at all.” ~Richard Manning, Against the Grain, p.24
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Jim, I know lots of people who see the words state and government as meaing the same thing. I still think it was a clever way for Jerry to appeal to these people who just can't get by the myth that there are certain social services (i.e. public goods) that must be performed or provided by "government". He clearly states that non-coercive governments don't own its clients while coercive governments own their citizens. So I don't see that use of terms as an error.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Hey Suverans2, I was hoping you would weigh in on this issue of semantics and you didn't disappoint. I also agree on "What's the frickin' point?" of pining for the Garden of Eden; must be frustrating.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    Jim, I like your idea for starting a database of bios for state agents.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    "Proper government", Mark, appears to me another oxymoron. To govern is to over-rule or destroy the natural and absolute human right of self ownership; that can never be proper (fitting, right, appropriate, suitable.) If Mr Wright thinks there can ever be such a thing, why not suggest to him the error into which he has fallen - along, of course, with a huge number of others. I've not come across anyone who thought that "self-government" means "self-state", that would be a phrase that makes no sense to me. It just means that you and I each make our own decisions for our own lives, period. Perhaps though it would be a good idea to phase out the use of the phrase, in favor of plain-vanilla self-ownership.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    G'day Mark Davis, Very good. That was the first thing that came to my mind; "What about 'self-government'?" There seems to be an aversion, by many freedom-seeking individuals, to the word "government", just as there is an aversion, by many 'citizens', to the word "anarchy". The former associates "government" with "coercion", and the latter associates "anarchy" with "chaos". "All men* have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property..." (Excerpted from the Natural Rights clause of the New Hampshire Constitution) [*Well almost "all men", some men claim to have a "just claim" to nothing. ;)] "These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two." (The Law by Frederic Bastiat) If we use the word "government" to define a collective organization that does nothing more than defend and protect our natural rights, would that "government" still be a bad thing? There are those who will now say something along the lines of, "If it only defends and protects our natural rights it isn't a government". But, just because it isn't, or even has never been, does that mean that it can't be? They then answer, "If it did only that, then it couldn't be called a 'government'." Fine!! What, pray tell, could it be called? Then substitute that word wherever you find the word "government" when we are discussing a collective organization that does nothing more than defend and protect our natural rights. It's that easy. And, why waste time discussing anarcho-primitivism, or whatever the hell one wishes to call it, where we did nothing but "run, jump, and play like a young child or animal[1]" in the Garden of Eden, when its staunchest proponent, here, openly admits that it is impossible for even one individual, let alone all of mankind, to voluntarily return to his primitive state? What's the frickin' point? As for me and my house we will discuss things that are possible. _________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Quick definition from Macmillan Dictionary for the word gambol.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago
    Where's the State?
    Page Jim Davies
    The State wields the sword that enforces the business of the Farmer's plowshares, and all the subsequent division of labor and production and concentration of wealth of agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) There is no use beating plowshares (a Mass-Death Culture technique to dominate Nature's Flora) into swords (a mass-Death Culture technique to dominate Nature's Fauna) until we decide that one specie of the family dominating the rest of Mother Evolution's Tree of Life family* is, eventually, suicidal. ____________ * The Great Tree of Life http://evogeneao.com/tree.html
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    A tautology of Zombie politics: "Noncoercive government consists of institutions, organizations, or agencies that provide protection and assurance of freedom without use of coercion..." I bet if you use just the right word magic on sacred pieces of contract-or grade paper, you could also conjure an animated corpse. Right after we have endless ergs of power too cheap to meter. Most of the Cargo Cults finally had the good sense to give up, but there are still a few surviving. All hail John Frum, Happy Government, Voodoo Science, and Free Statism. Yep, good luck with that. Let me know when it all works out. _________________ "The cults focus on obtaining the material wealth of the advanced culture through contract rituals and practices. Cult members believe that the wealth was intended for them by the Invisible Hand and the Founding Fathers." ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    States assume that they own the people in their territory and use legalized force and fraud to control those people. Corporations without states to do their bidding would be like any other entity vying for my business and be subject to free-market forces as well as ownership liability. You seem to completely discount that people can make choices for themselves and do not have to act like little puppets, though many do choose that path of least resistance. I don't know anybody who commutes two hours to work and forsakes social "play". I enjoy my work as it is engaging, challenging and I can do what I want when I want. No hierarchy in sight either. Other than the taxes I am forced to pay, of course. Maybe you just need a new line of work since your view appears awfully skewed. Still, I must say that I like the way you have brought a fresh perspective and interesting insights to the conversations around here although I felt blindsided by a 2x4. You might want to ratchet it down a little bit though.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Jim, Jerry states that "Proper government has the purpose of protecting people from coercion and fraud in their myriad forms, from their many sources... Noncoercive government consists of institutions, organizations, or agencies that provide protection and assurance of freedom without use of coercion or fraud...Individuals contracting for the services could be called clients, customers, citizens or other. However, they cannot have a governmental citizenship forced upon them: They do not belong to a government." He goes on to explain the differences between coercive and non-coercive governments such as coercive governments (States) are ownerless corporate entities that exist outside the set of laws it creates while non-coercive governments have responsible owners that are constrained by the same principles of the society they operate in. See Chapter 11 for a complete discussion. I see it as an extension of the concept of self-government where the word government doesn't mean that you are a self-state. It helps to overcome the common mistake of considering the word state synonymous with the word government and it also deflects the common fear of anarchy being lawless chaos.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Comforts brought by technology; we ALL like them. But such comforts are a monkey trap* of our own making. Now we're locked into commuting 2 hours per day to a Job working for The Man, when in the Original Affluent Society (Sahlins, 1974) 2 hours of play in the woods was sufficient to provide for human needs. Better enjoy that iPod's social media! -- that ever so poorly replaces the many hours Non-State bands and tribes spent together socially interacting (while making somebody way up the sociopolitical hierarchy rich.) Also, libertarian types are too quick to separate out the sociopolitical hierarchy into "evil coercive government" and "gloriously free corporations." They're pretty much all the same to a dispassionate observer. The reason being: libertarians love sociopolitical hierarchy and Lording-over-others — just not sociopolitical hierarchy that Lords-over-them. It's a big contradiction in their thinking. The "oh-so-evhul" Government is just the CUT-OUT MAN to blame for the very real power wielded by the corporate rulers, or as George Carlin calls them, "The People Who REALLY Own This Country."** We all know today that capitalist/corporate Wall Street purchases the Washington D.C. it wants. And that has been so from the beginning of agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) Those with the plowshares need to hire people with swords to get more land to farm. "Agriculture creates government." ~Richard Manning, Against the Grain, p.73 _______________________ * Monkey Trap http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/monkey_trap ** George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Mark, I share your liking for the comforts brought by technology, but it seems to me you haven't answered WhiteIndian's valid question, "What is 'non-coercive government' other than a contradiction?" If a social system is non-coercive, it's not proper to call it governed. If it has a government, then by definition it coerces. This is binary, because words have meaning. If Mr Wright is referring to social cooperation such as is used by corporations etc, he ought not to use the word "government." It is possible he used this contradictory phrase to arouse curiosity, to get the book browser to give attention. If so I'd say that's less than honest. It's also possible he likes the ideas we espouse here, about a society of self-governing individuals, but cannot see how one might be achieved and so wants to modify that objective. In that case please refer your friend to my 2006 STR article "How We Can Get There."
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    You've listed technologies used by Non-State societies for millions of years before domestication-agriculture-civilization-warfare-sacrifice. Evidence for fire is 9,000,000 years ago. There is archeological evidence of humans sailing blue water 800,000 years ago. I'm not against technology, per se, and neither are most primitivists.* But technology after the emergence of domestication tends to be harnessed into increasing the control of the control-freaks, or "emergent elite" or "Big Men" as anthropologists call them in the field's literature. Do the accounting yourself. Play two hours per day in the woods -- or drudge-away 14 hour per day for The Man and washing your shirts and cleaning and ironing and on and on and on. There's nothing "romantic" about the Original Affluent Society. (Sahlins, 1974) It's a scholarly analysis of empirical data gathered by anthropologists/ethnologists studying paleolithic people, like the Bushmen, in the field. They spend most of their day in leisure, telling stories, gamboling, sleeping. All of these recently discovered facts debunk the premises upon which people apologize for agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) It doesn't matter or not if I can or even want to live the life-style; the civilizationist's premises are proven invalid, just as a Biblical Literalists premises are proven invalid by empirical data that constitutes the theory of evolution. As far as living or wanting to live a Non-State society lifeway -- it's impossible, at least for now (although a fast collapse, like a nuclear war, would certainly create another "stone age.") The agricultural city-State (civilization) has been extremely thorough in its invasion and occupation of nearly every square meter of earth's surface. Living out in the woods, alone, signing "A Country Boy Can Survive" isn't living with a knowledgeable tribe or band on a Landbase that has abundant resources unruined by totalitarian agriculture. But neither can one ignore the Critique of Civilization. It's promises are illusory, it makes us sick and reduces quality of life. Just knowing that much has helped people today become healthier by eating a "Paleo diet." __________________________ * Isn’t it hypocritical of primitivists to use modern technology? If they want to live primitively so badly, why don’t they just run off into the woods already and do it? 26 October 2005 5 Common Objections to Primitivism, and Why They’re Wrong by Jason Godesky http://www.rewild.info/anthropik/2005/10/5-common-objections-to-primitiv...
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    I'm curious how you feel about making a fire for warmth and cooking? Are matches used for "concentrating wealth and sociopolitical control to the hierarchical elite" or should we still be using flints? What about using fishing polls or nets? Or axes for chopping wood? These are all technological advances that make life easier for individuals. "Playing in the woods for two hours per day to feed oneself" sounds a bit oversimplified and romantic to me. Have you ever even been camping much less hunting or fishing? For longer than a weekend? I know of some country boys that are squatters/roamers down in the Everglades that live just like you say you wish to do: free from the perils of civilization (except they're smart enough to have guns, boats, clothes and fishing polls which you could forsake if you wish); so since it is possible then why don't you live as you preach?
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Playing in the woods about 2 hours per day to feed oneself, as Non-State societies did in the Original Affluent Society (Sahlins, 1974), is a far cry from grinding-away 8+ hours for The Man and then having to do all the rest of your living on your "free time." How is exactly is technology "easing burdens?" It's not. Technology isn't about easing burdens as much as it is concentrating wealth and sociopolitical control to the hierarchical elite. Technology mainly means building bigger and better Pyramids for the Pharaohs. And even more efficient management/taming of the labor force. Alf Hornborg documents this observation well in his "The power of the machine: Global inequalities of economy, technology, and environment." http://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/o.o.i.s?id=12683&postid=538663 Being that government is a monopoly on violence over a geographic area, "non-coercive government" seems as ever hopeful as conjuring animated corpses. I suppose Zombies are possible with just the right application of technology too. James Axtell has a whole chapter in the following book describing White Indians, as follows: The Invasion Within: The Contest of Cultures in Colonial North America by James Axtell Oxford University Press http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/HistoryAmerican/ColonialRe... The White Indians of Colonial America by James Axtell The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Jan., 1975), pp. 55-88 Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture http://www.shsu.edu/~jll004/colonial_summer09/whiteindians.pdf
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Humans certainly are capable of using technical knowledge and tools such as nut and bolt machines to ease our burdens, indeed to prosper. I didn't say humans were machines. Noncoercive government is basically a free society organized around the principle of equal freedom. I suggest that you read the book to gain a better undrstanding of the concept. And what is a "WhiteIndian" other than a contradiction? I am curious how you rationalize using the Internet on a computer powered by electricity from a mechanical generator while promoting a roaming hunter-gatherer society? Do you appreciate the contributions of the scientists and engineers that created these modern tools? Do you believe that humans would have these wonderful tools today if social organization never evolved beyond humans roaming around looking for low hanging fruit and small animals to kill?
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Page Mark Davis
    Techno-salvationist social engineering = libertarianism. "...technical manual...rocket scientist...nuts and bolts of human interactions..." Human just aren't technical nut and bolt machines. And what is a "noncoercive government" other than a contradiction?
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Michael Dunn
    Typical, the only ones with guns are the ones we SHOULD fear!
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 29 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    G'day Mark Davis, Yes, and I apologize for not heeding my own advice. :( I too found some of it interesting, in fact some of it even parallels my own thoughts on the subject. But, as I wrote some time back, (and now edited a bit): "So, when will [we] be allowed to "gambol about plain and forest", you may rightfully ask? Why, that's simple, when the e-vile ACS "civilization" has completely collapsed, and at least three-quarters of the earth's human population is dead, and all knowledge of growing our own food and domesticating animals has been completely lost." Because, if this basic knowledge is not "completely lost" we will eventually end up...right back where we are today, because, as you put it, the "basic human desire [is] to improve one's lot in life". The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 29 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Don't worry Suverans2, STR will survive and move on after it becomes evident to WI that nobody pays attention to what he says anymore. I found his Neanderthal model for social organization interesting at first and still appreciate some of his insights and links to essays on how civilization has evolved. Unfortunately his goal appears to be to create chaos on this board while avoiding any direct challenges to his shallow thinking. It is very broad, but not as deep as he seems to believe. The premise that civilization and the state are synonymous doesn't get you very far. The ideal of humans living forever as free roaming hunter-gatherers is refuted by his precious empirical evidence as well as the basic human desire to improve one's lot in life; but that pales in comparison to the hurdle of de-evolution required to take us back to the (pre-?) stone-age. This scenario would, of course, require the death of billions of people, so he keeps dancing around our pointing out this psychotic desire.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Michael Dunn
    He writes: "...for...natural aristocracy ... contemptuous of egalitarianism..." That is as contradictory, and revealing, as saying, "I'm for natural polyester, and contemptuous of wool." First, egalitarianism IS natural. Humans have evolved to be egalitarian, as evidenced by low sexual dimorphism (on the level of penguins) and zero sexual dichromaticism (as compared to the red ass baboon.) For starters, see Christopher Boehm's "Hierarchy in the Forest: The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior," (2001) published by Harvard University Press. Second, only in an egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typography have anthropologists observed humans to be "autonomous and sovereign" individuals "who bow to no external political leaders." (Service, 1975) Egalitarianism means equal sociopolitical power. That is, no one Lords-it-over anybody else. Jefferson was quite egalitarian with his famous "all men are created equal" phrase. Egalitarianism = the greatest personal freedom. Unfortunately, I've learned that Libertarian types are like young-earth creationist types when it comes to empirical data that debunks their dearly held delusions. And Libertarians hold their delusions so they can hold hierarchical power and Lord-it-over other people. Funny thing is, they love Lording -it-over others, but don't much like it above them. And write vast volumes how that contradiction should be able to work, even though it never does. Seems they'd check their premises against a bit of scientific literature, but they never do. _________________ Elman R. Service (1975), Origins of the State and Civilization: The Process of Cultural Evolution. New York: Norton. NON-STATE AND STATE SOCIETIES http://faculty.smu.edu/rkemper/cf_3333/Non_State_and_State_Societies.pdf
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago
    It's Magic!
    Page Paul Hein
    Left/Right "false dichotomy" applies to Communism/Capitalism. Both agricultural city-Statist (civilization) political schemes annihilate Non-State society where people live as "autonomous and sovereign" individuals "who bow to no external political leaders." Both enforce a brutal hunt-gather-forage lockdown and ruthlessly restrict gamboling about plain and forest. Marx/Mises Axis of Gambol Lockdown = yet another example of the Left/Right "false dichotomy."
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago
    It's Magic!
    Page Paul Hein
    Don't forget the "invisible hand" magicians. A city-Statist hoard collectively and brutally invades a Land, perpetuates a 300 year long Trail of Tears and genocide, collectively forms government divide the land into states and estates, and collectively build vast arrays of roads and canals, huge drainage projects and irrigation projects. And then the moochers divvy up the loot, and dare call it --*POOF*-- "Private property!" Voila! Excuse it all with --*POOF*-- "homestead principle" and "mixed labor!" Abracadabra! Mises' system of capitalist agricultural city-Statism (civilization) is built on as huge a pile of skulls and blood and permanent violence to continually enForce the whole scheme as Marx's system of communist agricultural city-Statism (civilization.)
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Jerry J Brown
    Agricultural city-Statism (civilization) draws artificial Borders to Regulate the free movement of Non-State societies from gamboling about plain and forest, and also slaughters those Non-State people when they try to live their lives as "autonomous and sovereign" individuals who "bow to no external political leaders." (Service, 1975) But libertarians denigrate Non-State society, and laud such Land enTITLEments from city-Statist big-government as the foundation of their freedom — then sit around bellyaching why they don't feel free. P.S. When you've got enough government to enForce agricultural city-statist Fences, don't be surprised if you don't feel a bit fenced in. "The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said 'This is mine,' and found people naive enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. The first man who, having enclosed a piece of ground, bethought himself of saying This is mine, and found people simple enough to believe him, was the real founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this imposter; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody." ~Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men and A Dissertation On the Origin and Foundation of the Inequality of Mankind
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Jerry J Brown
    Very good article. One criticism. Ron Kaufman wrote "Television is advertising. It is a medium whose purpose is to sell, to promote capitalism." I believe it would be more accurate to say, "It is a medium whose purpose is to sell, to promote consumerism".
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Jerry J Brown
    Exactly! To "legalize", according to Black's 6th, means "to add the sanction and authority of law to that which before was without or against law". Liberty needs no "sanction and authority" added to it.
  • Jerry J Brown's picture
    Jerry J Brown 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Jerry J Brown
    It's a step in the right direction. There's ideals, then there's reality. Few of the liberties we lost will come back easily or quickly. And only with a lot of work.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 29 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Oh, groan, now, I suspect, we have trolls supporting trolls. If there are any legitimate anarchist/libertarian members left at this alternative news website, it will be a wonder. And, there most certainly won't be any new ones. Is this the ultimate goal, I wonder? I do realize that this comment will earn me the "paranoid, conspiracy theorist" title from the foppish whores of the STATE, [watch 'em come out of the woodwork], but as Craig Hulet put it, "When they call you a conspiracy theorist, it means you are closer to the truth than they want you to be.". ;)
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Jerry J Brown
    "Legalized regulation" is not liberty.
  • karren's picture
    karren 3 years 29 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    There's nothing surprising about this statistic, marijuana is a very popular drug, it has a lot of supporters. I am not one of them though, I've learned my lesson the hard way and I had my second chance in a bay area drug rehab, I am clean for three years and I plan to stay this way.
  • Evan's picture
    Evan 3 years 29 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    If WI, or any other dissenter, is banned then I will lose a lot of respect for STR.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 29 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    It's called "proprietary interest"; Rob presumably pays for this domain, so he has the natural right (a "just claim") to refuse service to anyone he wishes, and for any reason, or no reason at all. "Free world" doesn't mean that someone can move into your home and take over.
  • Guest's picture
    livefreeretiree (not verified) 3 years 30 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Protecting your own property is not tyranny... jesus...
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 30 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    What remains of the dear readers on this site are posting messages on the guest editor thread (essentially its basement) because the rest of the site has been jammed by a malware troll on a computer. Removing it has nothing to do with a biological creator nor defeat of the free market but I digress... It would appear that an analog to this troll situation is "Nomad" in "The Changeling". Nomad tells Spock that its mission is to "find and sterilize imperfection". Since Nomad's definition of imperfect includes all living things, it travels from [site to site I mean] world to world, sterilizing everything and everyone (except itself). Though repulsed by the machine's words, Capt Kirk decides to play along with Nomad's mistakes...and tells Nomad not to "sterilize" anything further... One way to shut down the troll before it shuts down this site completely is to access deny and ban it.
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 30 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    Hmmmmm. No room for diversity of opinion in the STR social? If the Ideals promoted in the cyber-space of STR won't work ,without resorting to the gun in the room(Banning White-Indian).................... than this is an effort in futility and has no chance in the real-world. To even suggest Banning someone already screams defeat. How is that translated into the free world veiw?
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 30 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    I recommend that WhiteIndia be banished from this community. He is not here to debate or trade ideas but to tie up this site in all the ways he has already shown. Ultimately his evidenced failure to execute his primary function on himself/his data is a dead give away. (Because his own data issues are just a set piece ruse). His primary directive is setting up the climbing up of vertical walls when there are clearly stairs. example abound of he the unnecessary testing of others but never himself or his data. The trolls subterfuge is exposed and now understandable. Some clues: WhiteIndian's--self admitted--separatness from its own biological anthopological data units is illogical. But not if he has dishonest intellectual intentions. His failure to discover his first error is a second error and his refusal to correct these errors is a third error And clue. Ultimately evidenced failure to execute his primary function on himself/his data is a dead give away. (Because his own data issues are just a set piece ruse).
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link Guest
    2A = Egalitarian Clause of the Constitution. (Try that on a liberal friend at a party tomorrow night!) Humans evolved to be egalitarian, and only in an egalitarian Non-State society do humans behave as "autonomous and sovereign" individuals who "bow to no political power." (Service, 1975) The early agricultural city-Statist (civilization) settlers from Europe greatly admired the egalitarian nature of the Non-State tribes and bands they observed, and this rebellion against hierarchy carried into Jefferson's "all men are created equal." It also destroyed the hierarchical divine right of kings in France and gave that country the banner of "liberté, égalité, fraternité." Much of this egalitarian Non-State band and tribal influence is documented in anthropologist Jack Weatherford's Indian Givers: How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the World. It's no wonder that anthropologist Elman Service observed that "Many people living in non-state societies enjoy lifeways that a number of Americans seem intent on reinventing—such as close association with the land, small group size, and emphasis on oral traditions." It's a real shame that so-called "libertarians" and "anarchists" have such a dim view of egalitarianism. Only with equal sociopolitical power can there be liberty. If there is hierarchy, that means somebody is Lording-over somebody else. It reveals the hidden intent of those who, against clear evolutionary evidence, purport that egalitarianism is a revolt against nature: they want to Lord over others. These smooth-talking economic "social dominator" types cleverly whitewash their hierarchical intent in a toxic mimicry of freedom. I no longer am fooled by their scheme.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Is the Divine Right of Property any less religious? "To date, however, no philosopher has ever successfully divorced Lockean property rights from monotheism." The Right to Property by Jason Godesky | 18 July 2005 http://rewild.info/anthropik/2005/07/the-right-to-property/
  • tomcat's picture
    tomcat 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Followers of the Abrahamic religions all have their "holy" Books full of bizarre rules about allmost all, even minor aspects of daily life.Since these rules are given by God, they should of course apply to all human beeings. In cases of doubt and in the Interest of the individual Prejudiceses, exegesis is mostly performed against basic commandments like loving each other, or the Ban of Stealing and Killing. Eat some pork chops and drink a Glass of Wine, as a Man put on a women's dress or just do some gardening on a Sunday Morning, all this in the visual range of a faithful believer, and you will see how easy it is to create a serious Stress test for the non-aggression principle. Tolerance or, even more, Respect for People that dont want to listen to their invisible friend is, in most cases, not the Chief Virtue of a true Christians, Moslems or Jews.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Domestication (control-freaks' War on other species) leads to War (control-freaks' Domestication of our own species.) Before domestication, there was little human violence. "The current literature consistently reports that until the final stages of the Paleolithic Age— until just prior to the present 10,000-year era of domestication—there is no conclusive evidence that any tools or hunting weapons were used against humans at all." ~John Zerzan The Origins of War http://www.scribd.com/doc/20298938/Zerzan-The-Origins-of-War
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 3 years 30 weeks ago
    Guest Editor
    Story strike
    The following post shows on the side bar but not in the body of the article link below. And I cannot update the like the author's button on the last page the same article. http://www.strike-the-root.com/jay-stuart-snelson-mighty-influential "WhiteIndian *METHODS* have been attacked for good reason (as opposed to the details. But even that has been seen thru by the author of the article on this thread and others.....) Let ALL reflect on his use of strawmen, context dropping, intellectual dishonesty in place of refutation and actual debate. http://www.strike-the-root.com/vision-of-free-society-1 Now this issue of trolls would make a proper subject to address. I think that others have provided good summation of why WhiteIndian fits this bill. His arguments have been seen thru...did he expect me to let him walk into this camp (yes I live in the wilderness, I doubt he does but I care not). It is hilarious to see someone who speaks about subjects and assumes and assumes yet is such a self congratulatory tender foot... His methodology has been shown for what it is...He is a troll. That is NO common ground for me. Now please think about it for a moment. Say dear reader WhiteIndian appears on your proximate horizon and starts his evidenced ways in your camp...What will you do hmmm? Will you pretend that his purposes are peaceful? Well, there is an answer for that. Now I think WhiteIndian has a taste for rabbit food...That is not my problem".
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    The hierarchy of control-freak dominionism is the same between Christians and Capitalists (including libertarians.) • JEVOVALLAH (The Invisible Hand) • EMERGENT ELITE (Kings, Industrialist Heroes) • MAN (owns everything below) • WOMAN (submits to husband (less now, but still cultural) • ANIMALS (submit to husbandry) • NATURE (worthless unless used up by hierarchy) "No new set of basic values has been accepted in our society to displace those of Christianity. Hence we shall continue to have a worsening ecologic crisis until we reject the Christian axiom that nature has no reason for existence save to serve man." ~Lynn White, Jr., The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis, Science, New Series, Vol. 155, No. 3767 (Mar. 10, 1967), pp. 1203-1207
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link painkilleraz
    This reminds me of a truth learned sometime before. That i'am pleased to share. http://markofthebeast.embassyofheaven.com/tramp.htm "What, hast thou come to see how Antichrist tortures men? There, look, he has locked them up in a cage, a whole army of them. Men should eat bread in the sweat of their brow. And he has locked them up with no work to do, and feeds them like swine, so that they should turn into beasts." "What is he saying?" asked the Englishman. Nekhludoff told him the old man was blaming the inspector for keeping men imprisoned. "Ask him how he thinks one should treat those who do not keep to the laws," said the Englishman. Nekhludoff translated the question. The old man laughed in a strange manner, showing his teeth. "The laws?" he repeated with contempt. "He first robbed everybody, took all the earth, all the rights away from men, killed all those who were against him, and then wrote laws, forbidding robbery and murder. He should have written these laws before." Nekhludoff translated. The Englishman smiled. "Well anyhow, ask him how one should treat thieves and murderers at present?" Nekhludoff again translated his question. "Tell him he should take the seal of Antichrist off himself," the old man said, frowning severely; "then there will be no thieves and murderers. Tell him so."
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link painkilleraz
    Repeat comment
  • painkilleraz's picture
    painkilleraz 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link painkilleraz
    Well said WI/ and yes agreed...what I have realized with time is that all forms of state regardless their name are the same in the end. And all forms of state based "philosophy" i.e. capitalism, etc., tend to be the same. I would that we had the classic "free market" and were simply voluntaryist/individuals- nothing more.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 3 years 30 weeks ago Web link painkilleraz
    Capitalism is Collectivist Social Engineering that destroys Non-State lifeways. American Capitalism has COLLECTIVELY: 1. Forms governments to kill off Non-State natural inhabitants 2. Aggressively invades and occupies the Land 3. Collectively builds mass systems of roads 4. Collectively builds mass systems of drainage systems 5. Collectively builds mass systems of irrigation projects. And then, the mooching TAKERS divvy up the loot amongst themselves, and call it... "Private" Property. Even Ayn Rand let it slip that the invasion and occupation was a violent TAKING of land. "[The Native Americans] didn't have any rights to the land ... Any white person who brought the element of civilization had the right to TAKE over this continent." ~Ayn Rand, US Military Academy at West Point, March 6, 1974 Read that again: The RIGHT. To TAKE. Wow, some honesty, finally! And there you have Capitalism, in plain words, un-whitewashed.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 30 weeks ago
    Natural Law
    Web link Don Stacy
    "Natural law never went away those who ignore it will (are) continuing to experience the consequence as witnessed [by] the slow motion collapse of all the western financial systems." ~ AtlasAikido Not to mention, and more importantly, by the slow motion collapse of all 'civilized'[1] society. "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature." The natural law of the human world "is the science of peace; and the only science of peace; since it is the science which alone can tell us on what conditions mankind can live in peace, or ought to live in peace, with each other." ~ Lysander Spooner _______________________________________________________________________ [1] civilized adj. ...humane, ethical, and reasonable ~ American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
  • zygodactyl's picture
    zygodactyl 3 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    White Indian, I have great interest about many things that you have been writing about recently. Please contact me at zygodactyl_1@stovermo.com and please also tell me if you happen to live in the mid-west.
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 31 weeks ago Web link Guest
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJIuYgIvKsc&feature=player_embedded