Recent comments

  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Exactly, jd-in-georgia, I don't, for one moment, believe that the so-called BIBLE is "The Word of God"; but I refuse, as so many do, to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are still pearls in those books, even after the CHURCH thought that they had "sanitized" it enough for the commoners.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    I have seen that lame TV program Dallas SWAT and I have always been appalled at the way they casually do thousands of dollars of damage to people's homes. Okay I get that they are looking for fugitives; quite dangerous ones in some case. But even so on their own TV show which they control to show themselves in the best possible light the tapes shows regularly hitting a suspect's girlfriend's mother's house, or an empty house and busting out all the windows or pulling the doors out of the wall with their armored vehicle, only to discover that their informant's tip was BS. The person they were looking for isn't or wasn't there at all. I can't even watch that show i get too angry.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 43 weeks ago
    Origins
    Page Jim Davies
    Jim makes an interesting point about defenders vs attackers http://www.strike-the-root.com/1492#comment-5381 which referred me to this article. And following on Jim's "Based on the precedent of the Slippery Slope, my advice to anyone reading this in, say, 2079 is to be very wary of the word "we." I concur Do not discount the "I". Challenge the premise of "We". Oui! There is *No We*: Challenge the Premise. http://zerogov.com/?p=2334
  • jd-in-georgia's picture
    jd-in-georgia 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    It is funny, Sam, how the church DID want obedient followers yet at the same time DID NOT want people to know how to read. Otherwise the "sheep" may come across something like this: For wisdom is a defence, and money is a defence: but the excellency of knowledge is, that wisdom giveth life to them that have it. ~Ecclesiastes 7:12 KJV or better yet, this verse is very pertinent to the evils of copyrighting: The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit. ~Proverbs 14:8 KJV I know not what others may believe, nor am I attempting to evangelize. But as far as I can tell, God wants us to read unhindered so we can decide for ourselves what to like and dislike, and to believe or not believe.
  • jd-in-georgia's picture
    jd-in-georgia 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    The best things in life are free... especially ideas. Imagine if everyone could think for themselves? As long as there is a manipulative monopoly on information dissemination, real progress will always be flowing with the rapidity of a glacier.
  • Akkarin's picture
    Akkarin 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Scarmig
    What is the difference between National and Citizen? I have been trying to figure this out without seeing any good definitions other than that Citizens are also nationals. Also, what paperwork did you submit to prove your child was born in the US for a passport? I will be doing this for my child soon.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Worth glancing through all the parts to the piece. Most of us know this, but the essay outlines the history of the incestuous yoke of governmentalists and religionists from the beginning of written history. The control of how the minds of the proletariat are shaped and controlled has been the obsession of all agents of both state and religion. Copyright encapsulates that joining-at-the-hip. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Guest
    I don't know about we killing people -- I know I have no intention of doing so. After 60 years I still have nightmares about the old M-1's and "tracer" ammo -- the newest technology when I was a kid enslaved to murder for state agents. Sam
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    I love the way Atlas Shrugged Jsu Garcia (as Francisco d'Anconia) dropped the "e" and the "s" on his name. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZFK7b5Io_s Atlas Shrugged Trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcyYjmjcPj8 Antonio Buehler is wearing a T Shirt with d'Anconia Copper emblazoned on his chest. Who is Antonio Buehler? See "From the Right To Resist the 'Duty To Submit' by William Norman Grigg" as it relates to "Austin Police Brutality Against Army Ranger Captain--[Antonio Buehler]--For Taking Photos Of Cops Abusing Woman In Cuffs" (Posted under the caption "Armed trolls do NOT like to be photographed").  http://tinyurl.com/Troll-Watch
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    EMPLOYment is a term of art meant to ensnare those who are beguiled. (I think S2 could have enlightened that subject, if he had wanted to.) Would you have me to argue over what i have submitted in an earlier posting? http://www.strike-the-root.com/entanglement-of-compassion-and-liberty#co... Perhaps we ought to consider the Law of Necessity? http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/3843/inalienablepolicepower.jpg Is the caged monkey free to not pull the handle to get the sustenence? (and starve? maybe?) Maybe that is the wrong question,but i think we are advancing. We are all victims of what information we have been exposed to. The studies have been done and we are likely to conform to a consensus. This braintraining can start with parents,to teachers,and than what we are exposed to from the manipulated media(movies,books,press &c. all manipulated information.) We are all a product of this mind/information controll, that is why the world is in the situation it now is.The killing fields seem to be on the very Horizon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgDx5g9ql1g We are stupified at the elephant chained from youth who is now fully grown and still thinks he cannot pull a little stake out of the ground;but that is the nature of the training(mind konTROLL).It would be a major misconception to think that we do not suffer from this same defective atitude.(although we may rage against it.) “The populace will not be allowed to know how its convictions were generated. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen." - Bertrand Russell, "The Impact of Science on Society", 1953 “Education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished." A revolt of the plebs would become as unthinkable as an organized insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton." - Bertrand Russell, "The Impact of Science on Society", 1953, pg 49-50 Empire does RULE the LOYalist. Moses is said to have been inspired to write that Scripture. I submit that ''the money [will again] faileth'' in your lifetime, so you will not be many years in Re-learning that lesson of history. See> http://www.amazon.com/New-Money-None-Willard-Cantelon/dp/0882703889 The folk song points to the ''indentured servant'' another term of art. > http://www.amazon.com/They-Were-White-Slaves-Enslavement/dp/0929903056/r...
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Hi Jim, If you go to private messages, click on "Write new message", at the bottom of the text window you will see the html tags that can be used here on STR, to close one of these where you want to, you simply use the same html tag but with a backslash in front of the html letter, letters or word. The word "strong" is bold, "em" is italicized, "a" makes your text blue, and ul indents the paragraph. If this isn't clear enough let me know and we can do a bit more by e-mail. Also, there's a trick to embedding a link, so if you'd like help on that, just let me know. p.s. Almost forgot; if you create your post in that private message box you can preview what you have done, by clicking on, yep, "Preview message", then copy and paste it into the comment box when you are satisfied with it. For some weird reason there is no "Preview message", with "Comments". You can, I believe I have already mentioned earlier, go back and "edit" your comment.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Paul, this is explored in my article on "Origins" [of government] at http://www.strike-the-root.com/92/davies/davies5.html You say that theft is easier than farming, but as I see it theft (the mounting of a successful raid on defended stores) would be prohibitively difficult. That's because in warfare, attackers need about a 3:1 advantage in resources, over defenders. Yet a village or other community that had diligently accumulated resources and had time to spare as a result of the agricultural surplus would have enjoyed a substantial resource advantage over potential attackers who, by virtue of being hunters and gatherers or herders living from day to day, had nothing in reserve. True, during the period of growing and before harvest-time, that might not be true. But at those times, there would be no harvest to steal. In addition, there is the ethical question. If mankind can turn on a dime from being honest hunters to being dishonest thieves (ie, original sinners) then I suggest there is no hope whatever and we might as well give up. I don't. There is a rational (non-superstitious) basis for ethics, and it is that self interest is best served by acknowledging the self-ownership rights of everyone else.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Never mind "my opinion", S2, just consider the reasoning. Is it sound or not? What I said was that no human being (no reference to "living being") can be enslaved totally (not with respect to "time", but with respect to his nature.) Yes. And yes, thank you, it does follow that he cannot therefore be 100% enslaved, regardless of whether or not he volunteers. This is quite a discovery! Total slavery is impossible. This fits well with the accounts of people who have been tortured, yet survived. The tyrant took everything but their spirits, their inner persons. However, I can't see that the converse is true - that 100% freedom isn't possible. Indeed, it certainly is possible! All that's required is that the enslavers (yes, the "system") vanish. Let's help them do so. BTW, you and others manage to use _emphases_ in STR forum posts - bold, italics, etc. How do you do that? When I see a window to post, the only option seems to be Notepad-like text. '
  • rita's picture
    rita 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    OMG I'm a terrorist. (Please don't tell my parents.) OMG they're terrorists too. (Okay, don't tell my children. OMG.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    Woke up way-y-y too early this morning and had trouble getting back to sleep, so y'all are stuck with me for awhile. lol Okay, here goes... ETYMOLOGY [of the name JESUS]: Middle English, from Late Latin Iesus, from Greek Iesous, from Hebrew yesû'a, from yehôsûa', Joshua ; see Joshua1 (Source: American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language) ETYMOLOGY [of the name Joshua]: Late Latin Ioshua, from Hebrew yehôsûa', Yahweh [sic] (is) salvation; see hwy in Semitic roots (Ibid.) So? Where is this leading? Technically yehôsûa' should be translated "halloo Yah", which means, "call upon the name of Yah", which in turn is idiomatic[1] for, "call upon the authority of Yah" NAME, n. ...8. Authority; behalf; part; as in the name of the people. When a man speaks or acts in the name of another, he does it by their authority or in their behalf, as their representative. Here is where this is leading. The PTB in the Roman Empire of that day, (just as the PTB of the Roman Empire today), did not want anyone calling on any authority but the CAESARS...they are jealous gods. Sound familiar? ;) Act 5:27 And bringing them, they stood in the sanhedrin. And the high priest asked them, 28 saying, Did we not command you by a command that you not teach in this name? And, behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine and intend to bring on us the blood of this man. (Literal Translation of the HOLY BIBLE translated by Jay P. Green Sr.) And what was this "doctrine"? Act 17:7 "...these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king..." Man, this is fun!! And what is the ONLY decree we read of in the so-called New Testament? Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world [the Roman Empire] should be taxed. What these "high priests" were afraid of is that the CAESAR would catch wind of their "doctrine" and they too would be nailed up on a stake for sedition[2]. Act 24:5 For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world [the Roman Empire], and a ringleader of the sect [party] of the Nazarenes... Basically sedition is kind of a 'catch-all charge'; it's what your government may try to charge you with some day...when they can't really find any evidence to charge you with anything else. I'm taking the time to type this all out, in the hopes that at least one of you will read it. Sedition. Communication or agreement which has as its objective the stirring up of treason or certain lesser commotions, or the defamation of the government. Sedition is advocating, or with knowledge of its contents knowingly publishing, selling or distributing any document which advocates, or, with knowledge of it purpose, knowingly becoming a member of any organization which advocates the overthrow or reformation of the existing form of government of this state by violence or unlawful means. An insurrectionary movement tending towards treason, but wanting an overt act; attempts made by meetings or speeches, or by publications, to disturb the tranquility of the state. See 18 U.S.C.A. § 2383 et seq. See also Alien and sedition laws; Smith Act. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 1357 _____________________________________________________________ [1] idiom noun ▸an expression whose meaning is different from the meaning of the individual words. For example, “to have your feet on the ground” is an idiom meaning “to be sensible.”
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    We should not attribute Paul's writings (e.g. The Epistle to the Romans) to the man called Jesus [sic]. Matthew 20:25 But having called them, Jesus said, You know that the rulers of the nations exercise lordship over them, and the great ones exercise authority over them. 26 But it will not be so among you. (Literal Translation of the HOLY BIBLE translated by Jay P. Green Sr.)
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Always wonderful to hear we can now more efficiently kill people we shouldn't be killing.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    Thanks, Paul. This is for those "not very smart parasites": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dMBKgSlUPg
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 43 weeks ago
    I Can Do It; You Can't
    Page Paul Hein
    "Every state constitution... contains language that refers to the people as the source of all political power, which is derived from them." Mere propaganda, to make slaves more comfortable in their slavery. This is similar to calling politicians "public servants" or saying "they work for us". They don't, and never have.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    At the risk of ruining your reputation, that was, in my opinion, a very good assessment and suggestion!
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    "I can see no reason why government should have followed the establishment of farming" I suspect it was the presence of accumulating surpluses, fixed in place. And the fact that theft is easier than farming. So yeah, the association of government (big parasitic government anyway) with agriculture makes lots of sense. And that association will continue until countervailing factors (such as personal firearms and communications tools) break that association. Also, there is protection. Say you are an early farmer and you have planted a field in wheat and vegetables. Come harvest time you find both deer and humans have raided your fields so your harvest is reduced. You hire a "protector" to keep them out. Eventually your protector owns you, because protection implies submission. Rather than asking why government resulted from agriculture, we should wonder whether it was even possible for agriculture to fail to produce government.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 43 weeks ago
    Dictates to the Union
    Page Emmett Harris
    People actually listen to state of the union addresses??!
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Douglas Herman
    "The sickest part is that there is no _written_ law that compels such conduct." Completely irrelevant. This is, after all, blatant theft; something government constantly engages in, and MUST engage in to survive. One does not ask a mugger to produce documents proving his right to take your wallet. I thought I was being smart, putting some money in 1mdc (a digital gold currency). Little did I know this was backed by e-gold, whose gold was located in the United States. This country stole all assets in 1mdc by raiding e-gold. And really, it doesn't matter where it was located since the US claims jurisdiction over the entire world these days. A mattress is a better bet. Another good bet is not having too many assets in the first place; assets attract thieves. What I don't understand is the defective self-interest of the parasite class. If they had any sense they'd keep their depredations to a low roar. When the entire society is impoverished because no institutions can be trusted, we won't be able to support that many parasites any more. They must not be very smart.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 43 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    Yeah, it might be a bit of a stretch to call Jesus an anarchist; although there are interpretations of Romans 13:1 not so subservient to government authority, e.g. http://www.freewebs.com/macinta/AO.html "You reap what you sow." This cuts both ways. Perhaps Christians have been antagonized enough by libertarians making fun of their beliefs, that they were less inclined to be charitable to the only libertarian on the stage when he said this. "...they rail against abortion while turning a blind eye to the mass murder of innocents committed by the US government overseas..." There is no inconsistency here, but just another case of misunderstanding Christians. Being pro-life does not turn a person into a pacifist! If I'm not mistaken, Christians believe all these wars are defense, and guess what? In defense you are allowed to kill somebody. Their error is not inconsistency in being pro-life, but in buying the line that invading other countries constitutes defense. Of course defensive war is fought only in one's own territory. We should stop whacking Christians for being inconsistent (which only shuts down any conversation with them), and start asking them what "defense" means.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Guest
    This seems to be an appropriate place to put this: "The Venn Diagram Memes" by Stephanie Herman, Geke.us I believe it will give newcomers a real "feel" for the term "corporatocracy".
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    As I understand it, it is your opinion that there can be no such thing as a "slave", because no living being can be controlled, in every respect, 100% of the time. Using this same rationale, would we not then also have to conclude that there is no such thing as a "free man", because no man can be "free" in every respect, 100% of the time? I am not, in every respect, a "free man", I am not, in every respect, "free of THE SYSTEM", the simple truth of the matter is, I do not consent to be a frickin' "member" of THE SYSTEM. Therefore, in every respect, 100% of the time, I am not a "member" of THE SYSTEM. "What would We the People be like if all would take the high road of walking away from our evil would-be masters?" ~ Claude Armstrong
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Hmmm. Frito pies have been the downfall of many a weight loss or fitness program. But they are so easy to make and they taste really good too. Not especially good for you though.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    S2, as I perceive it such a promise would be fraudulent. You _could not_ become a voluntary slave. I tried to spell this out in the post above (locate it with a search on "Bylund") by noting a human being is a selfowning person. That which would hypothetically get transferred in such a deal would therefore necessarily still be a selfowning person. Yet you would be representing yourself as being a non-selfowning person, ie someone owned by your wife's caretaker. Sorry if I can't express it clearly enough. Best I can do is to repeat that a person is not two entities, "I" and an owned "myself", but a single entity that is _permanently_ self-directed. Perhaps we can try to imagine what it would be like. We're through the looking-glass, now no longer selfowning but controlled by another, as if our own brain had been bypassed by wiring that led directly to that of our new owner. May we speak? - only by permission. May we think? - likewise. This is impossible; we will think thoughts whether the owner allows it or not - whether he even knows it or not. Consider: even black slaves, although enslaved in practice in most respects, were still selfowning human beings. They had their own thoughts, they spoke and sang with each other, worshiped, had kids, developed a culture - and one with a strong influence on America. None of that activity was directed by those who had stolen them. They were viciously restricted human beings - but they were still human beings, selfowners. One other thought: you suppose a person might "sell" himself into slavery. Okay, so he has a million bucks as contracted, but now he's enslaved. Oops! Being a slave, should his owner require him to return the fee, he must do exactly that. Or should he wish to spend it, he must obtain his owner's permission for every penny. Or if the deal is to become a slave in exchange for care for one's wife, what recourse does he have if the wife is not cared for as promised? - being a slave, none at all.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    Movie Quotes
    Web link Sharon Secor
    They should have had, (IMO), several from the movie The Matrix. Here's one of my favorites. Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around. What do you see. Business men, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    I agree that man is born "self-owning", but I fail to understand why he cannot, (or who could forbid him to), sell, trade or give away, that which he "owns"? For example, could I not contract with someone, thus? "I will become your voluntary slave, for as long as I live, if you will take good care of my wife, for as long as she lives."
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    Movie Quotes
    Web link Sharon Secor
    Thanks, Sharon. The Field (1990): McCabe: "There's a law stronger than the common law." Priest: "What's that?" McCabe: "The law of the land." What is the "law of the land", "the law" of "all land", it's the "law of nature". And, what is "the law of man", not just some men, but "all men"? It's the natural law of the human race.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    "Voluntary slavery is alive and well. Employee = EMPire + LOYalist." - Darkcrusader. This seems to me not correct. Check the online etymology dictionary, and see that to "employ" is shown as having derived from Latin, via Old and Mediaeval French, for "to make use of." Unrelated to empires or loyalty. Employment is a _contract_. We take a job by _choice_. Freedom comes with responsibility; if we make a bad choice, we have to deal with the consequences. The lament of the folk song is that the coal miner was "deeper in debt" even after "loading 16 tons" a day, but that too was his choice - both to take the job and to incur a debt. We can empathize - maybe even help out - but his situation was his own doing, unless "the company store" had in some way deceived him about the contract(s). He was not a slave. As for Genesis, who wrote that book? - but let's suppose the story is accurate. So the farmers of ancient Egypt got in a pickle, and begged the government (Joseph, for the Pharoah) for assistance. He provided it, but took title to the farms in exchange. What's the background, here; how did the pickle arise, and _where did the bread come from?_ And what was meant by "the money faileth"? Anyway, how does the story relate to voluntary slavery? - which my reasoning above showed to be impossible, since a self-owning human being cannot change his nature even if he wants to.
  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    TWICE, I tried to post the above comment to the original article. I wasn't actually denied, merely informed that "Your Comment will be Published Within 24 Hours" Is there something that I suggested that might be un-publishable in TheDailyNewsEgypt.com--perhaps the fact that the military already controls the news?
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 43 weeks ago
    Ball and Chain
    Web link Michael Dunn
    I always liked covers,it gives you a new interpretation on a song you may or may not like. They really ramp it up on this may favorite SD cover> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjQkgZmBjzE
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Suverans2, I suspect that this was not always the case,tho-you might be one who utilise an 'escape for the diligent'? Care to share the details? Work? Labor? Payment? &c. Are you sulf-sufficient;Energy,food production,Heat/cool,property tax? Do you patronize the Government monopolies?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Fortunately, as an individual secessionist, I am not an EMPLOYEE (an artificial entity), I have not submitted (or applied) to any of the STATES' (artificial entities) CORPORATIONS (artificial entities), since seceding from the body politic, (but not from society), however, I do work for a living (food, shelter & clothing). And, as a non-member of the body politic, I don't "owe my soul to the company store". I use no "Taxpayer Identification Number" to obtain benefits/privileges, or for any other reason; I, therefore, am not a "taxpayer", which is legally defined as, "one who is subject to a tax on income, regardless of whether he or she pays the tax", though I do voluntarily choose to pay most "sales taxes", and certain "use taxes".
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Voluntary slavery is alive and well. Employee = EMPire + LOYalist. If every means of sustaining your life is cut-off and you have to submit(apply) to one of the States fictions(CORPoRATIONs) for the means(Babelbux) to obtain sustenance.;after laboring for the Fraudulant Reserve Nots you have to again submit back to the Fictious State your 'voluntary' exchange becomes not so voluntary and you are indeed a slave that 'owes his soul to the company store'.(like the folk song states.And the old Book of Genesis unequivocally teaches. ) Gen 47:15 And when money failed in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came unto Joseph, and said, Give us bread: for why should we die in thy presence? for the money faileth. Gen 47:16 And Joseph said, Give your cattle; and I will give you for your cattle, if money fail. Gen 47:17 And they brought their cattle unto Joseph: and Joseph gave them bread [in exchange] for horses, and for the flocks, and for the cattle of the herds, and for the asses: and he fed them with bread for all their cattle for that year. Gen 47:18 When that year was ended, they came unto him the second year, and said unto him, We will not hide [it] from my lord, how that our money is spent; my lord also hath our herds of cattle; there is not ought left in the sight of my lord, but our bodies, and our lands: Gen 47:19 Wherefore shall we die before thine eyes, both we and our land? buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give [us] seed, that we may live, and not die, that the land be not desolate. Gen 47:20 ¶ And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh's. Gen 47:21 And as for the people, he removed them to cities from [one] end of the borders of Egypt even to the [other] end thereof. Gen 47:22 Only the land of the priests bought he not; for the priests had a portion [assigned them] of Pharaoh, and did eat their portion which Pharaoh gave them: wherefore they sold not their lands. Gen 47:23 Then Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, [here is] seed for you, and ye shall sow the land. Gen 47:24 And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth [part] unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones. Gen 47:25 And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh's servants. Gen 47:26 And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, [that] Pharaoh should have the fifth [part]; except the land of the priests only, [which] became not Pharaoh's. It is interesting to note that their is an escape for the diligent. :) http://loveforlife.com.au/content/08/07/30/standing-upon-land-john-josep... http://books.google.com/books?id=MemsAAAAMAAJ&dq=right%20of%20conquest&p...
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    JD, I, too, predict organics will continue a distant second, particularly if the government continues to shield and subsidize "corporate farming" "...the ultimate goal of corporate farming is to vertically integrate the entire process of food production, up to the point of the distribution and sale of food to consumers." Just wait until Archer Daniels Midland, Monsanto Company, and Cargill sew up the food market, completely...and they are well on their way to doing just that. They, with the help of their government co-conspirators, are monopolizing food, by buying up all of the old established seed companies and replacing heirloom seed with their own, "patented", GMO seeds, with built-in "terminator technology", which is also known as "genetic use restriction technology", so that we humans can't save seeds to grow our own food, which, by the way, is against "their so-called-bought-and-paid-for law" in some places already. And, I suppose, everyone here is familiar with the "Svalbard Doomsday Heirloom Seed Vault", which "places [through "years of manipulation and deceit"] Seed Savers Members’ Seed Collection under the control of the United Nations’ FAO Treaty, which was specifically designed to facilitate access by corporate breeders". I predict that "corporate farmers" are not only raping our Mother, the Earth, but they are, at the same time, raping our children, our children's children, our children's children's children, ad nauseum. Am I still "picking nits"?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    If we use Noah Webster's definition for the word "slavery", i.e. "the state of entire subjection of one person to the will of another. Slavery is the obligation to labor for the benefit of the master, without the contract of consent of the servant", then I have to agree with Jim Davies assessment -- voluntarily agreeing to work with/for someone, whether it is for babel bux or not, is not slavery.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    S2, if I may, beware of picking nits and failing to see the big picture. My argument above against the "earth rape" morons was clear, I hope, and was that reversion to primitive agriculture would starve a larger fraction of humanity than were killed by the Black Death. Whether organic foods have more nutrients per gram than others is a detail. Absent government, happily the market will determine the price, demand and supply for foods grown with and without chemical assistance; I predict organics will continue a distant second. That's because of the spectacular success of intensive agriculture. In 1798 Robert Malthus solemnly stated that "The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man" and few scholars have been proven more utterly, profoundly wrong. In the two centuries since, our population has grown from one billion to seven billion, and thanks to intensive, scientific agriculture there is so far no sign that future agricultural ingenuity will fail to sustain yet more. BTW there's more on Malthus at http://strike-the-root.com/malthus-mistakes
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Fair question, John. My take would be that in applying for a job, one is offering to enter a contract. All contracts involve specified obligations by both parties. No job contract I've heard of say that the employee will do whatever the hirer wants, without limit, and all of them say employment can be terminated by either party on certain notice. Clearly, therefore, the employee retains control over his own actions. One sometimes hears phrases like "debt slavery" but it's really not. You take out a loan, you undertake an obligation. It may become tedious to fulfill it, but that's what obligations are. (Though if there was fraud by the lender, the obligation would be void. Different subject.) TOLFA is at http://tolfa.us - begin with the "Benefits" and "Entrance" pages, and decide whether you want to undertake the whole course. Don't cherrypick, it's not designed for that.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 43 weeks ago
    Ball and Chain
    Web link Michael Dunn
    Good choice.
  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 4 years 43 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    SOPA and PIPA were diversions--and they worked!
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 43 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VbYZDohsHk The First Thanksgiving The early settlers of America, who braved the privations of those incredibly difficult years, were a fabulous lot, indeed. We can hardly imagine the burdens they endured to make a new life for themselves in a new land. Their turning point began one Friday in the middle of March,1621. Samoset An Indian, wearing nothing but a leather loincloth, strode up their main street to the common house, and to their startled faces boomed in flawless English, "Welcome." His name was Samoset, a sagamore (or chief) of the Algonquins. He had been visiting the area for the previous eight months, having learned his English from various fishing captains who had put in to the Maine shore over the years. He returned the following Thursday with another Indian who also spoke English, and who was to prove "a special instrument of God for their good, beyond their expectation." His story was to prove no less extraordinary than the saga of Joseph being sold into slavery to Egypt. His name was Tisquantum, also called Squanto. Squanto His story began in 1605 when Squanto and four other Indians were taken captive, sent to England,and taught English to provide intelligence background on the most favorable places to establish colonies. After nine years in England, Squanto was able to return to Plymouth on Capt. John Smith's voyage in 1614. Lured and captured by a notorious Capt. Thomas Hunt, he, with 27 others, were taken to Mlaga, Spain, a major slave-trading port. Squanto, with a few others, were bought and rescued by local friars and introduced to the Christian faith. Thus, it appears that God was preparing him for the role he would ultimately play at Plymouth. He was able to attach himself to an Englishman bound for London, then he joined the family of a wealthy merchant, and ultimately embarked for New England in 1619. He stepped ashore six months before the Pilgrims landed in 1620.1 When he stepped ashore he received the most tragic blow of his life. Not a man, woman, or child of his own tribe was left alive! During the previous four years, a mysterious plague had broken out among them, killing every last one.2 So complete was the devastation that the neighboring tribes had shunned the area ever since. The Pilgrims had settled in a cleared area that belonged to no one. Their nearest neighbors, the Wampanoags, were about 50 miles to the southwest. Stripped of his identity and his reason for living, Squanto wandered aimlessly until he joined the Wampanoags, having nowhere else to go. But God had other plans. God's Provision Massasoit, the sachem (or chief) of the Wapanoags, entered into a peace treaty of mutual aid with the Plymouth colony that was to last as a model for forty years. When Massasoit and his entourage left, Squanto stayed. He had found his reason for living: these English were helpless in the ways of the wilderness. Squanto taught them how to catch eels, stalk deer, plant pumpkins, refine maple syrup, discern both edible herbs and those good for medicine, etc. Perhaps the most important thing he taught them was the Indian way to plant corn. They hoed six-foot squares in toward the center, putting down four or five kernels, and then fertilizing the corn with fish: three fish in each square, pointing to the center, spokelike. Guarding the field against the wolves (who would try to steal the fish), by summer they had 20 full acres of corn that would save every one of their lives. Squanto also taught them to exploit the pelts of the beaver, which was in plentiful supply and in great demand throughout Europe. He even guided the trading to insure they got full prices for top-quality pelts. The corn was their physical deliverance; the beaver pelts would be their economic deliverance. The First Thanksgiving The Pilgrims were a grateful people-grateful to God, grateful to the Wamp-anoags, and grateful also to Squanto. Governor Bradford declared a day of public Thanksgiving, to be held in October. Massasoit was invited and unexpectedly arrived a day early-with an additional ninety Indians! To feed such a crowd would cut deeply into their stores for the winter, but they had learned through all their travails that God could be trusted implicitly. And it turned out that the Indians did not come empty handed: they brought five dressed deer and more than a dozen fat wild turkeys. They helped with the preparations, teaching the Pilgrim women how to make hoecakes and a tasty pudding out of cornmeal and maple syrup. In fact, they also showed them how to make one of their Indian favorites: white, fluffy popcorn! (Each time you go to a movie theatre, you should remember the source of this popular treat!) The Pilgrims, in turn, provided many vegetables from their gardens: carrots, onions, turnips, parsnips, cucumbers, radishes, beets, and cabbages. Also, using some of their precious flour with some of the summer fruits which the Indians had dried, the Pilgrims introduced them to blueberry, apple, and cherry pie. Along with sweet wine made from wild grapes, it was, indeed, a joyous occasion for all concerned. The Pilgrims and Indians happily competed in shooting contests, foot races, and wrestling. Things went so well (and Massasoit showed no inclination to leave) that this first Thanksgiving was extended for three days. The moment that stood out the most in the Pilgrims' memories was William Brewster's prayer as they began the festival. They had so much for which to thank God: for providing all their needs-and His provision of Squanto, their teacher, guide, and friend that was to see them through those critical early winters. by Chuck Missler 1The Pilgrims lived that first winter aboard ship and suffered the loss of 47 colonists. 2This epidemic, from 1615 to 1617, is believed to have killed 95,000 Indians, leaving only about 5,000 along the coast. 3Canada first adopted Thanksgiving as a national holiday in November 1879, and it is now celebrated there annually on the second Monday in October. http://www.mayflowerhistory.com/History/BiographyTisquantum.php For many Native American people, Thanksgiving is cause for mourning rather than celebration? Although the First Thanksgiving included the Pilgrims' Native American neighbors, that spirit of cooperation did not last long between the native people and the colonists. The land and lives of the native people were pillaged and destroyed countless times during the early history of the United States of America. Racism and bigotry persist until this day. As a result, Thanksgiving has taken on greater historical significance for many Native Americans, who view that First Thanksgiving as the beginning of centuries of oppression and discrimination.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 44 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Good lord, hope it ain't the east coast. Godspeed.
  • John deLaubenfels's picture
    John deLaubenfels 4 years 44 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    I'd like to explore the question "whether a person can volunteer to be a slave" further. Where can a line be drawn between offering oneself for hire in a typical employee relationship vs. a slave? Certainly if the "master" has a legal right to terminate my life, then I'm a slave. Anything short of that seems to be a matter of contract, however. I haven't read the discussion at TOLFA; could you provide a link? Thanks, JdL.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 44 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    In the bread and circus seasons like we're currently witnessing I used to ask students, "..I'd like to hear your prediction, when all this falderal of election is over, who do you believe will emerge as the most powerful man or woman in the world. After I've heard your prediction I'll give you mine..." I heard lots of "Nixon" and "Reagan" and "The Pope" responses. Then I'd tell them mine: "I will! That's because the world revolves around MY belly-button, NOT YOURS! "MY world. If I die, nobody has power. "But what gives me even more power is the knowledge that YOUR world revolves around YOUR belly button, whether you admit it or not. Therefore, even when I think you might be wrong I need to respect your ideas and your opinions -- they're yours and you come by them honestly..." People who are outside our relatively small minority will never understand this. To them it amounts to a bunch of narcissism. Liberty comes at a price. Gotta go trucking to the coast. Sam
  • Gwardion's picture
    Gwardion 4 years 44 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    A comment and sentiment I can get behind no matter who says it. Well said Sam. isms and ians are the true enemy. Forming and controlling the debate on freedom without the consent of those attempting to be free is in itself a form of aggression.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 4 years 44 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Some are, but not many here. I'm certainly not. My concerns generally seek ways to promote liberty in a statist world, but I am not "imprisoned" by history or my ideals. I enjoy life as I believe most libertarians do; indeed most libertarians I know are hard-working high-achievers that lead virtuous lives. Primitivists appear to want to do no work, achieve nothing and believe in the fantasy that all they need would be just laying about waiting to get picked up if only there were no property rights; basically live like an ape (except apes are territorial). This is silly no matter how many "anthropologists" may think it a wonderful ideal. Further, there is a significant difference between promoting an ideal that is based on non-aggression and individual responsibility (libertarian) and one based on a fantasy that requires the death of about 90% of the population. The cognitive dissonance in your brain must be unbearable. Eliminating argriculture, civilization and most of the population as an ideal is, well, lacking perspective. Until you have at least one constructive contribution to any discussion on this board I will ignore you. I suggest that you go out to some big forest and try living off the land for a couple days to gain some perspective of reality.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 44 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Evan: "...To some degree, I think a "taboo on ownership" (when it comes to land and other living beings,) is a good idea in that it's a peaceful voluntary way to promote a culture that values individual autonomy and maximizing liberty. Regardless of "legal status," I strive to be a good steward of the land and the plants and animals on which I depend, and I try to keep in mind the interconnectedness of everything..." The question on a forum such as STR is, "in a 'free society' who emerges as the enforcer(s) of such taboos?" I think a major factor in the combative nature of the white man's incursion onto this land centuries ago is contained in this question. The natives [stupidly called "Indians" to this day] who had already been settled here and had, for the most part, gotten along fine with each other save skirmishes over such things as stealing each others' women and horses; simply could not understand the white man's proclivity to think he had authority to mark-off segments of spirit-given land and claim private "ownership" thereof. That made no sense in the world to them. They did not mark off fictitious lines in the sand and call them "borders". They had no "states" or "counties". If my history is accurate, there were Cherokee "nations" and Choctaw "nations" and the like. But even the term "nation" was white man's vernacular, not natives'; and they did not celebrate boundaries or borders. As I understand it there was little objection by natives to sharing with the white man. He (the white man) even to this day commemorates a political holiday in the fall ("Thanksgiving" -- a classic misnomer, I perceive) where his teachers chirp stories to the kiddies about the original "Thanksgiving" and how the natives helped by bringing wild turkeys, etc., to the feast. Of course in the collectivist ("public" ha ha) schools they have to interject the idea that the "governor" or the "president" declared this to be a "public holiday", and therefore it is a holiday. Many of those tribes planted, harvested and preserved certain crops (herbs) for their own consumption and in cases to exchange for goods with neighbors. They, like any of us, had to contend with defending their harvest from neighboring tribes and bands of ne'er-do-wells and predators (the precursors to what we now lovingly call "policymakers"). White Indian is correct, however, that agriculture as we know it gives rise to state. Before even progressing to lobbies of farmers demanding of state predators to rob citizens in order to "subsidize" farmers for the fickle nature of cash crops; the way the white man wanted to farm seemed to demand the farmer have "title" to the area of the earth on which he would plant. The white man had all kinds of "legal" reasons for that -- also a complete mystery to the natives here. If you can't sit down together, make agreements you intend to keep, smoke a pipe together and have a trust relationship, you might as well fight each other to the death of the loser and be done with it. As I've said before, my favorite American politician is Aaron Burr. He fought the only just war in US history. He didn't drag US citizens into the forray. He challenged Hamilton to a duel and shot his ass. Sam