Recent comments

  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Guest
    That is a great link White Indian.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Sorry about the double post.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Beware. Gun control would be impossible to implement as in say England (ie, "turn 'em all in folks or else!") here in America because so many would resist. But "ammo control" is quite possible and much easier to enforce. I saw on a gun control policy center website that [said] American households have about 1.5 years worth of ammo in their homes. If serious troubles ensued and the supply was cut off that time frame would likely be much shorter. Bottom Line: Expensive and heavily customized arms like ARs or AKs but without ammo are just expensive clubs. (Now my friend White Indian is okay with clubs presumably but the rest of us would be f*cked.) Paul Bonneau in his excellent STR gun articles is correct IMHO about one thing most of all: Stick to weapons in mil calibers so we can buy, trade, steal, capture, or otherwise obtain some from state arsenals. You can shoot a deer, antelope or pig with a box of 5.56mm and defend yourself as well. But an AR in 6.5mm Creedmore with no ammo is worth what? If you put your faith in gold, food, or other tradable commodities is well and fine, if you have a gun and ammo to defend it; but an unarmed man with gold, food, is just a victim waiting to be robbed. I know the Austrian economists, Randroids, and etc will denounce me for not being rational or understand supply curves and what all but that's how I see it. so there's my rant.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Constitutionalists revere the Magna Carta, but if they were to read it, they'd be baffled. Expecting to find, as libertarian Constitutionalist Ken Krawchuk says, "many of the rights we still enjoy today," they'd find themselves adrift in an alien, feudal world of "aids," "wardship," "scutage," "knight service," "reliefs," "wainage," "castle guard," "socage," "burgage," and other arcana even medievalists toil to comprehend. Magna Carta -- extorted from King John by a few dozen rebellious barons in 1215, a dead letter within three months, voided by England's feudal overlord, the Pope -- did almost nothing for almost all of England's two million people. It confirmed or created privileges for churchmen and barons, occasionally for knights, and in only two instances for "free men." Most Englishmen were villeins, not freemen. And as historian Sidney Painter has written, "Whenever provisions of the Charter seem to benefit the ordinary man, a close examination will show that it is his lord's pocketbook that is the real cause of concern." It was only a question of who would do the fleecing. The Great Charter has nothing to say about free speech, unreasonable searches and seizures, self-incrimination, the right to bear arms, free exercise of religion, the obligation of contracts, ex post facto laws, bills of attainder, rights of petition and assembly, excessive bail, the right to counsel, cruel and unusual punishments, indictment by grand jury, etc., etc. Far from forbidding even involuntary servitude, it presupposes it (chs. 17, 20 and 23). Far from forbidding the establishment of religion, it confirms it in its very first provision (ch. 1). The real Magna Carta was not even remotely libertarian. above excerpt from: "CONSTITUTIONALISM": THE WHITE MAN'S GHOST DANCE by Robert C. Black http://www.spunk.org/texts/writers/black/sp001650.html
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Guest
    Yes, because gold is too heavy to throw at attackers and mobile food sources.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Guest
    "For more than six hundred years --- that is, since Magna Carta, in 1215 --- there has been no clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of, such laws." ~ An Essay on the Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner* *"Lysander Spooner has many great distinctions in the history of political thought. For one thing, he was undoubtedly the only constitutional lawyer in history to evolve into an individualist anarchist; for another, he became steadily and inexorably more radical as he grew older."
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago
    The Chain of Obedience
    Web link Mike Powers
    Ludwig von Mises said, "Man is born an asocial and antisocial being." This delusion parrots the monstrous myth that man is somehow "fallen," created with a "sin nature," or strangely evolved "wrong." Such dehumanization is the pretext for every cruel and wicked act seen on this world. He continues, "The newborn child is a savage. Egoism is his nature. Only the experience of life and the teachings of his parents, his brothers, sisters, playmates, and later of other people force him to acknowledge the advantages of social cooperation and accordingly to change his behavior." (Omnipotent Government, p. 241) The rule of agricultural city-Statism (civilization) "social cooperation" is that you follow the rules. The hierarchical CULTure of agricultural City-Statism (civilization) gets forced into kids early. The natural desire to gambol through the woods as a dweller of the forest (i.e., "silva"-dweller, or savage) gets brutally subdued. Just like Mises championed. And it works. Then he dares blame others for the consequences. So I dub thee unforgiven.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    "'Constitutionalism': The White Man's Ghost Dance," an essay by Bob Black, states: "Constitutionalists are certain that conniving judges, legislators and lawyers switched their own false law for the real law when the people weren't looking ... Constitutionalists look upon law as the word-magic of lawyer-necromancers who draw their wizardly powers from grimoires, from books of magic spells they have selfishly withheld from the people. Constitutionalists have extracted from these books -- from judicial opinions, from the Constitution, from legal dictionaries, from the Bible, from what-have-you -- white magic with which to confound the dark powers of legislation..." They all think that somehow, some way, agricultural city-Statism (civilization) will change its spots. __________________ "Constitutionalism": The White Man's Ghost Dance Robert Black http://www.spunk.org/texts/writers/black/sp001650.html
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    For anyone who may be interested here's a bit more from the Online Etymology Dictionary. republican (adj.) 1712, "belonging to a republic," from republic + -an (see -ian). In noun sense of "one who favors a republic," it is recorded from 1690s; and in sense of a member of a specific U.S. political party (the Anti-Federalists) from 1782, though this was not the ancestor of the modern U.S. Republican Party, which dates from 1854. [Emphasis added] republic c.1600, "state in which supreme power rests in the people," from Fr. république, from L. respublica (abl. republica), lit. res publica "public interest, the state," from res "affair, matter, thing" + publica, fem. of publicus "public" (see public).
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    "A true state is distinguished from nonstate societies by the presence of political leaders who maintain a socially approved monopoly on the legal use of legitimate force." (Service, 1975) Suverans2, you're subject to that monopoly of force, whether you consent or not, whether it's legitimate or not. If you don't think you're subject to the State's enforcement, grow a some pot and start openly advertising and selling it. You'll learn the effectiveness of your legalistic word-magic. There is no voluntary city-Statism (civilization,) which is what your Black's Law Dictionary spell-casting rituals assume. Only people in an egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typology are observed to be free. "Historically, people in non-state societies are relatively autonomous and sovereign. They generate their own subsistence with little or no assistance from outside sources. They bow to no external political leaders." (Service, 1975) __________________ Service, Elman (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
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    The master has the right to tell his servants, i.e. subjects, what they can and cannot ingest. Subject. ...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government. Swiss Nat. Ins. Co. v Miller, 267 U.S. 42,45 S.Ct. 213, 214, 69 L.Ed. 504.~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 1425 The latter is true, I believe, because a true "republican form of government" is restrained by the laws of nature, that is to say, the natural law of the human world. What you and I do not have the lawful authority to do, the government does not have the lawful authority to do. In other words, it is a government that "derives its just powers from the consent of the governed [its voluntary members]". This is why you now are "subject" to a "democratic form of government", and not republican. "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." ~ James Madison, Federalist No. 10
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Ivan Eland is ignorant of the facts about peak oil. He then proffers Cornucopian fallacies, as if "free" market economics can somehow negate the laws of thermodynamics. He writes, not to discover the truth, but to support his tottering libertarian ideology that city-Statism (civilization) isn't inherently aggressive and doesn't operate on the game theory of the Prisoner's Dilemma. The US empire expanded into the Middle East for one reason: the Prisoner's Dilemma, briefly explained as follows: "The Prisoner’s Dilemma provides the logical foundation of why civilization must always continue to grow. Each society faces a choice: do we continue to intensify production, adopt greater complexity, and increase the size or scale of our society, or do we happily accept the level we’re already at? If you choose not to intensify, you will be out-competed by those who do–and your lower level of intensity and complexity will become a resource they can absorb to fuel their further acceleration, whether by outright conquest or more subtle forms of economic or cultural exploitation. "This is the underlying logic of Joseph Tainter’s argument concerning collapse in peer polities in The Collapse of Complex Societies. If one peer polity does choose to collapse, that region becomes a resource that can be exploited by its neighbors. Whoever conquers it first will have an advantage over the others in the continuing race of escalation." Thesis #12: Civilization must always grow. by Jason Godesky | 23 October 2005 http://rewild.info/anthropik/thirty/index.html
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Would a Non-State sociopolitical typology suit you? "Historically, people in non-state societies are relatively autonomous and sovereign. They generate their own subsistence with little or no assistance from outside sources. They bow to no external political leaders." (Service, 1975) I'd guess a Non-State sociopolitical typology would not suit most libertarians, because they're like the monkey who has stuck his hand stuck in the monkey trap. They might express an aspiration for freedom, but they desire more the trinkets of agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) There is no way to arrange city-Statism to be as free as you want. Conjuring a "voluntary city-State (civilization)" is as contradictory, and therefore as impossible, as conjuring an animated corpse. The "voluntary city" is make-believe, fantastical Zombie economics, useful as an excuse to keep your hand in the Monkey Trap of city-Statism (civilization.) ________________________ Service, Elman R. (1975) Origins ofthe 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 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    WYSIWYG! Observing Soviet communism, I call it communism, even though true-believer communists bellyache that what can be observed is not PURE® Communism, but "State Capitalism," or a "mixed economy," "cronyism" or whatever lame alibi they can conjure to excuse their ideology's failure. I apply the same principle to capitalism by which I judge communism; that is, WYSIWYG, or What You See Is What You Get, or simply A=A. Observing American capitalism, I call it capitalism, even though true-believer captialists bellyache that what can be observed is not TRUE® Capitalism, but "State Capitalism," or a "mixed economy," "cronyism," or whatever lame alibi they can conjure to excuse their ideology's failure. True believer dogma aside, both capitalism and communism, as we observe them, are agricultural city-Statist political schemes that are quite similar: They both concentrate power and wealth, and they both collapse when wealth and power are too concentrated in the hierarchical elite's hands. Both capitalism and communist true-believers are exactly alike in their disdain for the personal responsibility for living a Non-State society lifeway of gamboling about plain and forest, foraging and hunting for food. Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest? MARX: NO! MISES: NO! Thus we can see that capitalism and communism are actually quite similar political ideologies of totalitarian* agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) _________________ * "For its complete ruthlessness toward all other life-forms on this planet and for its unyielding determination to convert every square metre on this planet to the production of human food, I've called it totalitarian agriculture." ~THE BOILING FROG by Daniel Quinn Excerpt from the book, “The Story of B” http://www.oilcrash.com/articles/frog.htm
  • rita's picture
    rita 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    Although I wonder what right or obligation any government has to prevent drug use in the first place.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago
    The Collectivist Mind
    Web link Michael Dunn
    Without agriculture, which was initiated 10,000 years ago by Bernie Madeoff-ish "Big Men" or "Emergent Elite" (those are scholarly anthropological terms you too can research yourself*,) then there wouldn't be a huge population to serve the elite Hierarchy as a "large pools of labor to provide for the nobility, and large populations that can be levied into large armies with which hierarchy can expand."** How to feed 7 billion. Wait, half of those are already starving or near starving, so how do we feed 3.5 billion human cattle -- or what Conucopian economist Julian Simon refers to as "The Ultimate Resource" -- bred to serve the hierarchy? Maybe there's a way out. I've got a few ideas, others do too. But first, we have to understand how we got to this. Mises, Rand, Rothbard, etal have it wrong. Completely wrong. As wrong as Biblical creationist got the origins of the species. ______________________ * (This is a short summary by an anthropologist) Thesis #10: Emergent elites led the Agricultural Revolution. by Jason Godesky | 11 October 2005 http://rewild.info/anthropik/thirty/index.html ** quoted from: Thesis #11: Hierarchy is an unnecessary evil. by Jason Godesky | 21 October 2005 http://rewild.info/anthropik/thirty/index.html
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 31 weeks ago
    Never Volunteer
    Page Paul Hein
    Has anyone else clicked on the Verl K. Speer link? BEWARE: I believe that there may be a virus attached to it.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 31 weeks ago
    The Collectivist Mind
    Web link Michael Dunn
    Not to start an argument here WI but without agriculture how are we going to feed ourselves? in my neighborhood in a semi-rural area if all of us had to hunt or forage for what we have to consume all the trees would be gone in a years time. Most of the wild the animals, fish, and birds too. Then what?
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 31 weeks ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    I hear you Alex but word games in courts of law just don't work. Not only will you be found guilty but you will go on the cops, DAs and judges shit list of knuckleheads to be ticketed, fined, harassed, and screwed with at every opportunity. Believe it.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago
    The Collectivist Mind
    Web link Michael Dunn
    Agriculture itself is collectivist. In fact, agriculture is the first-line reason why we have governmental functions in agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) Richard Manning sums up the evidence from archeology and anthropology well in his book Against the Grain, "Agriculture creates government," because big drainage and/or irrigation projects cover vast areas of land, roads, etc. Libertarians have a sophomoric, literalistic view of property rights. Their naivety was demonstrated this year when a few libertarian-type city-slickers, who moved to the rural area in which I live, made the news. See, a farmer had a drainage problem -- a large tile draining his farm was broken down. The farmer called up the county engineer, who is in charge of drainage. The farmer asserted his agricultural fields' property rights, which includes well drained soil. The farmer's property rights extend about 12 miles, all the way to the big river. All land owners pay yearly drainage assessments (digging ditches, clearing trees, installing drainage tile, etc.) All this work to maintain "individual" property values is done "collectively" via the county engineer and state crews. The tile that needed dug up and replaced ran through the yards of the newly built McMansions. Oh, how they belly-ached, and spouted various libertarian themes to the papers and eventually in court. But, of course, the state laws governing the abstract concept of property rights (including 12 miles worth of collectively maintained tile and ditches to preserve property "value" for agriculture) prevailed. The farmer's property rights were preserved in spite of Libertarian legalistic contrariness. Last time I talked to one of the libertarians, he still maintained the conceptual fiction that his property was basically an extension of his body, and he ("his" land) had been "raped," and blah, blah, blah.... I just asked him how a human body can extend 12 miles. I got a blank expression.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    In reply to such prior questions as "Question: do you [I] accept the theory of evolution?" I ask WhiteIndian--"what are you going to do to FREE YOURSELF?" as the relevant question. Making it personal--something directly controlled--does not mean I am interested in WhiteIndian's personal life per se. The following article addresses that. There is *No We*: Challenge the Premise. http://zerogov.com/?p=2334 For instance: The truth is no one knows what “we” will do in a completely voluntary society, there is just no way of knowing. Any answer that is given to questions pertaining to the problems that individuals would face in such a society are purely speculation. I cannot tell you what we would do, I can only tell you what I would and do. I would/do honor my contracts; I would/do defend myself; I would/do choose to help others in need; I would/do expect no one to support me; and I would/do plan accordingly. This as as good as a time as any to point out that humans may desire to live together but certainly not with cheats and liars and those who break the Non-aggression principle. Some individuals will choose to live alone if they desire peaceful existence until they find others who are of like mind. To elaborate: Someone says that the State solution to such and such problem isn’t working, we are in real trouble, what are we going to do about it. The essay “Freedom Has No ‘System” very nicely answers with the equivalent of “What do you mean ‘WE’, Statist?” Such an approach puts the burden of freeing oneself onto the Statist. It UNDERSCORES the fact that the Statist has NOT bothered to think of solutions that do NOT involve enslaving other people. As pointed out in the article: “…[watch] my fellow humans squirm when asked to think like a free people…”.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    Re: "humans evolved as egalitarian social band animals, and lived as such in a Non-State sociopolitical typology for millions of years demonstrating empathy and altruism -- and refutes your [my] dogmatic belief that there is no "we" or that "we" necessarily means a State society". You cannot answer a simple *I* question. Who is answering with you or for you? The point of the issue of this thread with me and you is try to stop asking "we" questions and making "we" assertions (they are assumptions). They are the ways of statists. You say you are not leftist nor a statist but you posted leftist links. You are speaking for others which is very statist like. *If you are not a leftist or statist stop using their ways*. Speak for yourself! Or continue to come across as a leftist or Statist with all your assumptions (speaking for others) hiding behind so called scientific data.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    It is nonsensical to "test" whether the interior angles of a triangle (in Euclidean geometry) add up to 180 degrees. But your data does not fall into this category. I choose to live with others or not. I am human. Your data is missing something. It can be refuted. I just did.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    You cannot speak for yourself let alone others. Where is the similarity between what I pointed out to you about a simple triangle and your data on humans?
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    All you did was demonstrate your intellectual ignorance, which is on par with young-earth creationists.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    Empirical data backs up my words -- and refutes your assertions. For example: humans evolved as egalitarian social band animals, and lived as such in a Non-State sociopolitical typology for millions of years demonstrating empathy and altruism -- and refutes your dogmatic belief that there is no "we" or that "we" necessarily means a State society.
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    RE: AA: "The truth is no one knows what 'we' will do in a completely voluntary society, there is just no way of knowing." Wrong. Non-State sociopolitical typology has been studied to a fair-thee-well. Quit evading the empirical data. ~Apparently you are evading that you are a member of that empirical data and cannot speak to it other than third person. That seems pretty evasive to me RE: AA: "...cheats and liars and those who break the Non-aggression principle." That's you, and any other advocate of invasive and occupational agricultural city-Statism (civilization.) ~ I was not referring to you. I think you have attributed to me what is not here on these posts. get off your high horse and come down to earth. ~You are telling me nothing about what you are going to do to be free. Address that. This is not about your personal life but you refuse to back up your words with what you are going to do about the subject of this thread--freedom. So why can't you answer a simple question? Without the invectives and put downs and arch-types?
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    AA: "The truth is no one knows what 'we' will do in a completely voluntary society, there is just no way of knowing." Wrong. Non-State sociopolitical typology has been studied to a fair-thee-well. Quit evading the empirical data. AA: "...cheats and liars and those who break the Non-aggression principle." That's you, and any other advocate of invasive and occupational agricultural city-Statism (civilization.)
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    Re: Still evading the evidence that humans are social animals? ~Your words not mine. Re: Your evasion hasn't changed any empirical evidence. ~Empirical evidence hmmm. You are social? You have exhibited Unsocial behavior. Re: And like I said before, "we" does not mean communism in an egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typology. Nothing is forced, humans are sovereign individuals in an egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typology. ~Like I said before "I" in an Unfree World does not mean I have not found Freedom. You apparently have to wait until you have convinced others that your world of unforced humans are sovereign individuals in your egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typology. Hopeless. You are not modeling freedom at least not in my book. Will others follow those who talk of freedom or those who model it? Re: It seems the dishonesty, and deliberate evasion of empirical data from archeology, anthropology, and evolutionary biology is all yours, AA. ~If you can't back up pour empirical data with the integrity in action of what you propose then of what use is your data? Re: And any property right that has to have government to defend it is Statist. ~Ii actually never brought up property rights till this last post. You have been and so I called you on it. And now you maintain that you have a property right to your account which is clearly not protected by the govt the state but the owners of this site. No one here says the State is upholding your rights. That's all you again. Re: You can try to whitewash the aggression required by repeating soothing "laissez-faire" words from your canon, but in the end, agriculture requires aggression and constant enforcement by threatened violence, and you're a city-Statist at heart. ~I am clearly not whitewashing your contradictions. If you have sovereign individual aspirations you have a strange second hander approach to it. What you model is not a sovereign individual but someone who is a "RanDroid". ~Like Ayn Rand herself, you're willing to commit genocide upon 90,000,000 native inhabitants, and then call it "freedom." I don't hold Rand responsible for uncritical zombies nor for helping the tobacco industry types nor those who will not help themselves and smoke because Rand smoked. They have been with us a long time. And they will even join up and perhaps assimilate the unwary with package deals. I am not Ayn Rand but thanks for the compliment. If you have a problem with initiated violence you should take that up with your drooling beast and if Rand is your red/bluecoat then perhaps you should grow a life. She is dead. You're alive as best as I can tell but these continued disconnects you make remind of what? Tom Woods Is Interviewed by a Zombie Recently by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.: http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods145.html And It’s Ayn Rand Bashing Time, Once Again by Walter Block http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block172.html PS Where is your password for your "we" account on this site?
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    I asked in a prior post as it relates to Living Freely in an Unfree World with other compatibles what problem/or not WhiteIndian had as it relates to an interpersonal contract that fulfilled individual freedom? I still have not received an answer to that although this is what WhiteIndian professes is his so-called banner. Which would appear to make Sovereign Individuals look and feel like his evidenced behavior here. A more honest Avatar would be ForkTongue-SovereignIndies. It is apparent to me that WhiteIndian did not Go Injun in the manner of Jim Walker and does not even rate as a Jed Smith who was very imprudent in his dealings with the Indians. I suspect that given the speed of WhiteIndians replies that he is other than his avatar professes. Calling himself WentIndjun would perhaps be too obvious a clue as his imprudent counterparts and as to what his actual covert purposes are. But I offer this as something to consider. He is no freedom lover or sovereign individual but the anti-thesis of such.
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 31 weeks ago
    Owning an IRS Lawyer
    Web link Don Stacy
    Attorneys and Lieyers? http://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/weekly16P.pdf
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    I'm not discussing my personal life with you. It's as relevant as discussing my personal life with a Fundamentalist believer in an argument over creationism vs. evolution. Empirical data from archeology, anthropology, evolutionary biology, and other sciences refute your belief system. You refuse to address it.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    Still you evade the scientific, empirical evidence that humans evolved as egalitarian, social band animals. It's pretty much like talking to a young-earth creationist. Observed reality destroys their quite similar mythology too. No, I'm not socialist. Socialism is another political ideology of agricultural city-Statism. Ignorant of facts, you spew your worst pejorative, "socialist!," much like some fundamentalist church lady calling somebody who accepts the empirical data supporting evolution a "satanist!" It's really lame, and reveals the anti-intellectual nature of your belief system.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    Still evading the evidence that humans are social animals? Your evasion hasn't changed any empirical evidence. And like I said before, "we" does not mean communism in an egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typology. Nothing is forced, humans are sovereign individuals in an egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typology. It seems the dishonesty, and deliberate evasion of empirical data from archeology, anthropology, and evolutionary biology is all yours, AA. And any property right that has to have government to defend it is Statist. You can try to whitewash the aggression required by repeating soothing "laissez-faire" words from your canon, but in the end, agriculture requires aggression and constant enforcement by threatened violence, and you're a city-Statist at heart. Like Ayn Rand herself, you're willing to commit genocide upon 90,000,000 native inhabitants, and then call it "freedom."
  • AtlasAikido's picture
    AtlasAikido 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    Your tongue in my mouth is is about you speaking for others. Pointing out the simplest application of your position escapes you. Your tongue in my mouth is what you practice. And evidently it has the power to shame you. Laissez faire capitalism (remnant) and this site where your *property rights* are upheld--No one is breaking into your account and writing FOR you. And I and others are getting along here well enough without your Govt "We" drooling beast. "We" are frolicking in the forest. And you seem to be joining us here. Why don't you post your password so "We" can all share your account? From each according to the needs of the "WE". As for the rest dear reader, I can barely sum up the energy... WhiteIndian the Gamboling We is not a leftist says he and his we? which is it? Part of some amorphous we that is witnessed using leftist links and smear tactics to buttress evidenced Anti-capitalist views but NOT life style. Trolling here on the internet--a Capitalist tool not originated by--but grown by, just adds to the list of let me see now, dropping context, intellectual dishonesty, arguing strawmen, contradictrions...See above. But living in your world is evidently boring and uninteresting because you evidently live here more than the world you espouse...frolic away, I cannot blame you. Hanging with the anti-capitalist is so dreary and boring...
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Another example of this on a larger scale would be the Jones Act (Merchant Maritime Act). The restriction of "US flag" vessels for US territories greatly impedes competition and forces prices upward for everyone, especially in places like Hawaii where only US flag carriers are permitted to operate. Asian carriers would have swept up all of the Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Caribbean business decades ago without this restriction. Not surprisingly, the industries that lobbied for this type of regulation were the railroads and trucking companies, much as you'd expect with similar tariffs and restrictions. However, somewhat more surprising (but not really when you understand how large companies use government) the coastal and ocean carriers didn't put up any protest. US carriers dominated the steamship market in the days of the Jones Act. This has led to the greatest collusion among the carriers that you can imagine and practices that make the mafia look down-right respectable by comparison.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    "obsessed with fanatical zeal to IMPROVE the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own" A city-Statists like Ludwig Mises fits that description well. "You have the courage to tell the masses what no politician told them: you are inferior and all the IMPROVEments in your conditions which you simply take for granted you owe to the efforts of men who are better than you." ~Ludwig von Mises, letter to Ayn Rand, January 23, 1956
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Pro 6:1 ¶ My son, if thou be surety for thy friend, [if] thou hast stricken thy hand with a stranger, Pro 6:2 Thou art snared with the words of thy mouth, thou art taken with the words of thy mouth. Pro 6:3 Do this now, my son, and deliver thyself, when thou art come into the hand of thy friend; go, humble thyself, and make sure thy friend. Pro 6:4 Give not sleep to thine eyes, nor slumber to thine eyelids. Pro 6:5 Deliver thyself as a roe from the hand [of the hunter], and as a bird from the hand of the fowler. Pro 6:6 ¶ Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: Pro 6:7 Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, Pro 6:8 Provideth her meat in the summer, [and] gathereth her food in the harvest. Pro 6:9 How long wilt thou sleep, O sluggard? when wilt thou arise out of thy sleep? Pro 6:10 [Yet] a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep: Pro 6:11 So shall thy poverty come as one that travelleth, and thy want as an armed man. Pro 6:12 ¶ A naughty person, a wicked man, walketh with a froward mouth. Pro 6:13 He winketh with his eyes, he speaketh with his feet, he teacheth with his fingers; Pro 6:14 Frowardness [is] in his heart, he deviseth mischief continually; he soweth discord. Pro 6:15 Therefore shall his calamity come suddenly; suddenly shall he be broken without remedy. The Humanitarian with the Guillotine In her discerning book, The God of the Machine, Isabel Paterson draws important distinctions between Christian kindliness directed toward the relief of distress, and the misguided efforts of those who would make it a vehicle for self-aggrandizement. She points out that most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom, except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own. "It is at this point," she says, "that the humanitarian sets up the guillotine.'' Although prompted by good intentions, such a program is usually the outgrowth of egomania fanned by self-hypnotism. As stated before, it is based on this idea: "I am right. Those who disagree are wrong. If they can't be forced into line, they must be destroyed." Egoism, a natural human trait, is constructive when kept within bounds. But it is highly presumptuous of any mortal man to assume that he is endowed with such fantastic ability that he can run the affairs of all his fellowmen better than they, as individuals, can rum their own personal affairs. As Miss Paterson observes, the harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional "do-gooders," who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others - with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means. But it is a mistake to assume that the do-gooders are insincere. The danger lies in the fact that their faith is just as devout and just as ardent as that of the ancient Aztec priest. http://mises.org/books/mainspring.pdf
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    I know you're trouble; violence is the way agricultural city-Statists roll. Aggression and war started with domestication (proto-agriculture) and has continued to intensify to nuclear weapons today.
  • emartin's picture
    emartin 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    State/government or no state/government, if you mess with my grain crops you're going to have troubles. You might want to cool it with the predictions of the future. I'm pretty sure that you're not all-knowing and the pretense is embarassingly ignorant.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    "Specialization (division-of-labor) is for insects." ~Heinlein Humans evolved as egalitarian band animals, and it takes central coordination, hierarchy, and administrative mechanisms to get them to behave like ants.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    It's all a part of the Koch-sponsored privatization* of government function, that is, turning America into a big company town that works only for the productive heroes, and eradicates the parasites who should get a job instead of protesting. Anybody who doesn't want to pay a fee for standing on and using property is a moocher. See how that Cato/Mercatus/Reason/GeorgeMasonU cirque-de-capitalism is working out? Transcript of prank Koch-Walker conversation http://host.madison.com/wsj/article_531276b6-3f6a-11e0-b288-001cc4c002e0...
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    [fixed] "The agricultural city-State (civilization) engages in a range of housing and community activities that used to be the responsibility of sovereign individuals living freely in small bands and tribes. Its Land-monopoly privation property, resource-sucking cities, and pollution activities have proven to be costly and damaging to the both Non-State societies and the environment. The city-Statists' poor management and misguided policies have led to deforestation, desertification, and the Sixth Great Extinction."
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Libertarian Utilitarianism: "The Needs of the Many (6 billion) outweigh the Freedoms of the Few to live a Non-State society lifeway" is the essential argument behind agricultural city-Statism.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Why would anybody who esteems government-protected property rights in Land have a problem with government-protected property rights on Water? The property right to operate the ferry is a big government enTITLEment, just like creating artificial borders on the surface of the earth is a Land enTITLEment program that grants monopoly-use-rights (often called "property rights") to parcel holders, and restricts the free movement of Non-State societies to forage and hunt the land. Remember, without big government guns, there are no "property rights" to vast tracts of agricultural Land. (I'm quite familiar with the libertarian canon that says different, and that you have many fantasies about how to enforce property rights without the State part of agricultural-City-Statism, but they are just that, make-believe stories.) "Agriculture creates government." ~Richard Manning, Against the Grain, p.73
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    A question was never asked. They end with a "?" last I heard. Humans are in overshoot, biologically speaking. I have no idea "what to do" with the "Ultimate Resource" that has been deliberately bred and fed for the emergent elite's labor pool and canon-fodder stock. But others have decent ideas. Especially the permaculturalists have good ideas. John Jeavons http://www.johnjeavons.info/ of whom I highly respect, has a proven system whereby one may grow all their food in a very small area, and improve the soil besides. How about this? It's been around longer than the White Man's Ghost Dance. (That's the piece of paper people worship called the Constitution.) 300 Year Old Food Forest in Vietnam http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5ZgzwoQ-ao It's not the Original Affluent Society (Sahlins, 1972.) It's intensive horticulture, and prone to all the violence correlated with domestication. But it's better than working for Lumbergh in Office Space.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago Web link Pete_Eyre
    You are arguing that "we" is inherently Statist. We is not statist. Two or three million years of evidence. "We" and egalitarianism and altruism are a part of your paloe-genetic heritage. Still, we no kissy-face; quit fantasizing.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 31 weeks ago
    Of Dogs and Men
    Page Paul Hein
    If pointing to empirical data are "ineffective means" then so be it. No, tribes and bands didn't do agriculture. Stay with the empirical data, instead of your make-believe "axioms" that CULTure teaches you. You really don't know what you're talking about. Really. Horticulture is the sweet spot. Learn the difference between it and agriculture.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 31 weeks ago Page painkilleraz
    Embarrassing question expertly dodged. I guess you don't have an answer, eh? Not too surprising, actually. Bombast is a lot easier than finding truth. When you decide what is to be done with us 6 billion "human resources" that won't quite fit into your pre-agricultural society, let us know...
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 years 31 weeks ago
    Of Dogs and Men
    Page Paul Hein
    So... OK... Well, trollish behavior is largely in the eye of the beholder. I think WhiteIndian's problem here is that he chooses ineffective means of getting his ideas across, not that his ideas are worthless. I am interested in the same sorts of ideas. Voluntary city-statism may well be a dead end, but the thing to do is let those who volunteer for it have it. I don't see any other option. The problem is getting them to let the rest of us go. I don't think letting us go is impossible. For example the Romany seem to do a pretty good job of living as they want, with some problems of course (e.g. their encounters with Nazi Germany) - but they are still around. "Look, agriculture itself, all by itself, is coercive. You're taking a huge tract of Land and claiming: This is mine, and mine only, and nobody else can use it, and I'll kill ya even if you walk across it." Well, even tribes and bands did that sort of thing. The only difference was that they were protecting hunting grounds, not food plots; and necessarily, much larger areas must be protected. And I don't see what is wrong with protecting your means of sustenance, although of course there are better and worse ways of doing that. There is nothing inherently wrong with horticulture, outside of the fact that, being largely static, it is more vulnerable to attack by raiders and to being taken over by "big men". Although that certainly IS a serious defect.