Recent comments

  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Duane Colyar
    So, tell us, Duane Colyar, about your plan to stop this ever-expanding fascism?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    B.R. Merrick and tzo, I have thought, many times, about doing that very thing, and now that I have actually been asked for the very first time, (since our[1] 11 year journey began), I may just "put pen to paper", so to speak. But know this, it may turn out to be a documentation of "what not to do" more than a "what-one-needs-to-do", because our "act of withdrawing from membership in [the] group"[2] was, using 20/20 hindsight, perhaps an unnecessarily "long and winding road", and my biggest mistake was believing that there was some complicated "process" that one had to do. In truth, the most difficult "process" will be, as Saul of Tarsus so eloquently put it, "the renewing of your mind". Thank you for asking, and thank you, tzo, for apparently seconding the request. I will seriously take it into consideration; might be fun. [1] My natural law wife joined me in this quest for liberty. [2] Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), definition for secession.
  • Cryptoman's picture
    Cryptoman 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Duane Colyar
    +1 The real mistake was not setting the pen down after the Declaration of Independence.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    Like
  • B.R. Merrick's picture
    B.R. Merrick 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    Suverans2, will you ever be writing an article on the process you went through to throw off the chattel number and voluntarily secede? I, for one, would very much enjoy reading the details.
  • B.R. Merrick's picture
    B.R. Merrick 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    Yeah, them too.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Duane Colyar
    "...our founders attempted to create a federation of states where the power of the central, federal government would be severely limited..." That is the conventional view. The more cynical (and in my opinion, more accurate) view is that of Spooner and recently of Kenneth Royce. The real founders, those ordinary men who fought for freedom, and men like Patrick Henry, were outmaneuvered by the nascent ruling class of Washington, Hamilton, et. al.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    ...or the LEFT.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    It's all about "control". "It will soon be possible to assert almost continuous control over every citizen and to maintain up-to-date files containing even the most personal details about health and personal behavior of every citizen, in addition to the more customary data. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities. Power will gravitate into the hands of those who control information." ~ Excerpted from Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era by Zbigniew Brzezinski An aside: Anyone here care to guess how difficult it is to "to assert almost continuous control over" and "maintain up-to-date files containing even the most personal details about health and personal behavior of" individuals who don't use any chattel numbers?
  • B.R. Merrick's picture
    B.R. Merrick 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    I have to credit WorldNetDaily and Vox Day with turning me further away from government, but it isn't nearly far enough. Maybe Mr. Day will continue to move away from systems of coercion over the next few decades of his life. Whether he does or doesn't, I know that for my own freedom revolution to be won, the God concept had to die, and it has. It's a shame to see such an intelligent writer disparage the free market, when everything good about his life most assuredly comes from it. There is too much belief still in systems of coercion among those who have affiliation or belief in anything coming from the right.
  • usc's picture
    usc 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    Just found your stuff, and for the most part I have been enjoying it...but since I slightly differ on the area of national defense and the military, and wars for that matter than most hard core Libertarians, I have to disagree with this essay, however well written and argued that it was. PFC Manning is currently in the U.S. Army, and as such is actually not subject to the Constitution, however flawed you may find it. He is actually subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And in this instance Article 106...which clearly states that what he did was wrong. "Communications Intelligence" is covered nicely in 106a.C. One of the desperate few things that a government must do is to defend it's citizens from foreign powers. It is not something you can do by yourself. It requires training and skills one does not get without effort. It requires finances and logistics and large transports that are pretty much out of reach of normal people...at some point some one has to foot the bill for that, organize, command and lead large troop formations. This is outside of the capabilities of man to do alone. That said, PFC Manning is not a Journalist. He's not "whistle blower" of the sins of the State. He is a Soldier. And as such his "whistle blowing" isn't whistle blowing it all. It is treason. It is counter to good order and discipline. It is a danger to the safety and welfare of the American people. Whether you believe that such a military should exist, whether you believe that other Americans, volunteers entirely, should be or can be charged with your defense, you can not deny that there are bad men who want to do you harm and as such you, as we all do, require defense and volunteers standing on the wall 24/7 to provide for that defense. And a Soldier sharing our communications in an open way provides information to those bad men who want to do us harm. We can debate "preemptive" war if you'd like, personally I am in favor of it. I think if a man declares his intentions to do me harm or coerce me into compliance to his slave inducing ideology I have a moral and ethical right to resist him. If a Nation State declares it's intention to close with and harm my country in any way available then I believe our Nation has a right to close with and destroy the enemy, even if it means firing the first shot. You may not, most Libertarians do not. But then again I am starting to believe that most Libertarians are actually Anarchist in Libertarian clothing. In the end, PFC Manning is a traitor. He has helped the enemy. We are not safer for his actions. He has emboldened our enemies with his actions. It is against the Law. Our Government does lie, cheat and steal and does use coercive force against us it's citizens and others around the globe, but none of our Government's actions excuse those of a Soldier in the U.S. Army who's sworn duty is to the United States Constitution and the People of this country...not the "truth". Out
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    "Quit using a fricken chattel number, (to receive some kind of benefit(s) or privilege(s)), and the I.R.S. will never have you "put in a government cage" for income tax violation(s) again." *** Agreed, but. In this country, given that a person has a set of work skills, he may have the option of earning $10/hour "underground" or $20/hour minus taxes with a T.I.N. Humans respond to incentives. Just because you believe it to be more lucrative to be a member of the gang doesn't make it involuntary. And, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who has subjected himself to the dominion of the government is free to bitch and complain about having to pay his dues (income tax), but what he may not rightfully do is claim that his membership is not voluntary, and that, my friend, is my whole point. Starving oneself and one's family on principle is not everyone's cup of tea. For the record, my woman and I are far from starving and I would be willing to bet that we eat better quality food than do the vast majority of individuals who voluntarily choose to be or remain under the dominion of the government. I believe you give too much credibility to the criminal organization when you say that you are contracting with them and so you have to accept their terms. There is no contract. A contract is “an agreement between two or more persons which creates an obligation to do or not do a particular thing”. I say applying for and/or using a T.I.N. to obtain benefits IS a contract; and I say applying for and/or using a government license, of any kind, IS a contract. I do not apply for or use a chattel number, I do not apply for or use any of their licenses, because I DO NOT ACCEPT THE TERMS attached to them, (I prefer to be free), I, therefore, am NOT contracting with them. They have a virtual monopoly on employment through the criminal T.I.N. system... Yes, they do, but that's because there is not one individual in ten thousand who is willing to “just say no” to the ruler's “dainties”. ...and if I use that system it is because I can benefit from it. Of course, that is what I have been saying all along; individuals VOLUNTARILY remain part of that system because they "can benefit from it". I will take everything I can from the criminal organization and there is nothing I can do that rightfully binds me to their system. By accepting whatever they hand out, I do not make a contract with them. I understand, but I assure you, if you read the “fine print” on all the benefits and privileges you're “taking” and “accepting” you will find there ARE binding obligations attached. No contract exists within a coercive relationship. Agreed, but...is it really “coercive”, or is it just “very inconvenient” to leave the pond. It is a war. If that it true, and I'm not saying it isn't, what good does it do us to sit around bitchin' and complainin' about it? The "Jim Davies" of the world are, (IMO), living a pipe dream if they believe that they can “re-educate” enough people to empty any substantial number of government offices, particularly the office of "citizen". "You must be the change you want to see in the world." So one can use the T.I.N. and still complain about the system, because without that system he should be able to contract for $20/hour (or its equivalent in a freed job market) without paying taxes. Well, of course he can complain, my friend, and you're right, life outside the pond can be a “bit more difficult”. Freedom has a price tag, that's for sure; just ask that pregnant nanny I found a few years back who had chosen to leave the pond; those who thought they “owned” her chased her for many days, but last I checked, she and her two kids were doin' just fine...and still free! If the government took complete control over food distribution, and it's getting close, should everyone forego food in order to avoid making contract with them? Oh, tzo, I expected so much more from you, my friend. First of all as I have previously, (and no doubt generously), guessed, there's not one in ten thousand that will forgo anything, they will continue to “take everything [they] can from the criminal organization” and continue “accepting whatever they hand out” 'til the bitter end. And, secondly, you needn't concern yourself too much about those few individual secessionists who have chosen to leave the pond, there's plenty of good food on this earth for us. (Last night we had tasty meat balls, made from deer meat, buried in a most deliciously seasoned tomato sauce, with a side of cabbage and homemade whole wheat bread. Is your mouth watering yet? [wink]) Don't use a T.I.N and you don't have to worry about the IRS. That is correct. Don't drink raw milk and you don't have to worry about the FDA. Because I'm not a member of your body politic, I can "legally" drink whatever the frick I like, because the FDA rules do not apply to me, they only apply to those who have “subjected themselves to the dominion of [the] government”, which only makes "raw milk" more difficult for us to acquire. Don't own a gun and you don't have to worry about the ATF. I never worry about the ATF, (as though it's some kind of living being to be afraid of), or the men and women who belong to it, because their rules do not apply to me; their rules only apply to their voluntary members, individuals who have “subjected themselves to the dominion of [the] government”. Do exactly what the police officer tells you and you don't have to worry about going to jail. I can honestly tell you that I NEVER do “exactly what the police officer tells [me] to do”, (because, thus far, I've not harmed anyone), and I rarely go to jail. Furthermore, what few times I have gone to jail they've held me the appropriate three days to check out my status to see if I'm one of theirs, and when they can find no nexus (connection), they have released me. I have never accepted, (let alone “signed”), a ticket, I have never been fined or beaten, and I've only had a gun pulled on me once, and that was at my own request, so I could truthfully claim my car was taken viet armis, “with force and arms. See Trespass.” (Source: Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 1568) Don't buy property and you don't have to worry about paying local government property tax. Do not submit yourself to the dominion of the government, don't use a fricken T.I.N., and don't register your LAND with the local government taxing agency. Will the “bully in the schoolyard” still come after your “lunch money”? Quite likely, because “right does not make might”, which is why it is “dangerous to be right when the government is wrong”. Don't buy food or gas and you don't have to worry about sales taxes. Agreed. Or, don't buy food from a “taxpayer” who is obligated to pay a sales tax. Don't live in the US if you don't want to follow the rules. Yick. I don't "live in the US”, I live on the Earth, the “US” is a fiction. If “you don't want to follow the rules” of the corporation, then don't be a member of the corporation. People are going to do what they think is the best for themselves and their families depending upon the current situation in which they find themselves. For what it is worth, I totally agree with you. And I am not for one minute telling anyone they have to follow in my footsteps; I just want them to know that there is another choice, and that there is at least one who has opted for it, nothing more. What really was an eye-opener, for us, was to find out that Individual Secessionists are pretty much ostracized even in so-called "freedom loving" groups like this. So be it. One can wish that all would take a principled stand against aggression, but that seems implausible. My friend, it is IMPOSSIBLE to get “all” doing what you wish they would do, (my Daddy says, "Sh*t in one hand and wish in the other, and see which one fills up first", but in order to be honest with myself, I had to admit that it is POSSIBLE for ME to “take a principled stand against aggression”. Only when the boot heel presses down with enough force does the mass reaction occur, and that reaction is not so much principled as it is the desperate act of cornered animals. And the “desperate act of cornered animals” is seldom a wise one, and almost always an ugly one. This response has now spiraled out of control. Fin. So, my friend, tell me, what is your “plausible” solution to the problem of out of control government?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    "But is merely uncovering the State’s true nature really a crime?" ~ Scott Lazarowitz No, it is a prime example of the true intention of "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press". Your rating: Must read! Well done, Scott Lazarowitz.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Good points, both. And as more and more material gets released and then gains an audience, the net effect will, inevitably, be to lower the public's opinion of the elite even more, and to make people question the elite's supposed "right" to run our lives, to take our money, to send our children into harms way in aggressive wars, to favor corporate advantage over individual rights, and all the rest of it. In turn, THAT will make the "Assange is a CIA asset" idea even more untenable than it is now. WikiLeaks isn't a psy-op: those who loudly insist it is are the ones running the psy-op.
  • madelineS's picture
    madelineS 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    B of A won't transfer WikiLeaks any funds or process any funds to the organization. It has joined several other financial institutions in refusing to handle payments for Wikileaks, the latest blow to the secret-releasing organization's efforts to continue operating under pressure from governments and the corporate world. You will find numerous companies that are doing the exact same thing, and Bank of America is just the latest. Some believe that finance corporations are doing so before a WikiLeaks release of bank documents in 2011.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    Wow. This is an exceptional essay, Scott. It was clearly researched, linked, and written with great care and intelligence. You've described the nature of the State generally, and of our own in particular, with great depth and economy -- the overall image is very clear and on-point. Welcome to STR, and I look forward to more of your work (also, thanks for introducing me to your own site). It isn't surprising that the on-going WikiLeaks saga is prompting writing of this caliber from old hands and from writers new to STR; few things in recent history have shown up the true nature of the State as starkly as the leaked material and, even more, the response to those who have set the cables loose in the world. Bonus: Here's an example of the stunning behavior of establishment toadies in regards WikiLeaks: an 11 min 15 sec interview with Glenn Greenwald (on the side of truth, justice, and [the Tom Paine version of] the American way -- sounds like humor but I mean every word) versus Fran Townsend on CNN via Mox News. This is an in-your-face example of the difference between Assange's few supporters, as represented by Salon columnist Greenwald, and Assange's detractors. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XInz4i6AV8M Bonus #2! - http://www.peopleokwithmurderingassange.com/ -- a collection of quotes from Sarah Palin to Bob Beckel of Fox News about how terrific it would be if Assange were assasinated.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    I think you're right about the cruelty Manning is being subjected to. Hate to even think it, but it just fits too well with Power's behavior generally.
  • B.R. Merrick's picture
    B.R. Merrick 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Scott Lazarowitz
    I keep thinking I've read the article that explains the whole Wikileaks fiasco, and then something brilliant like this comes along. Another reason I think Manning is being treated so harshly is so that anyone else who gets any ideas has adequate warning: "This is what we'll do to you, too." They are truly monstrous.
  • Evan's picture
    Evan 3 years 42 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    23 hours a day in solitary confinement? Sounds like Lauren Canario's and my own experience in Hillsborough County DOC in Manchester, NH. That, plus being forced to wear a respiratory mask and rubber gloves during the one hour outside of your cell, is standard treatment for prisoners in Manchester who refuse to take the TB shot.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    Another good research reference: http://www.kolumbus.fi/mdewit/rationalistlaw.htm
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    Evolving to something new: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGUsq8GNKeY
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    Hi MassOutrage, I appreciate the detailed response. So much better not to deal with generalities [my comments in [brackets]: I suppose that some people can theoretically live together in a strictly volunteer manner, but I can't think of a time when it has actually happened. http://royhalliday.home.mindspring.com/history.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_anarchist_communities http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Iceland/Iceland.html http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=126 http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Anarchy_and_Eff_Law/Anarchy_and_E... You are operating in theory, rather than in reality. [see above] Government is indeed a fearful and usually tyrannical entity. No argument there. But you must not live in an area like mine with hordes of fatherless, conscienceless young men, who kill and steal for fun. Even the police cannot bring them to heel. [So the government is powerless to stop the problem that it created. Therefore we need government. Do you doubt that the primary reason these conditions exist is due to government? This is their preferred strategy: Create huge problems that could not occur without their influence and then propagandize the situation so that everyone thinks that government is the only solution to those problems. Does it get better, or worse? Then just give the government more power and money and they will solve it. Eventually. Just a little bit more time and money...] That is just on the personal and city level. On the larger world level, where are you reading your history? Empire-mongers and barbarians have always abounded in every time and place, who have enlisted numberless fools to go off and fight wars for them, using simplistic arguments about patriotism, nationalism, the promise of loot, or even the fun of killing. (e.g. Rome, Greece, the U.S., the Soviet Union, the Nazis) Even large-scale, well organized efforts have often failed to save people from death and destruction at their hands. Just Think of the Ottoman Turks, nearly destroying Europe, or the hordes who descended on Rome repeatedly during its decline. Violence is more the norm than the exception. [Searching history for examples of successful voluntary societies may produce a very short list indeed. But this should not be used as proof that successful voluntary societies are impossible and government is necessary. There was a time when scouring the pages of history showed that slavery was necessary to a successful society. Steam engines and cars and airplanes were impossibilities until they in fact appeared. The Earth was most definitely the center of the universe until it wasn't. Searching history for precedent ignores progress. Humanity is not static, but dynamic. If something is possible, then we can figure out how to do it. That is the real lesson of human history. That and the fact that when some person or people decide to do something challenging, the mass of humanity ridicules the idea because it has never worked before. Then it works and everyone accepts it and moves on to ridicule the next new idea. Rinse, repeat.] The notion that insurance companies could organize adequate defenses to these perpetual threats from thugs and dictators, internal and external, is fantasy and wishful thinking. Here it comes over the hill - The Grand Army of the Gecko! Finally, your idea of a justice system is also not realistic. I work in the court system, and see the insanity of it. [I have no doubt that the governmental justice system is clinically insane.] Your premise is that a private one would be different, but why would it be. It is the same imperfect people, wherever you go. It will consist of the same venal, self-serving, power-mad fools whether public or private. [A private one would be different because it would have competition. The current monopoly system is not interested in justice because it doesn't have to be. It is concerned with preserving and growing itself, and nothing more. Private competition would wipe out such an inefficient beast. Who would pay for its services if there was a better alternative?] [I would also suggest you consider the history of common law, the basis for our law, and its creation and implementation through private, not public, means. Law writ by human beings based on natural law and human rationality, enforced by private judges in a free market. That is history. Government expropriated this private system and now the world gives them credit for it because that is what the government schools teach. The merchant law is another large legal system developed by entirely private means that has been absorbed and distorted by government monopoly.] http://libertariannation.org/a/f61l1.html http://mises.org/daily/4147 http://mises.org/daily/2265 And that painful reality of human nature - which your theory fails to take into account - is at least a reasonable argument for why we need a savior. Man, left to his own, is usually violent, derisive (like you and Mr. Davies), or just self-serving. In a land bereft of Godliness, Hobbes was right, unfortunately. [The fact that humanity has lasted as long as it has points to the success of cooperation over that of violence. The current world situation, dominated by governments and their violence, is the real threat to humanity. We haven't gotten this far because of government, but in spite of it. No government ever invented a light bulb. The light bulb was invented because the government was kept out of the way. If a land is truly bereft of Godliness, it embraces government. And if humanity would perish without government, so be it. There can be no excuse in any just God's eyes to initiate violence, brother against brother, in order to achieve some preferred end. If humanity cannot live without coercive systems as a means of "preemptive defense" then it should indeed perish as it is not worthy of existence. I cannot see any rational justification for the combination of a just God and government.]
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    "Quit using a fricken chattel number, (to receive some kind of benefit(s) or privilege(s)), and the I.R.S. will never have you "put in a government cage" for income tax violation(s) again." *** Agreed, but. In this country, given that a person has a set of work skills, he may have the option of earning $10/hour "underground" or $20/hour minus taxes with a T.I.N. Humans respond to incentives. Starving oneself and one's family on principle is not everyone's cup of tea. I believe you give too much credibility to the criminal organization when you say that you are contracting with them and so you have to accept their terms. There is no contract. They have a virtual monopoly on employment through the criminal T.I.N. system, and if I use that system it is because I can benefit from it. I will take everything I can from the criminal organization and there is nothing I can do that rightfully binds me to their system. By accepting whatever they hand out, I do not make a contract with them. No contract exists within a coercive relationship. It is a war. So one can use the T.I.N. and still complain about the system, because without that system he should be able to contract for $20/hour (or its equivalent in a freed job market) without paying taxes. If the government took complete control over food distribution, and it's getting close, should everyone forego food in order to avoid making contract with them? Don't use a T.I.N and you don't have to worry about the IRS. Don't drink raw milk and you don't have to worry about the FDA. Don't own a gun and you don't have to worry about the ATF. Do exactly what the police officer tells you and you don't have to worry about going to jail. Don't buy property and you don't have to worry about paying local government property tax. Don't buy food or gas and you don't have to worry about sales taxes. Don't live in the US if you don't want to follow the rules. Yick. People are going to do what they think is the best for themselves and their families depending upon the current situation in which they find themselves. One can wish that all would take a principled stand against aggression, but that seems implausible. Only when the boot heel presses down with enough force does the mass reaction occur, and that reaction is not so much principled as it is the desperate act of cornered animals. This response has now spiraled out of control. fin.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    “This rather is the kind of cynical, authoritarian deception practiced by the IRS: its alleged income tax is a "voluntary system" (they really do say that) but if you don't volunteer, you may be put in a government cage.” ~ Jim Davies As I have stated until I am virtually blue in the face, you “VOLUNTARILY” identify yourself as a TAXPAYER[1] by “VOLUNTARILY” using one of their “Taxpayer Identification Numbers”. Quit using a fricken chattel number, (to receive some kind of benefit(s) or privilege(s)), and the I.R.S. will never have you "put in a government cage" for income tax violation(s) again. [1] Taxpayer. One who is subject to a tax on income, regardless of whether he or she pays the tax. I.R.C. § 7701(a)(14) ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 1462
  • Guest's picture
    MassOutrage (not verified) 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    I suppose that some people can theoretically live together in a strictly volunteer manner, but I can't think of a time when it has actually happened. You are operating in theory, rather than in reality. Government is indeed a fearful and usually tyrannical entity. No argument there. But you must not live in an area like mine with hordes of fatherless, conscienceless young men, who kill and steal for fun. Even the police cannot bring them to heel. That is just on the personal and city level. On the larger world level, where are you reading your history? Empire-mongers and barbarians have always abounded in every time and place, who have enlisted numberless fools to go off and fight wars for them, using simplistic arguments about patriotism, nationalism, the promise of loot, or even the fun of killing. (e.g. Rome, Greece, the U.S., the Soviet Union, the Nazis) Even large-scale, well organized efforts have often failed to save people from death and destruction at their hands. Just Think of the Ottoman Turks, nearly destroying Europe, or the hordes who descended on Rome repeatedly during its decline. Violence is more the norm than the exception. The notion that insurance companies could organize adequate defenses to these perpetual threats from thugs and dictators, internal and external, is fantasy and wishful thinking. Here it comes over the hill - The Grand Army of the Gecko! Finally, your idea of a justice system is also not realistic. I work in the court system, and see the insanity of it. Your premise is that a private one would be different, but why would it be. It is the same imperfect people, wherever you go. It will consist of the same venal, self-serving, power-mad fools whether public or private. And that painful reality of human nature - which your theory fails to take into account - is at least a reasonable argument for why we need a savior. Man, left to his own, is usually violent, derisive (like you and Mr. Davies), or just self-serving. In a land bereft of Godliness, Hobbes was right, unfortunately.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    Your and my solution may not be that far apart, in fact, they may be virtually identical. Quit Government Employ. You'll have to do this eventually, if your job is involved with government at any level, directly or indirectly - so the sooner you exit, the easier it will be. ~ Jim Davies [Excerpted from Segment 18 of The Online Freedom Academy http://www.tolfa.us/L18.htm ] Governments "employ" citizens. They "pay" them with benefits and privileges. “All governments must have citizens in order to exist”, therefore if enough individual citizens secede from it, i.e. "Quit Government Employ", it will die, just as any parasite will die if it does not have a host. It is the only peaceful way to “abolish it”. "How bad do things have to get before you do something? Do they have to take away all your property? Do they have to license every activity that you want to engage in? Do they have to start throwing you on cattle cars before you say “now wait a minute, I don’t think this is a good idea.” How long is it going to be before you finally resist and say “No, I will not comply. Period!” Ask yourself now because sooner or later you are going to come to that line, and when they cross it, you’re going to say well now cross this line; ok now cross that line; ok now cross this line. Pretty soon you’re in a corner. Sooner or later YOU'VE GOT TO STAND YOUR GROUND WHETHER ANYBODY ELSE DOES OR NOT. That is what liberty is all about." ~ Michael Badnarik [Emphasis added] P.S. Vox Day is the pseudonym used by Theodore Beale. "He describes the New Atheists as being "irrational" and "clowns of reason" and blames their non-belief in the existence of God on a "social autism" which he believes is the result of a mild form of Asperger's syndrome ."
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    A common, yet baffling (to me) non-sequitur is the illogical leap made from the proposition that a society could exist without a government to the conclusion that there would be no justice system. Somehow, the bad guys cannot be dealt with without government. It is straight impossible. Inconceivable. The writer seems to share in his god's all-knowingness in that he is quite certain what would result if a group of human beings actually decided to live together in a strictly voluntary manner. He is the fish who can only imagine the pond when there is more out there that his lack of imagination or knowledge cannot even begin to fathom. Ouch. Shot right in the foot with his own fish pond. And when I regain my breath from rotflmao, I will address the last line that claims that the state is a respecter of property in contrast to the unwashed hordes of individual barbarians.
  • Michael Kleen's picture
    Michael Kleen 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    I've very glad to see my interview sparked a response! Truthfully, I was disappointed with Vox Day's reply to my question about the economic philosophies underlying "right-libertarian" thinking. I tried to press him on it, but he avoided saying anything concrete. I know he didn't want to send me an essay, but it seems that after writing so many columns about it over the years he could have effectively dealt with the question rather than just dismissing it with such broad strokes.
  • Guest's picture
    MassOutrage (not verified) 3 years 42 weeks ago
    Vox Dei?
    Page Jim Davies
    The fish in the pond says, "It is not logically possible for any life to exist outside of this pond, and there isn't a shred of objective proof that it could. This universe consists only of this pond, and nothing more." Mr. Davies is making the same argument about God and about those who may have good reason to believe in God, while saying there is not a shred of evidence to support the opposite position. Mr. Davies' logic does not get past the pond, but that does not mean he can prove there is no life outside of it, as he so blithely assumes to do. Whether he agrees with the proof or not, there is objective, logical, reasoned evidence that God exists and that Jesus is who he says he is. It can't be proven with mathematics, but we don't require that for many things we know to be true. The question of whether God exists or not is, first, a presupposition, which is buttressed by reasonable proofs. The other problem with Mr. Davies' solution is that some persons "do evil", as he points out. In fact, quite a lot of them do. We must have some mechanism for dealing with that evil. Large swaths of the citizens in every country and time have never subscribed to his aspiration to respect the property of others. They don't and could not care less if he does. They'll just take it. His no-state idea ignores that unfortunate reality. A state is a terrible thing indeed, as it is so susceptible to theft, corruption, and misuse of power. But no state is even worse, since the hordes will usually not respect property.
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    Suverans2. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I haven't delved into this field yet, and it's good that you're bringing it to our attention. There's a lot of IP application to this, too, eh? I'm considering a piece on the roots of IP (actually copyright) myself. The origins go back far before the events in English law that Kinsella points to -- not only in early incunabula printing but even in manuscript copying. But it's a difficult project. It will build on top of the Gutenberg article that I wrote a few years ago for STR. But as you bring up, this agriculture-industry-fascism/subsidy-IP "complex" is getting more dangerous each year, isn't it?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 42 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    If you are a citizen/subject of the U.S. government, here's how your FDA will protect you...NOT!! "There is No Right to Consume or Feed Children Any Particular Food; There is No Generalized Right to Bodily and Physical Health; There is No Fundamental Right to Freedom of Contract." ~US Dept of Health & Human Services and US Food & Drug Administration
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 43 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Yep, it was illegal because they knew it was the "winter solstice celebration", of the Pagans, with a new face upon it, of course. It was all part of the Roman syncretization (mixing) of religions to make the "state religion" palatable, i.e. "catholic", (which means "universal)", for virtually all their citizens.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    G'day Lawrence M. Ludlow, Perhaps reading, for yourself, the latest Wikileaks' leak on the GMO conspiracy will serve to motivate you, and hopefully others, in learning more about this issue. "Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory." http://213.251.145.96/cable/2007/12/07PARIS4723.html That was from "Craig Stapleton, the US ambassador to France...co-owner of the Texas Rangers with former President George W. Bush, (his wife, by the way, is George Bush's cousin)", talking about "retaliating" against European countries opposed to Monsanto's GMO crops. http://www.naturalnews.com/030828_GMOs_Wikileaks.html
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Alex Schroeder
    Excellent article, Alex! I will be linking to it the next time I run into doubt about anarchism.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Thanks Glen. I have seen these comments here and there trying to tie Wikileaks to CIA, etc. Hard to take seriously, and pretty easy to refute, but your column is the best thing I've seen for this purpose, and I will link to it from now on when I see such comments. There are also other ways: 1) The sheer volume of the cables. If Wikileaks were a CIA operation, it would have confined itself to perhaps a thousand carefully-vetted cables, with maybe a few embarrassing revelations; but nothing of this magnitude. 2) The point that releasing such information represents a huge cost to the ruling class. What then do they buy at such a cost? Control of the internet? So, how is is that ordinary people would prefer to surrender control of their best source of information, to the same agency clearly capable of putting out lies and disinformation to start wars - as revealed by the cables? The cables themselves defeat this purpose.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 43 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Let's see... do I trust these murderous bastards in government to protect me from naughty companies providing the internet? Sure, makes all the sense in the world...
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 43 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    If destroying a person's life over mnarijuana is unacceptable, it's equally unacceptable to destroy a life over heroin or cocaine or meth (yes, even meth). Or are the lives and freedom of pot smokers swomehow more precious than the lives and freedom of the rest of us? What I want to know is, why is it acceptable for government to destroy lives at all? The so-called "war on drugs" is being waged against ALL Americans, not just pot smokers. US drug policy is nothing but a system of laws enacted and enforced for the sole purpose of destroying human life. Some people believe that evil of this magnitude can be "reformed." I, for one, do not.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 43 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Even a blind pig finds an acorn now and then. Still good news though.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    Well done! A perfectly bite-sized and thought-provoking essay in a classic style. Powerful, too: even having known (for decades) the truth of what you say, it still shocks to read it in plain language.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 43 weeks ago
    A Drug War Mutiny
    Web link Anthony Gregory
    "What is a mutiny? A rebellion against authority." ~ Brian Martinez To be more precise, Brian, it is "a refusal by a group to accept someone’s authority"[1]. And, with that, we find ourselves, once again, believing that some "group" will magically make things right for us, instead of taking "individual" responsibility. ″Power [i.e. authority] rests on nothing other than people's consent to submit, and each person who refuses to submit to tyranny reduces it by one two-hundred-and-fifty-millionth, whereas each who compromises [with it] only increases it.″ ~ Vladimir Konstantinovich Bukovsky I do not consent! [1] Macmillan Dictionary
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 43 weeks ago Web link Anthony Gregory
    Ooooh, war, huh Good God y'all What is it good for Absolutely nothing Say it again War, whoa, Lord What is it good for Absolutely nothing
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Thanks, Lawrence -- that's an important issue that I didn't address in the column, and since I don't think I could say it any better than you have, I've added mention of your comment in the body of the column itself.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Here's something you'll get a kick out of . . . http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/73845.html December 22, 2010 The FBI Has Updated Bin Laden’s ‘Most Wanted’ Page… Posted by David Kramer on December 22, 2010 04:50 PM …but there’s still NO MENTION of 9/11. Hmmmmm. USAMA BIN LADEN Murder of U.S. Nationals Outside the United States; Conspiracy to Murder U.S. Nationals Outside the United States; Attack on a Federal Facility Resulting in Death REWARD: The Rewards For Justice Program, United States Department of State, is offering a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to the apprehension or conviction of Usama Bin Laden. An additional $2 million is being offered through a program developed and funded by the Airline Pilots Association and the Air Transport Association. Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world. [Where's 9/11???] Bin Laden is left-handed and walks with a cane.
  • Guest's picture
    stuartbramhall (not verified) 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    I'm afraid this whole media storm around Assange reminds me of the whole O.J. Simpson circus in a way. I recall it very distinctly because I was a single payer activist. The week of his arrest (1993) was the same week health care reform (after being headline news for a year) died a quiet death in Congress. So what is the corporate media trying to conceal by beating Assange's sex life to death? Most of the information in the recent cables release is already widely available on the Internet. At the same time I find it surprising to find absolutely nothing about the "strategic" reasons the US is at war in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Nothing about the Pentagon agenda to foster the secession of oil and mineral rich Balochistan from Pakistan as a US client state - just like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and other former Soviet republics. Nothing about CIA support for the Baloch separatist movement. Nothing about the CIA training young Baloch separatists in bomb making and other terrorist activities to disrupt operations at the Chinese-built Gwadar Port (intended to transport Iranian oil and natural gas via Pakistan to China). I blog about this at http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2010/11/28/afghanistan-and-the-...
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 43 weeks ago Page LaTulippe
    Congratulations, Steve LaTulippe, this is one of the most coherent columns I have read in a long time. And, it is not the first time that you have written something that the common man, (like myself), can understand. I find you 'guilty' of making sense here, http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/04-01-04/discussion.cgi.54.html and here http://www.infowars.net/articles/august2008/180808Neocon.htm and here http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/november2006/071106Grass.htm as well. In fact, you seem to have an habit of being able to reach simple-minded folk, like myself. Thank you, and looking forward to more of the same. Addendum. Just read this in one of your articles in the Lew Rockwell Archives, "a circular firing squad", and the vision that it engendered caused me to laugh so loud I was afraid of waking my woman. ROFLMAO
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 43 weeks ago Page LaTulippe
    Terrific piece, and welcome to STR! You've done a fine job of putting the disappointment we all feel about the MSM (Cretaceous Media?) into words. And those who don't READ or watch "professional journalism" any more should know just how vile the profession, as a group, has become.
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    Hi, Suverans2. I meant that creating hybrids and new strains of plants and cross-breeding animals to create different effects has been practiced for centuries. I don't know what the results of this new stuff are, however. Sorry about the confusion.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    G'day Lawrence M. Ludlow, With all due respect, to the best of my knowledge, there is no such word as “cross-straining”, and it has not been going on for years; it is happening for the first time in the history of the earth. “What's wrong with Genetic Engineering” “Genetic engineering is a radical new technology, one that breaks down fundamental genetic barriers -- not only between species, [but between “kingdoms”, i.e.] between humans, animals, and plants. By combining the genes of dissimilar and unrelated species, permanently altering their genetic codes, novel organisms are created that will pass the genetic changes onto their offspring through heredity. Scientists are now snipping, inserting, recombining, rearranging, editing, and programming genetic material. Animal genes and even human genes are being inserted into plants or animals creating unimagined transgenic life forms.” A little bit of knowledge can be, particularly in this case, a VERY DANGEROUS thing.
  • B.R. Merrick's picture
    B.R. Merrick 3 years 43 weeks ago Page LaTulippe
    Wonderful first article. (Well, first article for this site, anyway.)
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 3 years 43 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    Glen, thanks for writing this piece. It needed saying! We've seen so many "warnings" that Wikileaks can be used by GovCo simply because a number of the posts that have been revealed through Wikileaks indeed show the repetition of disinformation by various GovCo functionaries as they communicate to each other. Anyone familiar with "organization-speak" understands that these people often repeat to each other statements that are obvious lies to the rest of us who know better based on the reports of experts (such as the false statement that Iran poses a thermonuclear threat because of its power-generation program). Just because these GovCo employees butter-up their bosses by repeating these lies does not mean that Wikileaks is trying to disseminate these lies. It only means that we have been allowed to peek into the perfervid world of government boosterism that is required for "advance" within that evil realm.