Recent comments

  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 31 weeks 6 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Strange. Now that I'm old, tired of the fight, the thing has begun to come together. Striking realizations loom to the fore. If there is one thing Bill and Dr Bob hammered into my cranium some 55 years ago, it was that I can't wait for others to change in order for me to become free. You can help -- and you do -- indeed you do help. But my freedom is not in the hands of you or anybody else. If freedom's to be, it's up to me. I'm not talking here about drinking -- that constant "slipping" back into alcoholic stupor that seemed to beset me the first 10 or 15 years in the fellowship. Strangely, the book doesn't address drinking and getting drunk all that much. Throughout the AA experience, the emphasis is changing the way I think and the way I behave and the way I react to the thoughts and behaviors of others. In fact the book urges me to step up to the nearest bar, order a drink or two, just to see if AA "...is right for me..." (to borrow from the incessant TV drug commercials). Turns out AA was and is the most libertarian organization in town. Before I even understood the word "libertarian". There's a joke around the meeting halls, "...You can always tell a drunk. But you can't tell him very damned much!..." I remember how angry (and righteous) I became when local judges would "sentence" people to AA, and "require" signatures from chairpersons at meetings. I called one judge after a meeting, and was quite insulting (think I probably had another of my "slips" right afterwords), that he had no more right to sentence people to AA than he did to sentence them to Catechism down at the Catholic Church. The longer I stayed, the more vividly it sank in that nobody is in charge of the show. Nobody has authority to stop judges or alcoholism counselors from telling their victims that they are "required" to attend AA. That's anarchy, my friends. And, the program works (if you work it). Keep up the good essays, Alex. Sam
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 32 weeks 2 hours ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    I simply find that there is too much history established, and mistaken definitions included or attached to some of the terms as voluntarist, anarchist, libertarian and etc., they rank of evil in the minds who hear them and see them, Alice In Wonderland. John Kennedy once said, three days before his assignation "There's a plot in this country to enslave every man, woman, and child. Before I leave this High and Noble Office I intend to expose this plot." Unfortunately he was unable to achieve this goal. What would it have been like if he had exposed the conspiracy. I have experienced this personally when I attempted to affiliate with the ideology of anarchist, when I have made my zombie attacks on Congress, holding out on the idea that if just one of the puppets who reply for the pathocrats stumbling along the waxed halls. The ideologies presented in STR are radical for too busy Americans whom are fighting the fight to pay bills, pay taxes, among the other homages required by the pathocrats. They struggle to make something in their lives, and becoming involved in these philosophies take away what moments they have with family and for personal relaxation from their labors. T.V., beer, sex, chasing after kids activities. They are numbed with life and scourged by government For me, I have come to the conclusion that I subscribe to no one of these ideologies, but rather consider myself a survivalist; I pick and choose what meets my moral and ethical disposition. I make it one day at a time by whatever means necessary. I haven't figured out how to make my navel the center of my universe. I am aware of only one man who has achieved this and I am sure he has to be the freest of free people. The idea of freedom began somewhere around the 15th or 16th century, times when governments dominated the earth. Another Kennedy quote which I find has meaning, and even puzzles me about his is "Let us not seek a Republican answer, or the Democratic answer. Let us not seek to fix the blame for the past, but let us accept our own responsibility for the future."
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 32 weeks 16 hours ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    First off, a nod to Jim Davies, and my sincere hope that he's right, and his TOLFA program is a success. I went through the TOLFA process a couple of years ago myself, but the thing is, in all of the time since then, I've not come across even that crucial one other person to induct. My family is tolerant of my "eccentric ideas", but none of them, despite being intelligent and thoughtful, is remotely ready or interested in giving up the paradigm that they know and have been indoctrinated to since kindergarten. Not to mention, in some cases, the religious dogma that they've been exposed to for even longer. And those are ~family members~... I think what Jim often misses is that some people simply ~aren't~ rational, and that most, rather than give up their treasured ideas to logical arguments will simply dig their heels in and hold on for dear life. Throw on top of that the sociopaths-in-power and their media toadies doing everything they can to keep the flock thinking that they're indispensable, including indoctrination from an earlier age every year; this may not be insurmountable in the long run, but I have a hard time seeing the process as a simple arithmetical progression. Until that happens, I'll keep looking out for that TOLFA recruit, but I'll also be doing my best to fly under the radar, and enjoy as much freedom in this paradigm as I possibly can.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 32 weeks 21 hours ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Great column, Alex. Clear thinking and sleek writing on an important topic. Your timeline to freedom of "sometime after we're all dead, if ever" seems a pretty sure bet, and your response to that seems sensible and healthy. 
  • Tony Pivetta's picture
    Tony Pivetta 32 weeks 2 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
    Immigration enthusiasts have made the claim that exotic peoples can provide "leavening" to homogenous cultures. Europeans are getting a dose of that leavening, good and hard, from the Mohammedan hordes now swarming them. 
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 32 weeks 2 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Activism can be a positive thing, but when it translates into endless frustration and a poor quality of life, then it has become counterproductive. Getting others to embrace the full vision might be ideal, but it does not generally work with folks who are in a full-statist mindset. Better to try to change their minds on a single topic, where they can grasp the facts/rationale in a concrete manner. If that happens, then they might be willing to do a deeper dive. Though, truth be told, many people are simply so worried about what other people think that they will not cross certain lines, no matter how (intellectually) compelling the case may be.  
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 32 weeks 2 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    My feelings exactly. After fighting this fight for over 30 years one must eventually come to some hard realizations. The overall trend is toward freedom, but the road twists and turns and is full of potholes. The states of the world will eventually go bankrupt, like they all do, and there will be a major shift toward individual political autonomy due to technology, but the collectivist cult won't go away without a fight, perhaps even a scorched earth end-game.
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 32 weeks 2 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
    Even when the U.S. had basically an open immigration policy, there were certain restrictions in place. I believe that criminals were turned away. This seems reasonable (provided, of course, that we are talking about real crimes here and not State-concocted ones). In principle, turning away people who do not respect our basic standards of conduct is really no different. Imagine if the Free State Project came to fruition and New Hampshire became a (relatively) free, prosperous domain. Suppose further that statists soon flocked there to take advantage of the improved environment, but also wanted to bring their statism with them. Naturally, it would not remain free for very long. This has happened to other states that had been reasonably well-run at one point. Maybe such folks should be allowed work permits to live there, but not be allowed to become citizens of the Free state.  
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 32 weeks 3 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
    Open borders is not an option on the table in a statist world, so debating "open borders" vs. "closed borders" is a futile exercise. We can agree that eliminating the state would eliminate state borders, which is wonderful, but a purely theoretical exercise. In the existing statist "real world", the debate is do you support the state forcing its native population to accept the immigration of groups chosen by agents of the state or not. I'm all for individuals freely moving about without being molested by state border police, but I can still oppose the state imposed policy of bringing in thousands of uninvited people that are hostile to my culture and want to be supported by money stolen from me. Survival should be the primary concern of people today. The state is loosing credibility and the empire is crumbling; these trends will continue. Things will likely get worse before they get better.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 32 weeks 3 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
    Abstaining from beans is the only peaceful form of protest we have left. Withdrawing support for the system is spreading slowly. In the meantime I'll keep whining and complaining in an effort to speed up this trend of withdrawing support.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 32 weeks 5 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
     A "dose of leavening all their own.'' What's that mean?
  • Tony Pivetta's picture
    Tony Pivetta 32 weeks 5 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
    Property rights should be no less sacrosanct to libertarians than rights to migrate. No, government has no business enforcing national borders, thereby infringing on migration. Neither does it have any business subsidizing migration, thereby infringing on property and association rights. Government has no business existing at all.    The fact remains, government has subsidized migration. It has forcibly injected hostile and alien cultures into the West. The West is best for a reason. Freedom has civilizational antecedents.   Free people enjoy the right to associate, which necessarily includes the right to disassociate. This means the right to shun outsiders: for good reason, for bad reason, for no reason. In trashing that right, government has created a tragedy of the commons. There's nothing libertarian about that.    Hats off to you, Mark! You've provided left-libertarian Rooters a dose of leavening all their own. 
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 32 weeks 5 days ago
    How To Use a Kubaton
    Web link KenK
    Not everybody can have a firearm with them everywhere they go Glockster. If you hit a squeegee man or rapefugee in the face hard with big ball of keys it may allow you to escape. People who are legally forced to be in sketchy places unarmed is the audience that link was aimed at.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 32 weeks 5 days ago
    How To Use a Kubaton
    Web link KenK
    Glock: The Kubaton is no more effective than a small, pocket held .380 or 9mm. It comes down to training, and when you are in a situation with more than on attacker can you employ it with all the effectiveness it has, just as a firearm. Stress of the situation will hammer you into mistakes unless you train and train, then that is not always enough. That being said, something is better than nothing. The cane is my choice and has been for years, not to exclude my carry.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 32 weeks 5 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
    Mark, I may have missed some points in your narrative, but overall it is an issue which has been scaring me mostly for my children and grandchildren because my life span is drawing nigh. I have been railed against in the past for a support of boarders, and now the results are being made manifest by the European nations in that they are experiencing a psychopathology once doubted would have been believed. Today reflects the Jewish attitude during WWII when the Nazis swooped in upon the Jews and initialized the death camps. For many of them they could not believe it was real, it was a mistake and too many of this nation are being just as blind. I believe boundaries were established long before the United States came into existence, obviously, but even before European states began to emerge, even before the initializing of the Roman empire. It is my view point that the old philosophies must reorganize. Watching the video is a nightmare, one that I have no doubt will come into the boundres of the United States and is a warning to all who hold to the ideology of freedom and liberty will be forced to alter--if not for self, then for family and friends. Are we to permit these parasites to settle in the lands of this nation, suck us dry, demanding goods be paid out to them? Are we to be made defenseless against their tactics of slaughter of infidels? Are the people of this nation to be forced into paying for their housing, clothes, medical treatment? Are Americans to tolerate the rape of women and children, and are the men to be subjugated to watching the heads of their loved ones being removed with a dull sword? I may have missed all the points in your article Mark, but the theme which bore its hydra head was extremism and the results of extremist ideology. Radical Islamist have absolutely no concern for Anarchist, libertarians, voluntarist, or other groups supporting ideologies found on STR. I once called myself one of these names at one time or another, but I have come to see myself more of a survivalist, one who will do what is needed and necessary to assure natural rights and laws are the foundation of this nation. My perspective now is that no one is safe and everyone must in some manner prepare for the coming storm whether from the pathocracy this nation has evolved into or radical Islamic terrorist. Assist me, in a polite manner, on how any of these aforementioned ideologies will bear any fruit in the coming times. The elder philosophers as Bastiat, Lysander and others may inarguably be accurate, but could they have even predicted the mess that has arrived?
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 32 weeks 6 days ago
    STR Is Famous
    Web link strike
    Pete Eyre and Billyrock!  :-) 
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 32 weeks 6 days ago
    On the Border
    Page Mark Davis
    Nice to see your writing again, Mark! I've been working, busy, steering clear of forums lately. But this essay works in nicely with one that you wrote here over 11 years ago now. I've quoted it countless times at various comment venues: "Working within the system means to become a part of the system. When you go into the voting booth, the only meaningful significance that your action will have is to show that one more person supports the state". ~Mark Davis From Be Free, by Mark Davis July 10, 2005. http://www.strike-the-root.com/52/davis_m/davis1.html The above published not long after I had finally taken the bait and swallowed the hook of anarchy -- which I'll carry to my grave. No dilutions from pure anarchy make any sense to me any more. "Borders" are but fictitious lines in the sand. There is another quote I submit regularly, written by David Calderwood over at Lew Rockwell six or seven years ago: The state is the central abstraction by which a catastrophically wrong idea is placed into practice. ~David Calderwood http://www.lewrockwell.com/calderwood/calderwood35.1.html There's not a lot any of us can do about the existence of that mindless abstraction we refer to as "the state", or "government" -- other than to whine, gripe and complain (which I submit augments the perceived "power" of those wily psychopaths). Oh, yes -- we can abstain from beans. It might seem a small step. But it is a step. Sam
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 33 weeks 4 days ago Web link KenK
    This article misses the point that if you are attacked today it will not be by a solitary individual, but by two or more persons, and likely carrying a weapon of some form on their person.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 33 weeks 4 days ago Web link KenK
    This guy scares me regarding his attitude of concealed carry and caliber. It is not so much caliber as it is the enormous personal responsibility involved with carry. Having a firearm in your possession and the knowledge of what it means to carry is very important to understand. Shooting a target is not the same as shooting a live person, the dynamics is entirely different and the author failed to stress these highly important facts over cheap grade .22 caliber pistols. The .22 caliber can inflict pain and can kill given the correct shot, all of which you are unlikely to get under a tense, highly volatile situation. I completely disagree with his cheap approach as there are far too many things which can go wrong with a cheap firearm, having said that it is better to have a firearm of some nature rather than to have nothing available. For a young and healthful individual I could be hopeful that they may have the creativity to plan ahead and perform some level of defensive measures. For elderly individuals as myself, I must have something to exceed my physical ability to defend myself. I would never recommend a .22 as a self-defense firearm. A .380 is the minimum. The .380 costs a bit more than a .22, but it is far more effective as its caliber size is nearest to a .38 caliber. In conclusion, for me, it is the mental preparation to defend against an intruder and to have a very clear and knowledgeable base of the laws of my state regarding the use of deadly force. I would be very interested in any comment regarding my position.
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 33 weeks 4 days ago Page Robert L. Johnson
    I take notice that this site is in honor of Thoreau. In that same vein i take a dim view of an attempt to besmirch the first man recorded as having made the discovery that men are free. That may not seem like such a revolutionary discovery. (indeed we now take it for granted,and it can be a point of pride.) The challenge is;If you are honest with yourself,How old where you when you made that realization? Most had to overcome the twelve-year government indoctriNATION camps before they even attempted to act in accordance with the knowledge. THE beginnings are unknown. All over this earth are ruins of civilizations about which we know nothing whatever. These sixty centuries may have been a Dark Age. Perhaps all men once knew that men are free. Our record of this knowledge begins with one man. There is no historical proof that he ever existed. The story holds its self-evident truth. It begins about four thousand years ago. The wars of Kish and Shipurla were then as far past as the wars between Greece and Persia are now. Ur was the center of world-empire, about as old as England now is. Elamites and Arabs were attacking Ur, and Babylon was young in the west. This man traveled from Ur toward the far west, with his father, his wife, and an orphaned nephew. They were shepherds. Their flocks kept them moving always to fresh pastures. When Abraham died very old, his grandsons buried him in what is now Turkey. He had taught his increasing family that men are free. Many gods were then believed to control all things. Gods of water made water flow, gods of air moved the winds, gods whispered in trees, roared in thunder, or with gentle rain watered the crops. These gods required services from men at certain times. The god of fertility must be served in the spring or he would not make seeds sprout. (So we still celebrate May Day.) Gods always controlled every human being. As water could not run nor rain fall nor plants grow, so a man could not think nor feel nor move except as a god controlled him. Fifteen hundred years after Abraham died, a Greek loved a woman only because a god had shot a poisoned arrow into his heart. This little god on our Valentines was real to a Greek. Greeks were as sure that these gods existed, as Americans are sure that electricity exists. The logical Greeks could explain men's acts only by supposing that crazy gods controlled them. In senseless rages, the father of gods roared thunder and flung bolts of lightning. Gods and goddesses foolishly quarreled and, using men as weapons, they made wars. They hung invisible over the battles, snatching the javelin aside or driving it into the enemy's body. Abraham said that none of these gods exist. He said that God is One Creator-and-Judge. God is The Right, he said; Rightness creates the universe and judges men's acts. (As water judges a swimmer's rightness in swimming, God judges rightness in living.) But God does not control any man, Abraham said; a man controls himself, he is free to do good or evil in the sight of God. This observation of reality made little impression on the world at the time. After many adventures, Abraham's numerous descendants went to Egypt for food, during one of the usual famines. It seems that they became a rich and highly privileged class, having a pull at court with a clever kinsman who was reducing the Egyptians to slavery. Generations grew richer and richer, more and more secure, of course making no objection to slavery. (It wasn't their slavery.) Then the old, old, endless repetition occurred once more. A new man came to power, saying (and I quote,) "The children of Israel are more and mightier than we; come on, let us deal justly with them." https://mises.org/library/discovery-freedom
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 33 weeks 5 days ago Web link Westernerd
    No elected official will contribute to freedom and liberty; for they walk on stilts in the circus of their creation. So. The election of government officials only contribute to the decline and fall of human freedom and human liberty. Neither party likes being told what to do by any body, even in elections. There no longer exists a republic, or a representative government but rather a Pathocracy--a system of government created by a small pathological minority that takes control over a society of (normal?) people. However, failing to pay attention to the unfolding events is a surrender to the oppressor, then you are no one. What to do...what to do?
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 34 weeks 23 hours ago Web link Westernerd
    It's my personal belief that, in order to assimilate "liberty", one must first recognize two basic and fundamental mindsets: 1) collectivism, and 2) individualism. As I see it, there is no middle ground. And, I'm convinced you and I will always remain uncomfortable within when and if we try to switch between one and the other. As you have pointed out above, the prevailing mindset is #1: collectivism. Collectivism is everywhere -- up and down your street in your neighborhood, among the folks standing in line at the cash register at Wal Mart, inculcated into the minds of each and every individual attending or watching a spectator-sporting event such as "Super Bowl" -- probably the predominant mentality even among members of your own family. I see collectivism as a mental illness (although I'm a proponent of the writings of the late Thomas Szasz). I'm skeptical of much of what is presented on "Prison Planet" generally, but there is a YouTube video of G. Edward Griffin -- "The Collectivist Conspiracy" -- that answers much of the questions concerning those two philosophies. I recommend watching (or listening to) at least the first 20 or so minutes, which provides a good outline. Sam
  • mishochu's picture
    mishochu 34 weeks 1 day ago Web link Westernerd
    Wow, deep. How do you stay at peace within yourself when you know (assumption on my part) that more than a few people in this country are asking for "official" agents to affect your life in increasingly more intrusive ways? I'm new to this and blundering around, it appears that there are stages to realizing what liberty really means. I'm in that stage where unfruitful proselytizing is leaving me jaded. People more seasoned to this appear to have a peace within themselves and tolerate modern liberalism and neoconservatism in people who are loud, popular, and numerous. Perhaps I'm just impatient, while I'm grateful for Mises, Locke, Bastiat et al...how do you stay at peace when you know that, like them, full freedom in your lifetime is unlikely?
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 34 weeks 3 days ago Page Robert L. Johnson
    Got to like Hasnas. Very thoughtful man. (Of course that is my opinion)
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 34 weeks 3 days ago Web link Westernerd
    Sam, You can always be counted on for being perceptive and penetrating.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 34 weeks 3 days ago Web link KenK
    Wow! Double Wow! It is intriguing that an evolutionist, (who could not make it as an evolutionist, but rather generate notice via being atheistic and attach the Christian belief), could garner such sour remarks regarding Christianity. To attack Christians or the Christian belief on STR does not seem to ring true to the site philosophy. These are not the tones of freedom and liberty. Just wow! Incomprehensible.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 34 weeks 3 days ago Web link Westernerd
    What is scary (to me) about John Whitehead is not that he is a bad writer (as mainstream writers go who attempt to lean into libertarianism). He's a good writer, except for his incessant use of "we", the most dangerous word in the language. I'm always wary of anybody who tries to include me into their foray. What bothers me is the play he gets among "libertarian" press. I think Bell may have dropped him as a regular contributor now that Anthony Wile is back at the helm, but many give him front page. I don't know about you or Dr Whitehead, but if my freedoms (he erroneously and rather pompously writes "our" freedoms) are threatened by U S presidential elections, then I'd better make it a point to reexamine freedom and liberty. Sam
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 34 weeks 3 days ago Web link KenK
    Christ did not come to make bad men good, He came to give dead men life. If you are born once you die twice.(body and soul) If you are born twice you die once.(body) Christ was the most anti-religious man to walk the earth. Investigate that statement to grasp the meaning. Hint- Religion is mans attempt to reconcile himself to a perfect God. Another interesting theme that threads through the Scriptures is the chosen peoples rejections of God and the long suffering merciful Patience of God.(golden calf,ceasar,saul,gnostisism,Christ. &c) In the above article. ChristianDOM (as opposed to christians)would be better compared to atheisms bankrupt (un)-reasonings. http://www.reasons.org/articles/more-deaths-in-the-name-of-god-or-no-gods ''Atheists often sidestep or minimize the incredible amount of evil perpetrated by atheistic totalitarian regimes in the last century. Contrary to Dawkins, the multiple tens of millions (some estimates are as high as 100 million) of people systematically murdered by Soviet and Chinese Communist forces in the twentieth century were killed not merely by a few private leaders who happened to be atheists. No. These mass murders were carried out by a Marxist ideology that held atheism as one of its central components. Communism (or Dialectical Materialism) is a naturalistic and atheistic ideology by its very nature. Atheists may claim that these dictators were not representing true atheism, but without God objective human dignity, value, and purpose seem morally arbitrary and unjustified. So couldn’t Stalin and Mao reasonably argue that their regime’s murderous acts were consistent with their materialistic, atheistic philosophy?'' http://www.reasons.org/podcasts/straight-thinking/by-the-numbers-more-de... ''“With me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?” Several thinkers have argued that the worldview of naturalism (nature as the sole reality) involves a fundamental state of epistemological incoherence or is self-defeating in nature.2 Additionally, consistent with Darwin’s original uneasiness, a growing contingent of theists thinks it is irrational to believe in evolutionary naturalism in particular. Why? Because it fails to provide a viable pathway to ensure that humans develop reliable, true beliefs about reality.3 And the deliverances of science depend upon humans having reliable and true beliefs about the natural world. Three Strikes Against Evolutionary Naturalism? The idea that atheistic, evolutionary naturalism can reliably account for man’s rational faculties and explain how human beings can discover truth faces three potential defeaters.4 Naturalism Postulates a Nonrational Source for Man’s Rationality. If a person accepts the evolutionary naturalistic worldview then he must also accept that the ultimate source of people’s reasoning faculties was not itself rational (endowed with reason), personal (self-aware, intelligent), or teleological (purposive) in nature. Rather, the source was a nonrational, impersonal, purposeless process consisting of a combination of genetic mutations, variation, and environmental factors (natural selection). Naturalism therefore postulates that a combination of random chance and blind impersonal natural processes (physical and chemical in nature) produced humanity’s rational faculties. However, presuming that a nonrational, chance origin explains human intelligence raises legitimate questions about whether human reason can be trusted. According to the presumptions of science, an effect requires an adequate and sufficient cause, and indeed that effect cannot be greater than the cause. But in the case of evolution, the effect of human intelligence is magnitudes (or, exponentially) greater than its supposed cause. The naturalist appears to have adopted a potentially self-defeating posture: He is assuming a trustworthy reasoning process only to conclude that his reasoning is ultimately untrustworthy.'' http://www.reasons.org/articles/the-triune-god-is-love http://www.reasons.org/articles/astronomical-evidences-for-the-god-of-th...
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 34 weeks 3 days ago Page Robert L. Johnson
    Never would I disagree that central political "authority" is made up of religious/political Trojan Horses. And that wars, especially "Middle-Eastern wars", have pervaded history. Most who write about "Jews" and/or "Abrahamic religions" have no clue, but they express underlying anger towards the science of rulership. That is merely one of the "sciences" that deals with social engineering, and dates back to the beginning of recorded history. For example, when one writes or talks about "Jews" or "Jewish" s/he should be referring to individuals born into a relatively small tribe of a large family in history. The tribe was Judah; the family, Israel. Yet Lumpenproletariats generally lump the entire group into the smattering, as do writers for mainstream media. They can detect the religious/state incestuousness, and they can see particular religious groups as culprits in the villainy of lobbying for state favors. But how that parleys into the evils of political authority is elusive. Few ever get the chance see the forest. The trees are constantly in the way. Therefore, the phenomenon we call "anarchy" never really gets a chance to bud. I'm reminded of the way John Hasnas phrased it: "...this uninquisitive mental attitude is absolutely essential to the case for the state. For if people were ever to seriously question whether government is really productive of order, popular support for government would almost instantly collapse…” Now before you judge that I'm saying I have this special gift of viewing the forest, please understand: I don't. I am a sovereign state. The forest really doesn't concern me. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 34 weeks 3 days ago Web link Westernerd
    From the article (conclusion): "...The bankrupt political establishment has given us Trump as surely as Victor Frankenstein gave his community the monster. I'm all for revolting against the establishment, but we will regret making the authoritarian and boorish Trump the standard bearer of that revolt..." I'm a sovereign state. Nobody has "given me" Trump or anybody else. When they try, I refuse and reject. For my money they can select and/or elect Jack the Ripper to be grand wizard of their klan. I'll have no reason to regret who they choose. It will have no effect upon my survival tactics, or those of my family. My Standard Bearer maintains the rotation of the earth on its axis. I'm sticking with The Incumbent. Sam
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 34 weeks 6 days ago Web link Westernerd
    Excellent article
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 35 weeks 5 hours ago Page Robert L. Johnson
    Excellent article, Robert. Too many people are afraid to point out the obvious about Israel's leaders' actions; politicians in the US will certainly never question them, much less the corporate media whores.
  • Amerikagulag's picture
    Amerikagulag 35 weeks 7 hours ago Web link Westernerd
    ISIS: ISRAELI SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE. Joined at the hip with the US military. All this bruhaha in the middle east has a darker underlying purpose - that of creating the "Greater Israel". Apparently 'god' told these loonies that all the land between the Nile and the Euphrates was theirs. So they're foreclosing on the mortgage with the help of the US and its military. http://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-mid... The sad part is that supposedly civilized people believe this is actually a valid reason for genocide. I suppose if Syria would just give in to a Rothschild central bank, things might be different. Perhaps not.
  • Amerikagulag's picture
    Amerikagulag 35 weeks 7 hours ago Web link KenK
    I gave up the bible for lent, long ago and haven't gone back. Its contents speak of a tribal deity which is no more god than a spoiled, perverted child bent on revenge - and its 'chosen ones' now demonstrate that beyond cavil.
  • Amerikagulag's picture
    Amerikagulag 35 weeks 7 hours ago Web link Westernerd
    Well considering Bush's 'patriot act, military commissions act, et al, I'd say it hasn't survived the last 2 election-type-things. I don't call them elections any more. The table it tilted, the game is rigged. The choice for the 'oval office' is already made as we discuss this. The Rothschilds dictate who site in that seat. It's just a matter of the counting. And 'they' will take care of that.
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 35 weeks 22 hours ago Web link A. Magnus
    It is even worse than this. Not only are your child's allergies a business model, so are his neurological problems (seizures, ADHD, learning disabilities, sensory processing disorders, and autism), his gastrointestinal problems, and his cancer. Parents and health professionals are increasingly catching on to this scam and opting out. Naturally, the fascists do not like it when savvy people threaten their revenue streams, so they are increasingly pushing for vaccine mandates, and not just for kids.
  • emartin's picture
    emartin 36 weeks 1 day ago
    Jackass Abiding
    Page Paul Hein
    If someone was a coward and wanted to hide it. Wouldn't they pretend that being law-abiding was of the utmost importance?
  • Higgs Boson's picture
    Higgs Boson 36 weeks 1 day ago
    Jackass Abiding
    Page Paul Hein
    You are one of my favorite writers. Have followed you for many years. I registered on Strike-The-Root just so I could tell you that.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 36 weeks 1 day ago
    Jackass Abiding
    Page Paul Hein
    My own ruminations on the law: http://strike-the-root.com/law These days I look at the law as two things 1) a jobs program for a lot of government functionaries, and 2) a form of propaganda to keep the peons quiet and submissive. The former is self-explanatory; by the latter I mean that is creates a fantasy world in which justice is dispensed equally to all, but the reality of course is that the law applies only to the peons. The main distinguishing characteristic of the ruling class and its minions is that the law in reality does not apply to them (although now and then a minion might be thrown under the bus if he has not adequately done his job for the rulers). It's true that despite the above, which is lately becoming more and more visible, there are still a lot of peons who make a fetish of obeying the law (particularly the conservatives - or that recent term for them, the "cuckservatives"). All I can figure out about them is that they have a dearth of self respect.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 36 weeks 1 day ago Web link KenK
    Define "God".
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 36 weeks 2 days ago Web link KenK
    ...And the Jews cried out ,we have no King but Ceasar. > http://www.hisholychurch.org/sermon/idiots.php
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 36 weeks 2 days ago Web link KenK
    Professional statist Dick Dawkins is a hypocrite. The statist religion has murdered,imprisoned and terrorized more than any (non)-entity you may name. He sets up a straw man to knock down. Hey,it's the lesser of two-evils, Right? A quibble about definitions. A Christian would be someone who follows Christ. Christiandom, is the devils attempt at subverting those followers, by a joinder with the State. Remember who controlls the kingdoms of this world? Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 10Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Do you remember all of the Christians who were put to death in the Roman Empire? They were not put to death because they were Christians. In Rome, you could believe anything you wanted to believe, just as long as you swore by the genius of Caesar; just as long as you said, 'Caesar is Lord.' Christians were put to death not because they were Christians, but because they were called traitors and treasonous individuals, because they would not swear allegiance to the State. All down through history, Christians have been put to death because they said, 'Jesus Christ is Lord.' For the Christian, it is idolatry, which above all else, constitutes treason to the social order. We know, and we believe, that God is True and His Word is True. Disobedience and unfaithfulness to God is idolatry; it is treason. "Christianity in its true sense puts an end to the State. It was so understood from its very beginning, and also for that Christ was crucified." The martyrs of the christians,a derogatory term at the time,grew true christianity in the face of terrible persecutions. This distressed Constantine, something had to be done or else the TRUTHS of this christianity cult MAY TAKE OVER THE WORLD PEACEABLY. If you cannot destroy from the outside,you infiltrate. Modern day imperial government knows the lesson well. The Scriptures have a few themes that seem to run from beginning to end. One happens to be The rejection of God for the creation imperial government. Could even the very elect be deceived? I know precious few(the remnant) who call themselves Christians, who are not dyed in the wool Statists. God made man. Man hates God. Man made Government. The creation(government) now rules over the creator.(man) No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. God commands to have no one before him, for he is jealous. Man says ''I will have your first-fruits. You are my slave.'' God commands thou shall not kill. Man says ''Sally forth and spread my statist religion with the edge of a sword.'' It is always interesting to go back, and look again at the Ten Commandments and see which things God says actually are transcendant. What do we find there? As far as obligation and responsibility goes, the story looks like this. First Commandment: Our primary obligation is to God; all other obligations are secondary. Second Commandment: We must worship God and avoid the worship of all idols and secondary commitments. Third Commandment: God says that we may not empty the worship of God of meaning. Fourth Commandment: God has made a day of worship for us to spend with Him; we must keep it. We must not cause others to work on this day. Fifth commandment: God says that we have an obligation to our immediate family. Sixth Commandment: God says that we have a commitment to our fellow men not to kill them. Seventh Commandment: God says that we have a definite commitment to our spouse and to other married couples. Eighth Commandment: God says that we have an obligation to respect the property rights of others. Ninth Commandment: God says that we have an obligation to deal with other people truthfully and to guard their reputations. Tenth Commandment: God says that we are not to desire the spouses or possessions of others. And so, a look at the Ten Commandments reveals three circles of commitments: (1) To God first. (2) To our spouse and other couples, and to our immediate familiy. (3) To our fellow man, in not killing him, telling untruths about him, stealing from him, or causing him to work on Sabbath. Commitment to national units is nowhere to be found: not in the Ten Commandments; not in the teachings of Jesus; not in the teachings of Paul, or anywhere else in the New Testament. What are Christ's words that no one in ChristianDUMB can find these day? Christ Jesus has said; “And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.21 Luke 22:25 ..."But ye shall not be so." Jesus said in Matthew 20:25 “But Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you Mar 10:42 But Jesus called them [to him], and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. Mar 10:43 But so shall it not be among you Will you accept Christ Jesus's words? Or will you compromise the incorrect interpretation of romans13,that keeps one floundering in the morass of cognitive dissonance. Romans 13 was Hitlers favorite verse. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. Romans 13:8-10 (no tax,no tribute,no voting,as that is a trespass and a violence to your neighbors.) Mat 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets. and Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment. Mat 22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (No room for a Government of rulers here.) The next verses are prophetic and point to the rulers(kings) and their creatures(corporations,merchants) and how we should ''come out of the mystery babylon.'') Rev 18:3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. + 2Cr 6:17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you, 2Cr 6:18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 36 weeks 3 days ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Feds trying to whip up an incident to justify the impending Waco conclusion. WTF is this "town armory" thing? Dont know of any towns in America that stockpile arms & ammo.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 36 weeks 4 days ago Web link KenK
    Good for Dawkins. Except for the late Mr. Hitchens none of other so-called iconoclast evangelical atheists don't say sh*t about religious denominations except for Christians. Judaism, Hindus, Muslims nadda. Very little honesty in public debate any more. Maybe it's fear of ostracism or in the case of Muslims injury or death.
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 36 weeks 6 days ago Web link KenK
    I agree with that, but don't you think that many U.S. Christian churches are CURRENTLY just as death-crazed, except that they are expressing such a mentality through honoring and supporting the members of the armed forces, an avenue which is considered more civilized than shouting in street demonstrations and supporting acts of non-state terrorism?
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 36 weeks 6 days ago Web link KenK
    Islam, being the younger religion, is still going through the growth stages. . . Christianity was just as violent, just as death-crazed and misogynist as modern Islam - it was just 500 or so years ago instead of RIGHT F'N NOW! How do people think that the Dark Ages came to be? Rainbows and unicorn farts?
  • D. Saul Weiner's picture
    D. Saul Weiner 36 weeks 6 days ago Web link KenK
    I have nothing positive to say about the way that Islam is practiced in many parts of the world. But I would note that it does not seem to promote abominable behavior everywhere. In the U.S., it seems to be practiced quite peacefully. And while we may not associate Christianity with suicide-bombers and overt misogyny, there are plenty of Christian warmongers who have done much more to promote death and destruction worldwide (via the vehicle of the State) than freelance Muslims will ever likely accomplish. But again, I would not generalize to Christianity in total here, since there are also peace-loving Christians and sects of Christianity. It is too bad that Dawkins (and so many other Statists, who think that they are Atheists) can't grasp this reality.  
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 36 weeks 6 days ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Gratuitous advice. Learn to hunt & fish. Gutting & scaling fish is easy, as are birds. Because you never know when the Dear Leader is gonna classify all the little meat stores and cattle operation kulaks, and shut em down.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 36 weeks 6 days ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    I get most of mine from longtime family owned meat store that butcher & prepares it themselves. I trust them to do it right & have never had a problem in over a decade of patronage. So it can be done. Whole Foods sells meat tho it's pricey.
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 37 weeks 4 hours ago Web link Westernerd
    A lot of good, if depressing points, but at the end, this author shied away from the obvious conclusion as nearly all others seem to do. After illustrating the pitfalls of government very clearly, instead of taking the obvious leap, Anarchy, he defaults to the tired old trope of minarchy. That's what the founders set up in the first place, and the Constitution was their best effort to boilerplate it shut. That lasted all of about "four-score and seven years", so what makes ~anyone~ think another cleverly worded document can do better? Remember, Anarchy is an absence of ~rulers~, not an absence of rules or order.