What hope is there for the US?
Posted by freedomforall 2 months, 3 weeks ago to Politics
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
I said it before here that Freedom = Responsibility and responsibility = Freedom. You can not have one without the other, unless you compel others to be your slaves. (of course I was jumped all over by the idiot Listerine-spewing, EWE).
What frustrates the crap out of me, is people giving up on this argument. Religion is not a solution to change anyone's mind, yet the Religican's continue instituting Christianity in government. The above is simple, logical, rational and fair. Progressive ideology is none of that, but forced, totalitarian slavery, while asserting fair practice is actually forced.
― Ronald Reagan
Once America falls, the whole planet will enter Dark Age 2.0.
There will be nowhere to go.
When you get the time, please read Joel C. Rosenberg's amazing 5-book series:
The Last Jihad (2002)
The Last Days (2003)
The Ezekiel Option (2005)
The Copper Scroll (2006)
Dead Heat (2008)
In the first book, The Last Jihad, the main character Jon Bennett meets a Messianic Jew named Eli Mordechai. Mordechai becomes Jon's mentor and advisor (like the Mordechai in the Bible).
He used to run the Mossad, and can see around corners. Here's what he had to say about us Americans, every time we got caught with our pants down during an attack:
“The problem with you Americans is that you don't believe in evil. A man like Saddam Hussein, for example. Saddam tells the world for years that he has a territorial claim on Kuwait. Builds up his armed forces. Develops weapons of mass destruction. Moves troops to the border. Signals everyone he's going in. But all the boys and girls at the CIA and DIA say Saddam won't do it. Just saber-rattling. Just flexing his muscles. Couldn't possibly invade. Why would he? It would make no sense. It would be irrational. No arab nation has ever invaded another arab nation. Why start now? Saddam was painting us a road map, and you simply didn't believe he'd start the car and take the trip. Saddam Hussein was not a lunatic and in that case, he wasn't a liar. He was rational and calculating and evil. So he told the world what he was going to do – commit an act of evil, not an act of madness – and then he did it. It took a bunch of highly paid analysts with Harvard degrees to completely miss the simplicity of the moment.”
“I believe the terrorist is both capable and prone to acts of unspeakable evil, and you don't. I'm right, and you're wrong. It's not because I know more than your government. I don't. I know less. But I believe that evil forces make evil people do evil things. That's how I anticipate what can and will happen next in life. That's how I got to be the head of the Mossad, young man. And why I'm good at it. It's going to be one hell of an August, and my country is going to suffer very badly because your country doesn't believe in evil, and mine was born out of the ashes of the Holocaust” – “The Last Jihad”, by Joel C. Rosenberg
Pray for America, but keep your powder dry.
Or as my dad sang in WWII "Praise the Lord, and Pass the Ammunition"
we need a system in place similar to the one in the book StarShip Troopers
as was planned when it was done by politicians, giving the vote to all over 18 just meant the politicians buy votes by giving away other people's stuff, to those that did not earn it, the Gate-Keepers of the Supreme Court have ignored their duty to stop that from happening
This is why the founding fathers put a republic in place rather than a democracy. And in a legitimate republic, the vote is granted only to land owners, as they are the ones with skin in the game. Giving the vote to moochers and looters ensures that mooching and looting will continue, and even accelerate.
Nevertheless, it kept lots of idiots happily pacified.
What we need is no system: voluntarism and the free market. As soon as you use violence illegitimately (to 'enforce' made up 'laws'), all bets are off. You are violating reciprocity in relationships between individuals. Why would I want to play fair if you aren't? Fuck you then... I'm letting this motherfucker burn down. In fact, maybe I'll throw some gasoline on the fire...
I don't know why you think existence of 'bad' people would suddenly make no-system not work. Please explain your reasoning. I would assume it is because you think everyone would devolve into raping and pillaging without a state.
Obviously, the free market has a solution. I did propose a way to deal with it. Allow the free market to spawn insurance-like security agencies that would collect restitution (by force if necessary) from violators. This is assuming a 'universal law' can be developed (via logic, not having these agencies declare and enforce arbitrarily laws), and also assuming this universal law (by logic) allows restitution based justice system.
I would argue that the current situation is worse than if the free market was allowed to work. See, the state currently prevents good quality service of this type from existing by monopolizing this area of the market, then not providing the service. For example, current law is punishment based, not restitution based. So, victims can't even get paid back damages in most cases. Also, sometimes police refuse to go into some areas, thereby depriving their 'customers' of security services. Also, the states are basically huge mafia organizations that sometimes go to war against each other, causing a great deal of destruction and harm to their 'customers'. So, I would argue the current situation is worse than in the no-system scenario.
Also, I believe that people are generally good, otherwise civilization wouldn't exist. What causes them to turn 'bad' is the SYSTEM. It enslaves them. They feel it but they are unable to figure out what is actually going on. They return the favor by stealing back what was stolen. The problem is, most of the time they rape and pillage the wrong entity. My proposal is, stop the enslavement and you solve most of the problem.
And what makes you think the "security agencies" would operate on any moral basis. It sounds a lot like "protection money" paid to the mob.
I don't see that as a major improvement.
No, the security agencies would take voluntary payments only. The mob (and the state) payments are always involuntary. The non-aggression principle needs to become ingrained in society.
The idea is that the security agencies would forcefully bring the mob, the states and any other security agency that decides to go rogue to justice. Of course, the only way that would happen is if the collective power of the 'good' security agencies is much greater than that of the 'bad' security agencies. I don't know yet how this would take place except maybe if the masses suddenly begin to see their governments as their enemies, stop supporting them financially and begin supporting their abolition.
The person who was murdered was already selling their time in exchange for money. Everyone does that, btw. All you have to do is multiply their hourly rate by the time they had left over in their life (minus sleep and work). This would be deposited with the murdered person's estate. I would presume there would also be additional damages to third parties which need to be paid.
Go Galt.