While We Wait: Writer's Block & Other Lame Excuses

Status
Not open for further replies.
hey, that's all on the federalists
Look man, TJ signed the Louisiana Purchase, and James K. Polk was totally a D-R guy before Jackson split them up, so I won't abide somebody saying the D-Rs were totally innocent in the whole empire-building business.

All these things I said are bad are institutions of violence.
How do you propose establishing the inviolable sovereignty of the individual?
 
It's almost as if Americans overwhelmingly don't like or want Libertarianism.

While it may be true Americans are overwhelming not right-wing libertarian, Congress is a miserably unrepresentative body and serves as poor evidence for that kind of claim Symphony.
 
hey, that's all on the federalists

Who were also the only ones with any clue what the hell they were doing in economic policy. It makes choosing sides between the D-R's and the Feds pretty rough.

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhh, Louisiana, Haiti, and genocide can all be plopped at Jefferson's feet. I actually think the D-Rs were pretty clearly inferior in ALL things. ;)
 
While it may be true Americans are overwhelming not right-wing libertarian, Congress is a miserably unrepresentative body and serves as poor evidence for that kind of claim Symphony.
This is true. Broad-based American support for socialist programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, government-mandated education, government-mandated redistribution of wealth between states, etc., does however indicate that the majority is in fact supportive of things that are distinctly anti-Libertarian in character. As Amon himself has suggested, the vast majority of people supposedly in favor of "smaller" government are not willing to take the steps to actually make it smaller, whatever their pledges to Grover Norquist.

Shadowbound has already made an interesting remark in this very thread about a common perspective by people who are supposedly in favor of cutting entitlements: they often want to cut (or prevent the creation of) entitlements for other people. (Ironically, this spirit of self-interest is quite similar to what Ayn Rand advocated for the creation of.)

One is forced to conclude at any rate that because American government is still standing, most people do in fact support it, or at least a sufficient number of people to enable it to continue operating. As May of 1968 in France proved, should the people stop supporting the system en masse, the system will seize up. Whether vocal or tacit, support is support. If you believe that the government is a violent and coercive entity, then it's logical to label its supporters as accomplices in what you perceive to be its crimes. You might even take the step of labeling them enemies, in which case they would likely return the favor.
 
Look man, TJ signed the Louisiana Purchase, and James K. Polk was totally a D-R guy before Jackson split them up, so I won't abide somebody saying the D-Rs were totally innocent in the whole empire-building business.


How do you propose establishing the inviolable sovereignty of the individual?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Territory

This way. We have to assemble voluntarily and use force to assert ourselves as government uses force to assert itself. There are a lot of libertarians that are much more pacifist than I on the "how do we get there", but they are living in a dream world where those with power magically decide one day that they're going to give up that control. Nothing short of full-scale 'I'm a HUMAN BEING, God damn it! My life has VALUE!', will get us our sovereignty. And even then we have to beware of the commies next door, or eventually end up as another province of some other government as those in the Free Territory did.
 
We have to assemble voluntarily and use force to assert ourselves as government uses force to assert itself.
So am I correct in interpreting this agenda as being advocacy for the forceful acquisition of territory from the United States?
 
No. You should interpret is as people assembling in collective self defense from governments who constantly threaten death or kidnapping on us if we act in a way that government deems undesirable.

Territory is not the issue. Recognition of our self ownership is the issue. If governments tomorrow gave a pheasable opt out, libertarians would have no need to assemble in self defense, because government would have, in that policy shift, ceased to infringe on our sovereignty.

I see no problem with the use of force against those who's livelihood is based off infringing on your self ownership, however, and in reality that's the only effective way to take power from those who wield it. The more pacifist approaches to this problem are immoral because they inherently hand over the problem of government to the next generation and so on 'till one day magically government disappears (Not gonna happen).
 
There is an opt-out, actually. There s absolutely nothing stopping you from moving out to a tiny uninhabited island in the middle of the pacific where nobody knows you are there and establishing your own sovereignty. Or like an abandoned oil rig or something.

As long as you don't loudly declare your independence from Tonga or wherever they'll likely never know of your existence.

I don't know why more libertarians don't do that. Might be because building a community of like minded people from scratch without any support from a government or government-minded entity when your community is based around refusal to cooperate with eachother is hard or something.

Or maybe they've already done it and we don't even know. Who is John Galt.
 
You don't have any sovereignty... What makes you think you do? Nor do you have ownership of anything...

Docile slaves OP. Maybe this will help you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZAu22NYI4E

Grandkhan, fail argument. Which island isn't claimed by a government? My goal isn't just to live free myself, which I do. I live my life as if there is no government to the best of my ability, and try to wake others up from the matrix. My goal is to help others realize that we need to abolish the next worst thing to slavery, citizenry.

We realized slavery was bad, we abolished it. We realized serfdom was bad, we abolished it. When people realize that being a citizen and being held to some nonsense social contract that you never signed off on is still involuntary servitude, there will more people like me wanting to abolish it.

"Well what happens when you don't have the government? Everything's gonna turn to crap!" Dumb argument that I know you're getting to so I'll stop you right there. The same questions were being asked when slavery and serfdom was abolished. The answer is simple: It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that we abolish evil wherever we can. We will get along just fine after governments are no longer enforcing their will on us, just as we got along fine after task masters stopped cracking their whips, and lords stopped forcing us to work their fields, and people stopped offering human sacrifices to the sun god, and so forth.

Sooner or later, it is my hope, we can actually live freely. You guys are slowing our progress by being so passive about your enslavement.
 
If the libertarians claimed an island, I would quickly visit to try and find traces of guano so I could claim it for the USA.
 
If the libertarians claimed an island, I would quickly visit to try and find traces of guano so I could claim it for the USA.

I would hope someone would have the courtesy on behalf of the libertarians to plaster the place with napalm.
 
There is an opt-out, actually. There s absolutely nothing stopping you from moving out to a tiny uninhabited island in the middle of the pacific where nobody knows you are there and establishing your own sovereignty. Or like an abandoned oil rig or something.

As long as you don't loudly declare your independence from Tonga or wherever they'll likely never know of your existence.

I don't know why more libertarians don't do that. Might be because building a community of like minded people from scratch without any support from a government or government-minded entity when your community is based around refusal to cooperate with eachother is hard or something.

Or maybe they've already done it and we don't even know. Who is John Galt.

I know! Let's get together and found an UNDERSEA community! Seabed is international waters, after all. We can call it... Rapture, maybe. Has a nice ring to it.
 
But if we're living in the matrix we can enjoy steak. And not having Ebola.
 
Grandkhan, fail argument. Which island isn't claimed by a government? My goal isn't just to live free myself, which I do. I live my life as if there is no government to the best of my ability, and try to wake others up from the matrix. My goal is to help others realize that we need to abolish the next worst thing to slavery, citizenry.

Nah, you're not getting it. All islands are claimed by governments. Not all governments care about or are capable of enforcing their direct authority on tiny uninhabited islands that nobody ever visits, which the Pacific is full of.

Set up on one of those, and don't loudly proclaim your independence from Tonga or Micronesia or whereever, and you are literally not bound by anything because nobody with the legal authority to bind you to a citizenship knows you exist.

Easy way out, its just haaaaaaard to do the actually moral thing of building a society from the foundations up rather than letting the state that you oppose so much build your society for you and then saying "cool thanks for all the infrastructure but eff off now we are sovereign" which is pretty much what you are doing.

I guess what I'm getting at here is that secession is theft.

If the libertarians claimed an island, I would quickly visit to try and find traces of guano so I could claim it for the USA.

The best thing is that it would legally be US territory because the libertarians aren't within the lawful jurisdiction nor are they citizens of that government, given that they reject citizenship.

Big government strikes again!
 
Given the example of the Free Territory in Ukraine, we can surmise that once we become big enough to notice, a government will actually enforce it's will on us, so this option isn't really doable. Not sure why you demonize the idea of governments not infringing on people's liberties. Are you gaining something from the system, or do you just like to see people enslaved? To recap, it's not about territory, the government worries about territory. It's about taking violence out of every day social interactions.
 
If the libertarians claimed an island, I would quickly visit to try and find traces of guano so I could claim it for the USA.

MIDWAY was claimed under this act? PROVIDENCE truly smiles upon our blessed Union.



Also, citizenry is the most important concept that has emerged from Western political thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom