Traitorfish

Just because I'm curious, what exactly would you describe my political beliefs as if not Libertarian?

I think there might be a difference between libertarianism as a political system and libertarianism as a philosophy but I'm not sure.

Well, the entire story of Iceland up until the integration into the norwegian monarchy is the story of how a state can be constructed from a society on a technological parity with the rest of the known world.

Dayum! Had a YouTube article on fiscal pressure in Argentina. The only reply that the government makes is that well-dressed people worry about taxes.

I can't help but think that you'e like a society close to the Icelandic Commonwealth (sans slavery and family feuds)… am I right?

Can you read in Spanish? I have something that might interest you about taxation.

Nope!

Nope!

Hello Traitorfish! Have I convinced you of the merits of culture bombs yet?

You need to read "The Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia". Methinks you'd like it.

Nicely put on the Boston thread, my friend.

"I'm still not sure how Cooper can be against theft and endorse ... a presidential candidate."

Mainly that anti-enlightenment is an unfair, retroactive characterization of Fascism.
Certainly there's nothing pre-enlightenment about it, and it certainly did have it's roots in the enlightenment, most notably in Rousseau.
While yes, Fascism selectively absorbed 19th century criticisms of the enlightenment, they same can be said of any political ideology of the 20th century.
Fascism, in my understanding, represents a genuine disagreement with what the Enlightenment was about, just as the disagreement between Liberalism and Socialism. If I wanted to be cute, I'd say the early 20th century was marked by disagreement whether Liberte, Egalite, or Fraternitie came first.

Disappointed at how you voted in this poll. "Useful and important" doesn't necessarily mean you like them.

To answer your question regarding natural rights, I don't have the time right this minute, but I'd be willing to try in a couple days. Though I don't necessarily think I'm the best one for the job, considering my answers would tend to be more "Rights are God-given, and are naturally evident" more than "Rights are natural."

I figured a spritely, totally lucid and extremely potent 135 yet with the cantankerousness one associates with one of such experience

You're 23??? No way.

I feel the need to mention I haven't forgotten about your questions in the secession thread. They are good ones, and I haven't been able to express my ideas on paper well enough to post them.

Still watching the thread with interest.

Hey brosif, I posted a new article in A&E. I don't expect many people will care about its subject, but you might find it interesting. Give it a read? http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=460527

He is fighting for the rights of indigenous people, a cause I support wholeheartedly. EZLN has never defined itself ideologically and has several big ideological differences from the western left.

He is, he is a leader for nationalist indians and the zapatistas. I am very much inspired by them.They fight for the right of the indigenous people to own their land and their resources. They want seperatism instead of globalism. They are pro gunrights and for local power.

"To be honest, I don't think that you do. If you did, you would be able to give a coherent, straightforward explanation for its why wrong, but all you've managed so far is appeals to common sense (discovering, in the process, that your sense isn't so common). I think that, rather, you just find it squicky, and the posture of moral superiority allows you to avoid confronting your own irrational prejudices."