Can anyone tell me about Politics....

[BuckToothMoron]

I'm willing to learn about politics basic theory. I'm going to study it. Can you explain what is the politics...

Ok, I’m going to give you a few simple facts regarding politics and politicians.

I will start with the evil trinity of politics. They are Money, Power and Influence, and one begets the others.

Wealthy people often buy their influence making the elected official wealthier. In politics, people like Nancy Pelosi have great influence which has afforded her power and wealth. The examples are endless.

All politicians must do 3 things to be successful.
1- they must lie
2- they must compromise their own values
3- they must ask people for money

The higher in politics one rises, the more of these 3 things they have done well.

That’s a good start.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

For me, politics is the business of government policy and how that policy affects the standard of living of citizens.

The philosophy of America's founders was that individuals must have rights protected FROM government and that government should be limited so that said individual can be free, productive and prosperous. Hence, many on the right want to "conserve" those principles, hence the term "conservatives".

Many progressives (Democratic Party), on the other hand, seem to believe that government should run every facet of society and our lives. Healthcare, education, economic results (not opportunity), etc., must ALL be managed by a small group of like-minded people in an all-powerful, central government. They want endless regulations and taxes on citizens, which ultimately diminishes their productivity and their standard of living.

That’s good, yet slightly inaccurate. Politics does not only apply to governments. It is played out in business, social settings and many areas of life.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm willing to learn about politics basic theory. I'm going to study it. Can you explain what is the politics...

Ok, I’m going to give you a few simple facts regarding politics and politicians.

I will start with the evil trinity of politics. They are Money, Power and Influence, and one begets the others.

Wealthy people often buy their influence making the elected official wealthier. In politics, people like Nancy Pelosi have great influence which has afforded her power and wealth. The examples are endless.

All politicians must do 3 things to be successful.
1- they must lie
2- they must compromise their own values
3- they must ask people for money

The higher in politics one rises, the more of these 3 things they have done well.

That’s a good start.

Yup. And it gets even better.

Some people are led to believe that politics is for helping people!

AND THEY BUY IT!


.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

People could form their own militia, Private Security could be hired to patrol neighborhoods(Like they do now), and without the Government infringing on our right to defend ourselves,

Outside of gated communities, what neighborhood has hired private security to patrol their area?

Just as one example, there are neighborhoods in Seattle with Private Security. There's an entire industry for this. Amazingly, with Government infringing on people's right to defend themselves, and Road Pirates taking an average of 15 minutes to arrive, there's even more incentive for this sort of thing. Of course, regulations and an unsustainable fiat currency make it more expensive than it would be, but they're still half the price and twice as effective as Road Pirates.
Texas Town Gets Rid of Police Dept., Hires 'SEAL Security' — Guess What Reportedly Happened to Crime
A town that hired Seal Security had a drop of 61% in their crime rate.
This, of course, makes sense. They're not working for an organization which claims legitimate use of the initiation of force, they have to worry about losing their jobs, because as anyone who isn't an economic illiterate would know, having a monopoly on anything is bad. This means, naturally, replacing Police with Private Security would result in a more effective and less costly product.

EDIT:

Because the "road pirates" take so long to arrive, is why every citizen capable should take measures to ensure their own personal safety. AKA People should be armed.

Exactly, everyone should protect themselves, and hiring private security would be a preventative measure, while Road Pirates are purely reactionary. They're basically just for paper work.

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Outside of gated communities, what neighborhood has hired private security to patrol their area?

Just as one example, there are neighborhoods in Seattle with Private Security. There's an entire industry for this. Amazingly, with Government infringing on people's right to defend themselves, and Road Pirates taking an average of 15 minutes to arrive, there's even more incentive for this sort of thing. Of course, regulations and an unsustainable fiat currency make it more expensive than it would be, but they're still half the price and twice as effective as Road Pirates.
Texas Town Gets Rid of Police Dept., Hires 'SEAL Security' — Guess What Reportedly Happened to Crime
A town that hired Seal Security had a drop of 61% in their crime rate.
This, of course, makes sense. They're not working for an organization which claims legitimate use of the initiation of force, they have to worry about losing their jobs, because as anyone who isn't an economic illiterate would know, having a monopoly on anything is bad. This means, naturally, replacing Police with Private Security would result in a more effective and less costly product.

EDIT:

Because the "road pirates" take so long to arrive, is why every citizen capable should take measures to ensure their own personal safety. AKA People should be armed.

Exactly, everyone should protect themselves, and hiring private security would be a preventative measure, while Road Pirates are purely reactionary. They're basically just for paper work.

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

People could form their own militia, Private Security could be hired to patrol neighborhoods(Like they do now), and without the Government infringing on our right to defend ourselves,

Outside of gated communities, what neighborhood has hired private security to patrol their area?

Just as one example, there are neighborhoods in Seattle with Private Security. There's an entire industry for this. Amazingly, with Government infringing on people's right to defend themselves, and Road Pirates taking an average of 15 minutes to arrive, there's even more incentive for this sort of thing. Of course, regulations and an unsustainable fiat currency make it more expensive than it would be, but they're still half the price and twice as effective as Road Pirates.
Texas Town Gets Rid of Police Dept., Hires 'SEAL Security' — Guess What Reportedly Happened to Crime
A town that hired Seal Security had a drop of 61% in their crime rate.
This, of course, makes sense. They're not working for an organization which claims legitimate use of the initiation of force, they have to worry about losing their jobs, because as anyone who isn't an economic illiterate would know, having a monopoly on anything is bad. This means, naturally, replacing Police with Private Security would result in a more effective and less costly product.

EDIT:

Police are accountable to the people. A security company is accountable to it's shareholders. We want the police to pursue criminals regardless of whether it's cost effective or not. Pursuing serial killers, cold cases, and organized crime are costly and more often than not fail to reach their goal. It makes no financial sense at all to spend years and millions of dollars perusing a child killer but that is exactly what police do. Security firms make a lot more money, protecting the wealthy, guarding warehouses and patrolling gated communities, a lot more than they could make pursuing criminals.

Hiring a security company to do the work of police is like hiring the boy scouts to guard a bank. Police make the money they do because of levies that the citizens pass and agree to pay for. In fact we had one here about three years ago. We passed it with flying colors. My neighborhood may be bad, but we have great police if you really have an emergency, although I would rank them pretty low with traffic stops and things like that. However the Ferguson Effect is more responsible for that.

I've never in my life had any problem with the police. They have always been helpful and courteous. I think they key on the person they are dealing with. If you're courteous and respectful, they will follow suit. If you're antagonistic with a chip on your shoulder, then their response is likely to be less than friendly. I think you have to really like people a lot to be an effective cop because you have to put up with a lot of awful shit.

Like any group of people, most are good and some are real assholes.

With video today they are much better however. As a truck driver, I get pulled over for no reason other than for them to check out my truck. As unconstitutional as it is, I understand they are just doing their job. As you pointed out, they usually return the respect I give to them.

I also understand how it is dealing with different people all day long. Again, most are okay, some are really great to work with, and others are assholes. When I confront an asshole, I report it to my employer so he is aware of a problem delivery or pickup. If I feel threatened in anyway, I just call my boss and tell him I'm not completing the delivery. If he wants, he can call the shippers boss and explain the problem to him.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Just as one example, there are neighborhoods in Seattle with Private Security. There's an entire industry for this. Amazingly, with Government infringing on people's right to defend themselves, and Road Pirates taking an average of 15 minutes to arrive, there's even more incentive for this sort of thing. Of course, regulations and an unsustainable fiat currency make it more expensive than it would be, but they're still half the price and twice as effective as Road Pirates.
Texas Town Gets Rid of Police Dept., Hires 'SEAL Security' — Guess What Reportedly Happened to Crime
A town that hired Seal Security had a drop of 61% in their crime rate.
This, of course, makes sense. They're not working for an organization which claims legitimate use of the initiation of force, they have to worry about losing their jobs, because as anyone who isn't an economic illiterate would know, having a monopoly on anything is bad. This means, naturally, replacing Police with Private Security would result in a more effective and less costly product.

EDIT:

Because the "road pirates" take so long to arrive, is why every citizen capable should take measures to ensure their own personal safety. AKA People should be armed.

Exactly, everyone should protect themselves, and hiring private security would be a preventative measure, while Road Pirates are purely reactionary. They're basically just for paper work.

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Because the "road pirates" take so long to arrive, is why every citizen capable should take measures to ensure their own personal safety. AKA People should be armed.

Exactly, everyone should protect themselves, and hiring private security would be a preventative measure, while Road Pirates are purely reactionary. They're basically just for paper work.

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

Natural resources is a reason for invasion, next! You take an organized military against a gaggle of armed anarchist enclaves, and the organized military is going to win every time.

See: Indians.

 

[Flopper]

Police are accountable to the people. A security company is accountable to it's shareholders. We want the police to pursue criminals regardless of whether it's cost effective or not. Pursuing serial killers, cold cases, and organized crime are costly and more often than not fail to reach their goal. It makes no financial sense at all to spend years and millions of dollars perusing a child killer but that is exactly what police do. Security firms make a lot more money, protecting the wealthy, guarding warehouses and patrolling gated communities, a lot more than they could make pursuing criminals.

Road Pirates are not accountable to the people, they're no more accountable than the rest of the Government, which ignores absolutely everything "we" want.
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites...testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf
They also don't serve us:
Warren v. District of Columbia - Wikipedia Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales - Wikipedia DeShaney v. Winnebago County - Wikipedia Maksim Gelman stabbing spree - Wikipedia
The Government literally admitted this. All you're doing is repeating what you've been told by your masters in Government.

A security company is accountable to it's shareholders.

Oh, so you legitimately DON'T know how the market works. You see, there are these people, they're called consumers, they buy stuff from the business. If those consumers don't buy from that business, they run out of money. Even assuming the Shareholders want to throw their money into a black hole, like economic illiterates such as yourself like to claim, nobody is obligated to buy their services.

We want the police to pursue criminals regardless of whether it's cost effective or not.

You're completely missing the point here, as you consistently have so far. You see, you either move into a neighborhood where they have hired Private Security, or you buy your own. In either case, they are there to prevent people from hurting you or depriving you of your property. Beyond that, there's nothing to use force against them for. This is cost effective, because in most cases, people aren't going to want to be shot in the face, and they can raise or lower prices according to demand. You have already said you'd like to not be hurt(Go ahead and tell me I'm wrong), which means there is demand. Now, this idea that "crime" means something bad is just silly. How does downloading music or smoking pot hurt you? It doesn't, the Government just doesn't like when people do them. There's no reason to use force against people for doing those things.

Pursuing serial killers, cold cases, and organized crime are costly and more often than not fail to reach their goal. It makes no financial sense at all to spend years and millions of dollars perusing a child killer but that is exactly what police do. Security firms make a lot more money, protecting the wealthy, guarding warehouses and patrolling gated communities, a lot more than they could make pursuing criminals.

False, if there's a demand for something, people will pay them to do it. The fact that you expressed a desire to deal with those things you mentioned is inherently proof that there would be profit incentive, and thus an industry dealing with each of those. In fact, Private Investigators already exist.

So affluent neighborhoods hire private police, the wealthy they are the more protection they get. Poorer neighbors pay protection to local gangs. Business owners pay for protection in the downtown section. In rural areas, everyone protects themselves because there's not enough residents to hire protection. Trucks travel in convoys. Travelers in rural areas become targets of gangs that roam the country preying on those that travel without sufficient security.

Since there are no governments there can be no governmental laws, no patent protection, no copyright laws, no zoning laws, no protection against stock manipulation, and no criminal or civil laws. The only justice is vigilante justice. And you consider this no government American business friendly

BTW I have owned a business for 15 years and have managed two businesses and have been managing our families portfolio of investments for over 50 years, so I would say I'm pretty knowledge of both markets and business. Business can grows and flourish only where you have goverment, laws, and law enforcement. Businesses must have stability in the community and nation to grow.

 

[Flopper]

Because the "road pirates" take so long to arrive, is why every citizen capable should take measures to ensure their own personal safety. AKA People should be armed.

Exactly, everyone should protect themselves, and hiring private security would be a preventative measure, while Road Pirates are purely reactionary. They're basically just for paper work.

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

The closest thing we have in this world to a true anarchy is South Sudan. I suggest you try it and see how you like it. You won't have to worry about any real government. No real laws except the law of jungle intermittently enforced by gangs. Business is so good in this country that the GDP has fallen by 90% in last 9 years.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Minimal Training is an assumption, there is absolutely no training that other people cannot go through. You're literally assuming that they have no training on the sole basis that they're not employed by the Government, which is blatantly retarded. If anything, they'd be trained better, because you can just get the same service elsewhere.

They ARE also better because they have no authority, it means they can only kill or hurt people in self defense or the defense of others, rather than kidnapping and imprisoning them for carrying a plant they don't like AND other people can defend themselves against them if they attempt to hurt them wrongly.

I know they don't have the training because they are what's called Peace Officers. To be certified for a peace officer, it takes two to three days of training, then testing and licensing. A police officer goes through a month or two of training. Much different. Plus there is no further training once you are a certified peace officer. With police work, they update their training all the time.

More than that is being updated on laws. A peace officer only has scant training on laws, mostly that pertains to security work. Security work and police work are two entirely different fields. Police are only allowed to use deadly force in self-defense.

Nobody gives them authority to do those things, we have literally no say in what laws are passed, and Government officials do not work for us. They've even admitted this in court cases.

I also want to further point out that you don't freaking speak for me, and neither does anyone else. A majority of people saying something, ASSUMING it's a majority, doesn't change that. None of the people in any public office represents my interests, either, they don't freaking know me. They're literally just normal people claiming to have authority over us, despite having no expressed consent in any way.

They factually are. What do you call it when someone takes property from you against your will? Gosh, that sounds exactly like robbery. Oh wait, that's because it is. They literally force you to pull over by the side of the road under threat of violence, then steal your money under threat of violence. This is how taxes work, too. They also gun people down for defending themselves when they break into their homes or assault them for doing something they don't like which doesn't hurt anyone. They also literally kidnap and imprison people, how many people are in jail for "crimes" that don't hurt anyone? 48%, if I recall correctly. They literally kidnap and imprison people for "crimes" that didn't hurt anyone. How is this not obvious to do? Oh gosh, probably because you attribute rights to them which nobody else has, as if they're above us.

Yes, they do have expressed consent via voting. We vote in our representatives, and by doing so, give them our permission to make laws.

It sounds to me your problem is living in this country. Because the US was built as a nation of laws starting with our US Constitution. Your desire is to live in a place with no laws. No laws means no civilized society. But the United States is a civilized society which is why we have laws, authority and penalties. You can't have a civilized society without them. Being placed under arrest is not kidnapping. Look up the word in the dictionary.

It's called "applying the same standards to everyone", and it's hard to do when you've been brainwashed into worshiping an organization of robbers, murderers, and kidnappers. Do you know what they do with those video cameras when they don't want people to see? They either don't get released, or they "mysteriously" fall off while they're attacking an innocent person.
Woman shot herself in the head while cuffed with hands behind her back during traffic stop in suicide, police say
Nothing strange about this at all.

Police don't attack innocent people. Police attack people who are either running away from them or are fighting with the officers.

 

[Norman]

You are going to study political science?

What a dumb choice, why not study something that is productive and useful instead?

Tips:
- Engineering.
- Mathematics.
- Computer science.
- Medicine.
- Law.
- Crafts.

You can "study" the bullshit on your own time.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Exactly, everyone should protect themselves, and hiring private security would be a preventative measure, while Road Pirates are purely reactionary. They're basically just for paper work.

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

Natural resources is a reason for invasion, next! You take an organized military against a gaggle of armed anarchist enclaves, and the organized military is going to win every time.

See: Indians.

You'd lose more than you gain, especially in a society without Government. War is, once again, extremely expensive, and that "Gaggle of armed Anarchist enclaves" has access to the same training and technology as any invading force. Your brain seems to just shut off when you see the word "Anarchist". You didn't refute a single thing I said above. If they want the resources, it's more mutually beneficial to just trade for them, hence Governments being the reason for all recent wars.

 

[Marion Morrison]

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

Natural resources is a reason for invasion, next! You take an organized military against a gaggle of armed anarchist enclaves, and the organized military is going to win every time.

See: Indians.

You'd lose more than you gain, especially in a society without Government. War is, once again, extremely expensive, and that "Gaggle of armed Anarchist enclaves" has access to the same training and technology as any invading force. Your brain seems to just shut off when you see the word "Anarchist". You didn't refute a single thing I said above. If they want the resources, it's more mutually beneficial to just trade for them, hence Governments being the reason for all recent wars.

I disagree. The organized army would gain everything.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

So affluent neighborhoods hire private police, the wealthy they are the more protection they get. Poorer neighbors pay protection to local gangs. Business owners pay for protection in the downtown section. In rural areas, everyone protects themselves because there's not enough residents to hire protection. Trucks travel in convoys. Travelers in rural areas become targets of gangs that roam the country preying on those that travel without sufficient security.

Without the Government, we'd be using a currency with actual utility, value, and purchasing power, prices would be at an all-time low, with competition at an all-time high. Even if what you said was true, which it isn't because Government is what's creating the "poor class" in the first place, a community could split the cost of private security. Also, even if there were gangs and convoys in such a hurry to be shot and simultaneously ruin their reputation, removing incentive for anyone to trade with them, it would only encourage more Private Security to offer their service in rural areas.

Besides, even if you had a point, and you don't, the Government is like a less-effective Mafia, because in their case you don't even get what you're paying for, and the Mafia can accurately allocate resources, so hiring a Mafia would be more effective than relying on Government.

Since there are no governments there can be no governmental laws, no patent protection, no copyright laws, no zoning laws, no protection against stock manipulation, and no criminal or civil laws. The only justice is vigilante justice. And you consider this no government American business friendly

All of that stuff you just listed is a benefit. Laws are just opinions written on paper. Patents, copyright, and zoning laws just artificially inflate prices and promote monopolies, due to stopping other businesses from selling the same product as a lower price(Since you view this as a benefit, you can't be all that worried about the poor), and in fact are one of the reasons the current economy and especially the healthcare industry is completely in shambles. If there's a demand for any kind of arbitration, there could be private courts, which would promote competition among courts instead of leaving them a monopoly.

BTW I have owned a business for 15 years and have managed two businesses and have been managing our families portfolio of investments for over 50 years, so I would say I'm pretty knowledge of both markets and business.

It's amazing that you've managed a business without understanding basic economics, so kudos for that.

Business can grows and flourish only where you have goverment, laws, and law enforcement. Businesses must have stability in the community and nation to grow.

Completely false, markets have existed for far longer than the Government, as people have always exchanged things for mutual benefit, and the Government does nothing but make the process less efficient, artificially inflating prices and promoting monopolies. Nothing the government does improves the process in any way, shape, or form. In fact, it has been repeatedly proven that the economy is far better in places with more economic freedom.

 

[Mike Dwight]

They literally don't make games to get people into politics like they do Accounting... Oh crap , so all there is in the world is making briefcase factories or pencil factories... And the way to do it is keep white-collar workers and blue-collar workers! I get it! Free Enterprise!

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Exactly, everyone should protect themselves, and hiring private security would be a preventative measure, while Road Pirates are purely reactionary. They're basically just for paper work.

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

The closest thing we have in this world to a true anarchy is South Sudan. I suggest you try it and see how you like it. You won't have to worry about any real government. No real laws except the law of jungle intermittently enforced by gangs. Business is so good in this country that the GDP has fallen by 90% in last 9 years.

I think you mean Early Pennsylvania, Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Medieval Ireland. If you mean TODAY, people attempting to leave "Countries" have been forced back in:


Sudan is not even remotely Anarchist, that's just another one of your uneducated strawman arguments that result from the zero research you've done, because your masters don't like educated people. They're a Constitutional Republic with president and vice president, you freaking binswanger. If you're referring to the fact that it has multiple warring Governments, then that's literally MORE statism.

Yeah, bro, things are going great. Purchasing power dropping, regulations ever increasing, no longer in the top ten on the index of economic freedom, more and more Government every day. Yeah, no.

 

[Marion Morrison]

There still needs to be law enforcement and an army, because bad people can gang up.

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

The closest thing we have in this world to a true anarchy is South Sudan. I suggest you try it and see how you like it. You won't have to worry about any real government. No real laws except the law of jungle intermittently enforced by gangs. Business is so good in this country that the GDP has fallen by 90% in last 9 years.

I think you mean Early Pennsylvania, Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Medieval Ireland. If you mean TODAY, people attempting to leave "Countries" have been forced back in:


Sudan is not even remotely Anarchist, that's just another one of your uneducated strawman arguments that result from the zero research you've done, because your masters don't like educated people. They're a Constitutional Republic with president and vice president, you freaking binswanger. If you're referring to the fact that it has multiple warring Governments, then that's literally MORE statism.

Yeah, bro, things are going great. Purchasing power dropping, regulations ever increasing, no longer in the top ten on the index of economic freedom, more and more Government every day. Yeah, no.

So nihilistic! I swear there's hope!

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I know they don't have the training because they are what's called Peace Officers. To be certified for a peace officer, it takes two to three days of training, then testing and licensing. A police officer goes through a month or two of training. Much different. Plus there is no further training once you are a certified peace officer. With police work, they update their training all the time.

So, what you're saying is that with no Government, people will go through minimal training, that way their competitors can prove that their services are better and steal all of their customers. Seems legit, dude.

You may be used to the Government cornering the market with regulatory capture, since that's all you've ever known from the Deity you worship, known as Government, however in the absence of Government, nothing is preventing businesses from entering the market.

More than that is being updated on laws. A peace officer only has scant training on laws, mostly that pertains to security work. Security work and police work are two entirely different fields. Police are only allowed to use deadly force in self-defense.

Laws are opinions written on paper, nothing needs to be done unless one person is attempting to deprive another of their property or hurt them.

I see you're still ignoring all of the cases I showed and mentioned where Road Pirates straight-up murdered people who were handcuffed in the back of a Road Pirate car, or on the hands and knees, or shot people through a door. I'd probably ignore them as well, if I were so thoroughly brainwashed. What do you think would happen to a Private Security Business if they straight-up murdered someone? Gosh, I think they'd lose all of their customers while news organizations that aren't controlled by the Government because there is no Government report the incident, causing them to go under. Meanwhile, if a Road Pirate murders someone, apparently it's barely reported on, and nothing happens to the guy. Oh, and the Government still steals your money to fund them.

Yes, they do have expressed consent via voting. We vote in our representatives, and by doing so, give them our permission to make laws.

So, they don't have consent from 100% of people below the age of 18, and 40% of eligible voters. That's not consent at all, anyway, because voting can be seen as an act of self defense, since every piece of legislation passed, which they don't care about our opinion on, further restricts our rights and gives the Government more permission, from themselves by the way, to initiate force against us.

I also want to point out that I never gave anyone permission to give consent to things for me, and a majority vote can't give consent for me, otherwise a majority of people can decide that they should be allowed to steal your property and lynch you, then that would be perfectly legitimate, because frick, a majority of people decided that was A-OKAY.

It sounds to me your problem is living in this country. Because the US was built as a nation of laws starting with our US Constitution. Your desire is to live in a place with no laws. No laws means no civilized society. But the United States is a civilized society which is why we have laws, authority and penalties. You can't have a civilized society without them. Being placed under arrest is not kidnapping. Look up the word in the dictionary.

I shouldn't have to leave everything I own to prevent an organization of robbers, murderers, and kidnappers from initiating violence against me. That's like saying that if I went through a dark ally at night, it's perfectly legitimate to stab me to death.

That Constitution just a sheet of paper, nobody consented to it, just a few guys who signed it. It's nowhere near a legitimate binding contract, and the idea that complete strangers can consent for someone else by writing their names on it is absolutely baffling.

I don't consider a group of robbers, murderers, and kidnappers sending road pirates after people who haven't hurt anyone to be civilized, nor do I consider the mass murder of unborn babies to be civilized.

Being placed "under arrest" is literally kidnapping. The Government deciding they can rename something in order to claim it's legitimate doesn't change that. That's like saying stabbing an innocent person in the face isn't murder because they were holding a plant the Government didn't like. By your logic, they can rename any act of aggression and claim it's fully legitimate. You wouldn't happen to pray three times a day while facing Washington DC, would you?

Police don't attack innocent people. Police attack people who are either running away from them or are fighting with the officers.

I just showed you numerous examples of that claim being totally false. Do you just argue by ignoring the other person? I thought that was Joe's job.

Are you, then, under the impression that wearing a blue uniform with a badge prevents someone from being held to the same standards, and suddenly makes them a paragon of all that's good in the world? I guess they're deities, to you, just like the rest of the Government.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

Natural resources is a reason for invasion, next! You take an organized military against a gaggle of armed anarchist enclaves, and the organized military is going to win every time.

See: Indians.

You'd lose more than you gain, especially in a society without Government. War is, once again, extremely expensive, and that "Gaggle of armed Anarchist enclaves" has access to the same training and technology as any invading force. Your brain seems to just shut off when you see the word "Anarchist". You didn't refute a single thing I said above. If they want the resources, it's more mutually beneficial to just trade for them, hence Governments being the reason for all recent wars.

I disagree. The organized army would gain everything.

Oh hey, no argument, just a point-blank statement refuting nothing I said. Billy, is that you?

People only need to defend themselves and their property, which Private Security is better at, due to being preventative, cheaper, and more effective. There's actual competition, while the Road Pirates are a monopoly, which takes your money regardless of performance. An army isn't needed because a Militia serves the same INTENDED purpose while actually working for the people, unlike the military which serves the Government.

What happens in the instance of an organized military invasion?

Well, for one, there's no reason for an invasion, because every war in recent history has been Governments fighting each other. Even if they did invade, well, for one, war is expensive, so they're just wasting more of their own money, and for another, they'd be repelled by the millions of people who don't want to be enslaved by yet another Government. The millions of people who have access to the same technology or better, and are capable of defending themselves, and the Militia formed to protect their investment, property, and loved ones. They'd be literally sending the invaders to their deaths, to fight nothing specific since there's no Ruler, when they could just be trading for what they want.

The closest thing we have in this world to a true anarchy is South Sudan. I suggest you try it and see how you like it. You won't have to worry about any real government. No real laws except the law of jungle intermittently enforced by gangs. Business is so good in this country that the GDP has fallen by 90% in last 9 years.

I think you mean Early Pennsylvania, Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Medieval Ireland. If you mean TODAY, people attempting to leave "Countries" have been forced back in:


Sudan is not even remotely Anarchist, that's just another one of your uneducated strawman arguments that result from the zero research you've done, because your masters don't like educated people. They're a Constitutional Republic with president and vice president, you freaking binswanger. If you're referring to the fact that it has multiple warring Governments, then that's literally MORE statism.

Yeah, bro, things are going great. Purchasing power dropping, regulations ever increasing, no longer in the top ten on the index of economic freedom, more and more Government every day. Yeah, no.

So nihilistic! I swear there's hope!

I am a nihilist, but there is hope. The Government will collapse sometime in the next ten years. Every aspect of the economy is screwed enough for that to be the case.