Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, but what happens when there is a dispute between two members of society and they can't resolve it on their own?You don't establish anarchy....You just STFU, MYOB, live-and-let-live, carry your own weight, peacably trade with your neighbors, and it just happens.
I don't disagree. I was just making the point that none of us have the same goals.Disagree with your ratios.
It's roughly 1/4 vs. 1/4, while the other half of us lay low and get shafted nonetheless.
[
Or, it's time for things to change here, peacefully or otherwise. Why should we have to leave. Make us.
So, a big, fat, huge, all-powerful, FedZilla central government is a really bad idea?
I completely agree.
Societies work when most people therein have the same goals. Half our nation give not one single fuck about some rights, with the other half give no shit about other rights. It's a war over who can fuck us out of which rights.
.
Why is it that a large portion of our population hated what the founders did and want to remove it?That has to be one of the stupidest statements ever made on this message board!
The U.S. government has been the single greatest institution in this world for protecting people's rights!
The very concept of people having rights was initiated by the founding fathers of this nation.
You may want to go back to the days of Kings and slaves, but the rest of us prefer modern government.
Sorry if that limits all you 'would be' kings.
Typical leftist argument.Gubmint is the primary perpetrator of economic and social injustice, Karl.When there is gross economic or social injustice it's the government's responsibility protect the American people - to provide for the common defense.
There is no real government in Somalia, have you ever thought about moving there?
Begging the question.Yes, but what happens when there is a dispute between two members of society and they can't resolve it on their own?You don't establish anarchy....You just STFU, MYOB, live-and-let-live, carry your own weight, peacably trade with your neighbors, and it just happens.
BOOM. Government. The state is born.
It's not that I want anarchy to be impossible. It just is. There is nothing I can do about it.
That's wrong. The tribe might kill you for treason. Otherwise you were free to do what you liked.They had leaders. There was no organized means of compulsion. You are redefining government to the point of meaninglessness.They already had government. All they brought it with them. The Indians lived there for thousands of years with no formal government. They had no means of enforcing laws other than social pressure.
once again your knowledge of history is lacking, to put it nicely.
All of the Indian tribes had a system of governing with leaders and rules.
Yes they did, you followed the rules of the leaders or you were killed or banished. Seems a pretty good means of compulsion.
That attitude is at the core of his "progressive" attitudes...Misquote, take out of context, and exploit the vagaries of the Constitution, in order to undermine and subvert it.Why is it that a large portion of our population hated what the founders did and want to remove it?That has to be one of the stupidest statements ever made on this message board!
The U.S. government has been the single greatest institution in this world for protecting people's rights!
The very concept of people having rights was initiated by the founding fathers of this nation.
You may want to go back to the days of Kings and slaves, but the rest of us prefer modern government.
Sorry if that limits all you 'would be' kings.
.
It may be our only choice. What I really want is for Washington to stay the fuck out of Texas (or let Texas be independent). If that eventually requires bloodshed, some things are worth more than my own life.that is a choice as well. let me know how that works out for you, I do wish you luck.
This "thing" does not efficiently or effectively address the needs of the people the way small, close groups do. But, we can't even agree to let states have the power they had in the beginning, before the union was formed. We can't even agree to break up the power to state levels. We are not united. That is a lie. This "union" has lost it's benefit.it is neither good nor bad, it is just a thing.
Yes. We are on the same page.That is a big problem, I agree. I have put forth a few times on this fourm it might be time to end the grand experiment and break up the union. I think that 6 or so smaller nations could be formed based upon common geography and needs.
Or maybe that is too big for you and you think we should have 50 individual nations each fighting each other for resources.
But, what happens when Tanto is fucking Shitting Bull's wife and Shitting Bull finds out about it? What about when Plays With His Dick steals Wipes His Ass With Poison Ivy's bow? How does such a social group resolve these problems?That's wrong. The tribe might kill you for treason. Otherwise you were free to do what you liked.
Anyone who accepts it as a legitimate function of government.Who deserves being shaken down to support a violent protection racket?We get what we deserve because we've allowed government to claim far, far too much power over society.
Well, that's a relief...I don't deserve it.Anyone who accepts it as a legitimate function of government.Who deserves being shaken down to support a violent protection racket?We get what we deserve because we've allowed government to claim far, far too much power over society.
Typical leftist argument.Gubmint is the primary perpetrator of economic and social injustice, Karl.When there is gross economic or social injustice it's the government's responsibility protect the American people - to provide for the common defense.
There is no real government in Somalia, have you ever thought about moving there?
Read about common law. Methods for settling disputes were not created by the king. Over the centuries the common people developed their own system for setting disputes which was entirely separate from the central government. It evolved organically. It's the system of law mentioned in the Constitution: common law.But, what happens when Tanto is fucking Shitting Bull's wife and Shitting Bull finds out about it? What about when Plays With His Dick steals Wipes His Ass With Poison Ivy's bow? How does such a social group resolve these problems?That's wrong. The tribe might kill you for treason. Otherwise you were free to do what you liked.
I understand your general sentiment, and I am not your opponent, but I have continued to prove that government is inevitable. Thomas Jefferson loathed all government, but in his writings he lamented the fact that he had reached the same conclusion.
Somalia has multiple governments that wage war on each other. It's a feudal state, not an anarchy.Typical leftist argument.Gubmint is the primary perpetrator of economic and social injustice, Karl.When there is gross economic or social injustice it's the government's responsibility protect the American people - to provide for the common defense.
There is no real government in Somalia, have you ever thought about moving there?
It is not a argument, it is a suggestion. You claim that things are better without a central government, well we have a country right now that is in that state of being. Do you think things are better there than they are here under this central government?
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Somalia has multiple governments that wage war on each other. It's a feudal state, not an anarchy.Typical leftist argument.Gubmint is the primary perpetrator of economic and social injustice, Karl.When there is gross economic or social injustice it's the government's responsibility protect the American people - to provide for the common defense.
There is no real government in Somalia, have you ever thought about moving there?
It is not a argument, it is a suggestion. You claim that things are better without a central government, well we have a country right now that is in that state of being. Do you think things are better there than they are here under this central government?
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Most of Europe was governed by hereditary monarchies, but no longer. Most governments of South America are far less tyrannical today than they were 100 years ago.Governments seldom "evolve" in the direction of freedom and liberty. They almost always go in the other direction, like Venezuela.
Anarchy actually did exist. Prior to the rise of the state, farming communities existed for thousands of years with no formal government. Most tribes in North America no formal government.Somalia has multiple governments that wage war on each other. It's a feudal state, not an anarchy.Typical leftist argument.Gubmint is the primary perpetrator of economic and social injustice, Karl.
There is no real government in Somalia, have you ever thought about moving there?
It is not a argument, it is a suggestion. You claim that things are better without a central government, well we have a country right now that is in that state of being. Do you think things are better there than they are here under this central government?
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Anarchy is like socialism in that neither have ever existed in the true form...just varying degrees
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
