The WEIRD political hypocrisy of this board.

[Slade3200]

Oh now I get it... you’re an anarchist. That makes sense. Unfortunately your system is an impossibility in a country like ours. Go find a tribe in the rainforest somewhere and you might have better luck, although they likely will have a leader as well.

Has already worked for 9000+ years in Ireland, worked in Capaia, Neutral Moresnet, Pennsylvania. Not only is it a possibility, there's evidence that it has worked in other places, unlike Governments, which are completely unsustainable. You only think that it's primitive because your lord and masters in government want you to think so.

What are you talking about?! Ireland has a parliamentary system and a prime minister. They are not an anarchist country. And again without an organized central government there is no military protection, no currency for trade and no organized system to take care of basic infrastructure needs of a nation of our size. We are not playing cowboys and Indians anymore nor are we living in tribes. Your idea is fun in theory but utterly impossible in reality

They were Anarchy until the statist barbarians invaded. I would say that you should have figured that I was referring to medieval Ireland, but since you're a statist yourself, I would be expecting too much. You fail a lot of "Connect The Dots" activities, don't you? I'd also like to point out that you latched onto what you, ignorantly, thought was an inconsistency and failed to address my other citations. Is that an admission that you're wrong?

Ireland's ability to fend off attacks from statists for 9000+ years is evidence in and of itself that a central government is not needed for an army. America also formed a militia without a state, and every individual in any society does not need the government to arm themselves and defend their own homes. In fact, they are much stronger without a government, since a government restricts the abilities of the citizens to own and bear whatever arms they please. The only reason there's a state military in the first place is so that the government can initiate force for its own self-interest.

Government is not needed for currency, and in fact they replace currency with actual value with their unsustainable fiat currency. The demand for the US dollar is a result of the government pointing its guns at demanding that they trade with their worthless paper. With no supply cap and little utility, the US dollar will eventually collapse, and that's all a government does as far as currency. People would otherwise naturally trade with currencies with actual value, supply cap, and utility, examples include crypto currencies, precious metals, and literally anything one person values enough to trade another thing for.

Government is not needed for infrastructure, if there's a demand for something, people will already pay for it willingly. The only reason a government would need to get involved is if people don't want to pay for something, in which case there's no demand. Private industry already builds roads, for example.

How in the world do you think comparing medieval Ireland to modern day USA makes any sort of sense?! Even within your utopian medieval Ireland you will find systems of leaders within each tribe and community. Usually the stronger tribes killed raped and pillaged to take over the weaker tribes. Sounds fun but I’ll take a civilized society over that any day of the week. Also if it worked so well it would still exist today.

So, you're just going to keep ignoring my other citations which thoroughly debunk your statist nonsense. Besides, he difference between their 'leaders' and your United States is that their worker groups were completely voluntary and people could come and go as they please(I think they were called Tuaths) while the US uses force and coercion to make you obey their selected "leaders". Furthermore, the groups didn't force you to live how they demand, under the threat of imprisonment or death.

You also have no citations to back up your claim that without the threat of government, people kill and rape each other willy nilly, and even if they did, the US Police's response times of 15 minutes on average certainly isn't doing anything to stop it, nor is their disarmament of victims. A damn good job it's doing in Chicago, for example. Oh, and let's not forget that when the police DO finally get there, they murder the armed citizens like the well-trained professionals they are.

Private security sure as hell wouldn't kill the citizens, unlike the armed thugs we nonsensically refer to as police, or the law.

There's also the government's tendency to pick fights with other governments for its own benefit, like the war for oil recently, and replacing the "leader" in Ukrain with a plant which baited Russia into attacking them, so the US could start a war with them to force them into accepting their worthless fiat currency.

I prefer to try and limit my posts to contain a one or only a few topics so they can be more direct and to the point. I find that the arguments in the long winded posts get lost in the shuffle. I’ll make an exception with his response but let’s try and move forward one topic at a time.

Your argument lost credibility when you tried to compare modern day USA to medieval times Ireland, that was my simple point.

Regarding your other arguments about currency and infrastructure you seemed to state that the “people” will trade and build what they want. Well that’s fine and dandy but when it comes to major projects and world trade that is beyond the ability of a few individuals to manage. The only way to accomplish these things is with the voice of the collective which I’m sorry to tell you is what a government is.

My kill and rape statement was made from what actually happened in medieval Ireland. It’s history. And if your anarchist society was so wonderful and productive back then it would still exist today. The fact that it doesn’t just shows its vulnerability and it’s lack of lasting power.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Has already worked for 9000+ years in Ireland, worked in Capaia, Neutral Moresnet, Pennsylvania. Not only is it a possibility, there's evidence that it has worked in other places, unlike Governments, which are completely unsustainable. You only think that it's primitive because your lord and masters in government want you to think so.

What are you talking about?! Ireland has a parliamentary system and a prime minister. They are not an anarchist country. And again without an organized central government there is no military protection, no currency for trade and no organized system to take care of basic infrastructure needs of a nation of our size. We are not playing cowboys and Indians anymore nor are we living in tribes. Your idea is fun in theory but utterly impossible in reality

They were Anarchy until the statist barbarians invaded. I would say that you should have figured that I was referring to medieval Ireland, but since you're a statist yourself, I would be expecting too much. You fail a lot of "Connect The Dots" activities, don't you? I'd also like to point out that you latched onto what you, ignorantly, thought was an inconsistency and failed to address my other citations. Is that an admission that you're wrong?

Ireland's ability to fend off attacks from statists for 9000+ years is evidence in and of itself that a central government is not needed for an army. America also formed a militia without a state, and every individual in any society does not need the government to arm themselves and defend their own homes. In fact, they are much stronger without a government, since a government restricts the abilities of the citizens to own and bear whatever arms they please. The only reason there's a state military in the first place is so that the government can initiate force for its own self-interest.

Government is not needed for currency, and in fact they replace currency with actual value with their unsustainable fiat currency. The demand for the US dollar is a result of the government pointing its guns at demanding that they trade with their worthless paper. With no supply cap and little utility, the US dollar will eventually collapse, and that's all a government does as far as currency. People would otherwise naturally trade with currencies with actual value, supply cap, and utility, examples include crypto currencies, precious metals, and literally anything one person values enough to trade another thing for.

Government is not needed for infrastructure, if there's a demand for something, people will already pay for it willingly. The only reason a government would need to get involved is if people don't want to pay for something, in which case there's no demand. Private industry already builds roads, for example.

How in the world do you think comparing medieval Ireland to modern day USA makes any sort of sense?! Even within your utopian medieval Ireland you will find systems of leaders within each tribe and community. Usually the stronger tribes killed raped and pillaged to take over the weaker tribes. Sounds fun but I’ll take a civilized society over that any day of the week. Also if it worked so well it would still exist today.

So, you're just going to keep ignoring my other citations which thoroughly debunk your statist nonsense. Besides, he difference between their 'leaders' and your United States is that their worker groups were completely voluntary and people could come and go as they please(I think they were called Tuaths) while the US uses force and coercion to make you obey their selected "leaders". Furthermore, the groups didn't force you to live how they demand, under the threat of imprisonment or death.

You also have no citations to back up your claim that without the threat of government, people kill and rape each other willy nilly, and even if they did, the US Police's response times of 15 minutes on average certainly isn't doing anything to stop it, nor is their disarmament of victims. A damn good job it's doing in Chicago, for example. Oh, and let's not forget that when the police DO finally get there, they murder the armed citizens like the well-trained professionals they are.

Private security sure as hell wouldn't kill the citizens, unlike the armed thugs we nonsensically refer to as police, or the law.

There's also the government's tendency to pick fights with other governments for its own benefit, like the war for oil recently, and replacing the "leader" in Ukrain with a plant which baited Russia into attacking them, so the US could start a war with them to force them into accepting their worthless fiat currency.

I prefer to try and limit my posts to contain a one or only a few topics so they can be more direct and to the point. I find that the arguments in the long winded posts get lost in the shuffle. I’ll make an exception with his response but let’s try and move forward one topic at a time.

Your argument lost credibility when you tried to compare modern day USA to medieval times Ireland, that was my simple point.

Regarding your other arguments about currency and infrastructure you seemed to state that the “people” will trade and build what they want. Well that’s fine and dandy but when it comes to major projects and world trade that is beyond the ability of a few individuals to manage. The only way to accomplish these things is with the voice of the collective which I’m sorry to tell you is what a government is.

My kill and rape statement was made from what actually happened in medieval Ireland. It’s history. And if your anarchist society was so wonderful and productive back then it would still exist today. The fact that it doesn’t just shows its vulnerability and it’s lack of lasting power.

Except no, times are no indication of whether a societal structure works or not, that's just your excuse. For example, Socialism will not work regardless of what age it is, fiat currency will never be sustainable, government will never be sustainable, and the reasons for all of those are consistent. The fact that it's 2018 doesn't give or take away credibility, this is just your excuse because you don't want to acknowledge that people can live without a monopoly on violence and arbitration.

There were long distance trade routes before governments existed, your claim that the government is necessary for world trade is completely false. The problem with your arguments is that you believe that the government is capable of certain things simply because they call themselves such. The reality is that the govenrnent is just as human as anyone else, and thus anything they're capable of, the private sector is ALSO capable of. Furthermore, the government is NOT the voice of any collective besides itself. Regardless of whether elections were truly democratic, and they're not, I've already made this point and cited evidence, BUT even if they were, AT BEST it's the voice of the majority oppressing the minority, which doesn't make it moral. The majority in Germany apparently wanted the Jews dead. However, that's not the case, because the government makes decisions regardless of what the people want. Assuming that everyone wants whatever the government does, simply because the Electoral College selected them is hilarious. When was the last time you were able to sync up to the community-wide hivemind? Oh, that's right, never.

Well, no, actually, you have no citations to support your claim, and even if you did, the US is no less subject to the same occurances As I said, the government suppresses our ability to protect ourselves, and their thugs with guns even shoot us when they do arrive. Furthermore, there was ALSO Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Pennsylvania. The fact that the barbarians in a state conquered Medieval Ireland after 9000+ years and multiple attempts does nothing to discredit its longevity, that's longer than ANY state has lasted, as the absolute LONGEST was the Pandyan Empire, at 1850 years.

 

[Harry Dresden]

even beyond trump.....no relief in site....

Republicans poisoned the well in stealing a Supreme Court seat

The chances of .....
Let’s shake hands and let bygones be bygones are nil until Republicans make good

They have created a new political reality and I don’t think they will be happy with what they have to live with

like you guys have never poisoned that well.....and you guys helped create that new political reality.....but then the dems did not have much to work with either...

Give me an equivalent example of the Dems doing the same and we can talk

if you are talking about the supreme court tell me that democrats would not have done the same?....

They would not have done the same.

yes they would have....

 

[Harry Dresden]

When you rewrite history to fit your narrative, anything is possible. The fucking nutbags here simply can not accept reality. It would require them to apologise for the way they've scorched the earth in DC and for allowing a windbag like Trump to get anywhere near an elected office.

they cant except reality?....is that anything like the people who cant except election results?....because thats reality too....

Accept. Idiot.

like you havent misspelled anything in this forum before.....only an asshole would start with the name calling...are you an asshole LL?..

 

[Slade3200]

What are you talking about?! Ireland has a parliamentary system and a prime minister. They are not an anarchist country. And again without an organized central government there is no military protection, no currency for trade and no organized system to take care of basic infrastructure needs of a nation of our size. We are not playing cowboys and Indians anymore nor are we living in tribes. Your idea is fun in theory but utterly impossible in reality

They were Anarchy until the statist barbarians invaded. I would say that you should have figured that I was referring to medieval Ireland, but since you're a statist yourself, I would be expecting too much. You fail a lot of "Connect The Dots" activities, don't you? I'd also like to point out that you latched onto what you, ignorantly, thought was an inconsistency and failed to address my other citations. Is that an admission that you're wrong?

Ireland's ability to fend off attacks from statists for 9000+ years is evidence in and of itself that a central government is not needed for an army. America also formed a militia without a state, and every individual in any society does not need the government to arm themselves and defend their own homes. In fact, they are much stronger without a government, since a government restricts the abilities of the citizens to own and bear whatever arms they please. The only reason there's a state military in the first place is so that the government can initiate force for its own self-interest.

Government is not needed for currency, and in fact they replace currency with actual value with their unsustainable fiat currency. The demand for the US dollar is a result of the government pointing its guns at demanding that they trade with their worthless paper. With no supply cap and little utility, the US dollar will eventually collapse, and that's all a government does as far as currency. People would otherwise naturally trade with currencies with actual value, supply cap, and utility, examples include crypto currencies, precious metals, and literally anything one person values enough to trade another thing for.

Government is not needed for infrastructure, if there's a demand for something, people will already pay for it willingly. The only reason a government would need to get involved is if people don't want to pay for something, in which case there's no demand. Private industry already builds roads, for example.

How in the world do you think comparing medieval Ireland to modern day USA makes any sort of sense?! Even within your utopian medieval Ireland you will find systems of leaders within each tribe and community. Usually the stronger tribes killed raped and pillaged to take over the weaker tribes. Sounds fun but I’ll take a civilized society over that any day of the week. Also if it worked so well it would still exist today.

So, you're just going to keep ignoring my other citations which thoroughly debunk your statist nonsense. Besides, he difference between their 'leaders' and your United States is that their worker groups were completely voluntary and people could come and go as they please(I think they were called Tuaths) while the US uses force and coercion to make you obey their selected "leaders". Furthermore, the groups didn't force you to live how they demand, under the threat of imprisonment or death.

You also have no citations to back up your claim that without the threat of government, people kill and rape each other willy nilly, and even if they did, the US Police's response times of 15 minutes on average certainly isn't doing anything to stop it, nor is their disarmament of victims. A damn good job it's doing in Chicago, for example. Oh, and let's not forget that when the police DO finally get there, they murder the armed citizens like the well-trained professionals they are.

Private security sure as hell wouldn't kill the citizens, unlike the armed thugs we nonsensically refer to as police, or the law.

There's also the government's tendency to pick fights with other governments for its own benefit, like the war for oil recently, and replacing the "leader" in Ukrain with a plant which baited Russia into attacking them, so the US could start a war with them to force them into accepting their worthless fiat currency.

I prefer to try and limit my posts to contain a one or only a few topics so they can be more direct and to the point. I find that the arguments in the long winded posts get lost in the shuffle. I’ll make an exception with his response but let’s try and move forward one topic at a time.

Your argument lost credibility when you tried to compare modern day USA to medieval times Ireland, that was my simple point.

Regarding your other arguments about currency and infrastructure you seemed to state that the “people” will trade and build what they want. Well that’s fine and dandy but when it comes to major projects and world trade that is beyond the ability of a few individuals to manage. The only way to accomplish these things is with the voice of the collective which I’m sorry to tell you is what a government is.

My kill and rape statement was made from what actually happened in medieval Ireland. It’s history. And if your anarchist society was so wonderful and productive back then it would still exist today. The fact that it doesn’t just shows its vulnerability and it’s lack of lasting power.

Except no, times are no indication of whether a societal structure works or not, that's just your excuse. For example, Socialism will not work regardless of what age it is, fiat currency will never be sustainable, government will never be sustainable, and the reasons for all of those are consistent. The fact that it's 2018 doesn't give or take away credibility, this is just your excuse because you don't want to acknowledge that people can live without a monopoly on violence and arbitration.

There were long distance trade routes before governments existed, your claim that the government is necessary for world trade is completely false. The problem with your arguments is that you believe that the government is capable of certain things simply because they call themselves such. The reality is that the govenrnent is just as human as anyone else, and thus anything they're capable of, the private sector is ALSO capable of. Furthermore, the government is NOT the voice of any collective besides itself. Regardless of whether elections were truly democratic, and they're not, I've already made this point and cited evidence, BUT even if they were, AT BEST it's the voice of the majority oppressing the minority, which doesn't make it moral. The majority in Germany apparently wanted the Jews dead. However, that's not the case, because the government makes decisions regardless of what the people want. Assuming that everyone wants whatever the government does, simply because the Electoral College selected them is hilarious. When was the last time you were able to sync up to the community-wide hivemind? Oh, that's right, never.

Well, no, actually, you have no citations to support your claim, and even if you did, the US is no less subject to the same occurances As I said, the government suppresses our ability to protect ourselves, and their thugs with guns even shoot us when they do arrive. Furthermore, there was ALSO Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Pennsylvania. The fact that the barbarians in a state conquered Medieval Ireland after 9000+ years and multiple attempts does nothing to discredit its longevity, that's longer than ANY state has lasted, as the absolute LONGEST was the Pandyan Empire, at 1850 years.

I’m gonna address your first paragraph only so we can keep this conversation more concise.

I don’t agree that the day of age isn’t a factor in the effectiveness of political systems. It absolutely is. For example your tribal anarchist system may have worked in medieval times when societies were small and more self contained. But not in a society comprised of hundreds of millions of people actively engaged in global commerce. This is why Anarchy I’m extinct in modern developed countries.

Although I’m not a fan of socialism I’d also disagree that it will never work. Fast forward 100 years (probably less) and let’s say robots are conducting all the labor jobs that are currently held by humans. Robots are able to manufacture, pack, ship, harvest, diagnose, treat, and service everything that us humans need to live comfortably. As a result the need for human labor plumits and available jobs cease to exists. Unless we want a tidal wave of low class citizens and the crime that would be associated it might make sense to undertake some sort of socialism where the basic needs for humans are provided by the state and the role of humans takes on a new form. Again, I am theorizing but it exemplifies my original point that the times play a crucial role in the style and roll of governments.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

They were Anarchy until the statist barbarians invaded. I would say that you should have figured that I was referring to medieval Ireland, but since you're a statist yourself, I would be expecting too much. You fail a lot of "Connect The Dots" activities, don't you? I'd also like to point out that you latched onto what you, ignorantly, thought was an inconsistency and failed to address my other citations. Is that an admission that you're wrong?

Ireland's ability to fend off attacks from statists for 9000+ years is evidence in and of itself that a central government is not needed for an army. America also formed a militia without a state, and every individual in any society does not need the government to arm themselves and defend their own homes. In fact, they are much stronger without a government, since a government restricts the abilities of the citizens to own and bear whatever arms they please. The only reason there's a state military in the first place is so that the government can initiate force for its own self-interest.

Government is not needed for currency, and in fact they replace currency with actual value with their unsustainable fiat currency. The demand for the US dollar is a result of the government pointing its guns at demanding that they trade with their worthless paper. With no supply cap and little utility, the US dollar will eventually collapse, and that's all a government does as far as currency. People would otherwise naturally trade with currencies with actual value, supply cap, and utility, examples include crypto currencies, precious metals, and literally anything one person values enough to trade another thing for.

Government is not needed for infrastructure, if there's a demand for something, people will already pay for it willingly. The only reason a government would need to get involved is if people don't want to pay for something, in which case there's no demand. Private industry already builds roads, for example.

How in the world do you think comparing medieval Ireland to modern day USA makes any sort of sense?! Even within your utopian medieval Ireland you will find systems of leaders within each tribe and community. Usually the stronger tribes killed raped and pillaged to take over the weaker tribes. Sounds fun but I’ll take a civilized society over that any day of the week. Also if it worked so well it would still exist today.

So, you're just going to keep ignoring my other citations which thoroughly debunk your statist nonsense. Besides, he difference between their 'leaders' and your United States is that their worker groups were completely voluntary and people could come and go as they please(I think they were called Tuaths) while the US uses force and coercion to make you obey their selected "leaders". Furthermore, the groups didn't force you to live how they demand, under the threat of imprisonment or death.

You also have no citations to back up your claim that without the threat of government, people kill and rape each other willy nilly, and even if they did, the US Police's response times of 15 minutes on average certainly isn't doing anything to stop it, nor is their disarmament of victims. A damn good job it's doing in Chicago, for example. Oh, and let's not forget that when the police DO finally get there, they murder the armed citizens like the well-trained professionals they are.

Private security sure as hell wouldn't kill the citizens, unlike the armed thugs we nonsensically refer to as police, or the law.

There's also the government's tendency to pick fights with other governments for its own benefit, like the war for oil recently, and replacing the "leader" in Ukrain with a plant which baited Russia into attacking them, so the US could start a war with them to force them into accepting their worthless fiat currency.

I prefer to try and limit my posts to contain a one or only a few topics so they can be more direct and to the point. I find that the arguments in the long winded posts get lost in the shuffle. I’ll make an exception with his response but let’s try and move forward one topic at a time.

Your argument lost credibility when you tried to compare modern day USA to medieval times Ireland, that was my simple point.

Regarding your other arguments about currency and infrastructure you seemed to state that the “people” will trade and build what they want. Well that’s fine and dandy but when it comes to major projects and world trade that is beyond the ability of a few individuals to manage. The only way to accomplish these things is with the voice of the collective which I’m sorry to tell you is what a government is.

My kill and rape statement was made from what actually happened in medieval Ireland. It’s history. And if your anarchist society was so wonderful and productive back then it would still exist today. The fact that it doesn’t just shows its vulnerability and it’s lack of lasting power.

Except no, times are no indication of whether a societal structure works or not, that's just your excuse. For example, Socialism will not work regardless of what age it is, fiat currency will never be sustainable, government will never be sustainable, and the reasons for all of those are consistent. The fact that it's 2018 doesn't give or take away credibility, this is just your excuse because you don't want to acknowledge that people can live without a monopoly on violence and arbitration.

There were long distance trade routes before governments existed, your claim that the government is necessary for world trade is completely false. The problem with your arguments is that you believe that the government is capable of certain things simply because they call themselves such. The reality is that the govenrnent is just as human as anyone else, and thus anything they're capable of, the private sector is ALSO capable of. Furthermore, the government is NOT the voice of any collective besides itself. Regardless of whether elections were truly democratic, and they're not, I've already made this point and cited evidence, BUT even if they were, AT BEST it's the voice of the majority oppressing the minority, which doesn't make it moral. The majority in Germany apparently wanted the Jews dead. However, that's not the case, because the government makes decisions regardless of what the people want. Assuming that everyone wants whatever the government does, simply because the Electoral College selected them is hilarious. When was the last time you were able to sync up to the community-wide hivemind? Oh, that's right, never.

Well, no, actually, you have no citations to support your claim, and even if you did, the US is no less subject to the same occurances As I said, the government suppresses our ability to protect ourselves, and their thugs with guns even shoot us when they do arrive. Furthermore, there was ALSO Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Pennsylvania. The fact that the barbarians in a state conquered Medieval Ireland after 9000+ years and multiple attempts does nothing to discredit its longevity, that's longer than ANY state has lasted, as the absolute LONGEST was the Pandyan Empire, at 1850 years.

I’m gonna address your first paragraph only so we can keep this conversation more concise.

I don’t agree that the day of age isn’t a factor in the effectiveness of political systems. It absolutely is. For example your tribal anarchist system may have worked in medieval times when societies were small and more self contained. But not in a society comprised of hundreds of millions of people actively engaged in global commerce. This is why Anarchy I’m extinct in modern developed countries.

Although I’m not a fan of socialism I’d also disagree that it will never work. Fast forward 100 years (probably less) and let’s say robots are conducting all the labor jobs that are currently held by humans. Robots are able to manufacture, pack, ship, harvest, diagnose, treat, and service everything that us humans need to live comfortably. As a result the need for human labor plumits and available jobs cease to exists. Unless we want a tidal wave of low class citizens and the crime that would be associated it might make sense to undertake some sort of socialism where the basic needs for humans are provided by the state and the role of humans takes on a new form. Again, I am theorizing but it exemplifies my original point that the times play a crucial role in the style and roll of governments.

Of course you will, because ignoring my points is your only option here, since you cannot address them.

You're saying that without considering that trade routes existed before the earliest government and that there were no governments before 2332 BC. If your assertion were accurate, they would have been screwed, yet they were organized enough to BUILD trade routes. As usual, you're full of crud. I'd also like to point out that territorial monopolies on arbitration and violence, IE the US, don't take kindly to Anarchy, and as such, would not allow large scale Anarchies to exist, they'd be able to steal less money, and people would realize that Statism is actually just thuggery.

False, for every job that is innovated away, new jobs will form. Losing jobs in manufacturing would only result in more jobs in engineering and programming. For every job that's replaced with machines, there will need to be people innovating, programming, engineering, and maintaining those machines. Even if, hypothetically, the machines could maintain themselves, people would be needed to head the companies manufacturing those machines, and people would be needed for innovating new methods to build and advance those machines. Not only this, but machines can't do creative work, such as software engineering, so the video game, music, movie industries, etc, will always have a demand for human labor. The economic calculation problem will also always make Socialism completely unworkable, even if states were sustainable.

 

[Synthaholic]

Now Bush is hated by the right and admired by the left.

That’s a rightwing meme. The Left does not admire Bush. Sharing candy with Michelle Obama doesn’t erase his incompetent and deadly regime, which was a total disaster on nearly every front.

 

[Synthaholic]

Under Obama everyone on the right loved Bush and the left hated him. Now Bush is hated by the right and admired by the left.
When McCain/Romney ran against Obama they were supported by the right and despised by the left. Now those roles too have reversed.

I think it is a flawed personal trait when you don't have the courage to stick to your so called principles regardless of someone elses health condition. It's hard to take a lot of you serious.

I hated the entire fucking Bush Family

You voted for Bush over Kerry.

 

[Slade3200]

How in the world do you think comparing medieval Ireland to modern day USA makes any sort of sense?! Even within your utopian medieval Ireland you will find systems of leaders within each tribe and community. Usually the stronger tribes killed raped and pillaged to take over the weaker tribes. Sounds fun but I’ll take a civilized society over that any day of the week. Also if it worked so well it would still exist today.

So, you're just going to keep ignoring my other citations which thoroughly debunk your statist nonsense. Besides, he difference between their 'leaders' and your United States is that their worker groups were completely voluntary and people could come and go as they please(I think they were called Tuaths) while the US uses force and coercion to make you obey their selected "leaders". Furthermore, the groups didn't force you to live how they demand, under the threat of imprisonment or death.

You also have no citations to back up your claim that without the threat of government, people kill and rape each other willy nilly, and even if they did, the US Police's response times of 15 minutes on average certainly isn't doing anything to stop it, nor is their disarmament of victims. A damn good job it's doing in Chicago, for example. Oh, and let's not forget that when the police DO finally get there, they murder the armed citizens like the well-trained professionals they are.

Private security sure as hell wouldn't kill the citizens, unlike the armed thugs we nonsensically refer to as police, or the law.

There's also the government's tendency to pick fights with other governments for its own benefit, like the war for oil recently, and replacing the "leader" in Ukrain with a plant which baited Russia into attacking them, so the US could start a war with them to force them into accepting their worthless fiat currency.

I prefer to try and limit my posts to contain a one or only a few topics so they can be more direct and to the point. I find that the arguments in the long winded posts get lost in the shuffle. I’ll make an exception with his response but let’s try and move forward one topic at a time.

Your argument lost credibility when you tried to compare modern day USA to medieval times Ireland, that was my simple point.

Regarding your other arguments about currency and infrastructure you seemed to state that the “people” will trade and build what they want. Well that’s fine and dandy but when it comes to major projects and world trade that is beyond the ability of a few individuals to manage. The only way to accomplish these things is with the voice of the collective which I’m sorry to tell you is what a government is.

My kill and rape statement was made from what actually happened in medieval Ireland. It’s history. And if your anarchist society was so wonderful and productive back then it would still exist today. The fact that it doesn’t just shows its vulnerability and it’s lack of lasting power.

Except no, times are no indication of whether a societal structure works or not, that's just your excuse. For example, Socialism will not work regardless of what age it is, fiat currency will never be sustainable, government will never be sustainable, and the reasons for all of those are consistent. The fact that it's 2018 doesn't give or take away credibility, this is just your excuse because you don't want to acknowledge that people can live without a monopoly on violence and arbitration.

There were long distance trade routes before governments existed, your claim that the government is necessary for world trade is completely false. The problem with your arguments is that you believe that the government is capable of certain things simply because they call themselves such. The reality is that the govenrnent is just as human as anyone else, and thus anything they're capable of, the private sector is ALSO capable of. Furthermore, the government is NOT the voice of any collective besides itself. Regardless of whether elections were truly democratic, and they're not, I've already made this point and cited evidence, BUT even if they were, AT BEST it's the voice of the majority oppressing the minority, which doesn't make it moral. The majority in Germany apparently wanted the Jews dead. However, that's not the case, because the government makes decisions regardless of what the people want. Assuming that everyone wants whatever the government does, simply because the Electoral College selected them is hilarious. When was the last time you were able to sync up to the community-wide hivemind? Oh, that's right, never.

Well, no, actually, you have no citations to support your claim, and even if you did, the US is no less subject to the same occurances As I said, the government suppresses our ability to protect ourselves, and their thugs with guns even shoot us when they do arrive. Furthermore, there was ALSO Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Pennsylvania. The fact that the barbarians in a state conquered Medieval Ireland after 9000+ years and multiple attempts does nothing to discredit its longevity, that's longer than ANY state has lasted, as the absolute LONGEST was the Pandyan Empire, at 1850 years.

I’m gonna address your first paragraph only so we can keep this conversation more concise.

I don’t agree that the day of age isn’t a factor in the effectiveness of political systems. It absolutely is. For example your tribal anarchist system may have worked in medieval times when societies were small and more self contained. But not in a society comprised of hundreds of millions of people actively engaged in global commerce. This is why Anarchy I’m extinct in modern developed countries.

Although I’m not a fan of socialism I’d also disagree that it will never work. Fast forward 100 years (probably less) and let’s say robots are conducting all the labor jobs that are currently held by humans. Robots are able to manufacture, pack, ship, harvest, diagnose, treat, and service everything that us humans need to live comfortably. As a result the need for human labor plumits and available jobs cease to exists. Unless we want a tidal wave of low class citizens and the crime that would be associated it might make sense to undertake some sort of socialism where the basic needs for humans are provided by the state and the role of humans takes on a new form. Again, I am theorizing but it exemplifies my original point that the times play a crucial role in the style and roll of governments.

Of course you will, because ignoring my points is your only option here, since you cannot address them.

You're saying that without considering that trade routes existed before the earliest government and that there were no governments before 2332 BC. If your assertion were accurate, they would have been screwed, yet they were organized enough to BUILD trade routes. As usual, you're full of crud. I'd also like to point out that territorial monopolies on arbitration and violence, IE the US, don't take kindly to Anarchy, and as such, would not allow large scale Anarchies to exist, they'd be able to steal less money, and people would realize that Statism is actually just thuggery.

False, for every job that is innovated away, new jobs will form. Losing jobs in manufacturing would only result in more jobs in engineering and programming. For every job that's replaced with machines, there will need to be people innovating, programming, engineering, and maintaining those machines. Even if, hypothetically, the machines could maintain themselves, people would be needed to head the companies manufacturing those machines, and people would be needed for innovating new methods to build and advance those machines. Not only this, but machines can't do creative work, such as software engineering, so the video game, music, movie industries, etc, will always have a demand for human labor. The economic calculation problem will also always make Socialism completely unworkable, even if states were sustainable.

Happy to address each of your points just don’t want to be writing novels back and forth.

You are comparing trade routes in BC to modern day world commerce? I don’t think you know what you’re talking about with that one.

As far is innovation jobs, yes you are right there will be innovation jobs but those will only cater to a fraction of highly educated individuals. Many millions of labor jobs will be lost and the wealth inequality gap will grow exponentially. Think it through for a bit.

 

[Olde Europe]

Of course you will, because ignoring my points is your only option here, since you cannot address them.

Happy to address each of your points just don’t want to be writing novels back and forth.

May I gently suggest you two geezers create your own thread to work out your ideological differences? Thanks in advance.

 

[LoneLaugher]

When you rewrite history to fit your narrative, anything is possible. The fucking nutbags here simply can not accept reality. It would require them to apologise for the way they've scorched the earth in DC and for allowing a windbag like Trump to get anywhere near an elected office.

they cant except reality?....is that anything like the people who cant except election results?....because thats reality too....

Accept. Idiot.

like you havent misspelled anything in this forum before.....only an asshole would start with the name calling...are you an asshole LL?..

Yes. I'm an asshole.

Especially when dealing with people who cannot be honest about the most obvious truths.

 

[Mac1958]

So, you're just going to keep ignoring my other citations which thoroughly debunk your statist nonsense. Besides, he difference between their 'leaders' and your United States is that their worker groups were completely voluntary and people could come and go as they please(I think they were called Tuaths) while the US uses force and coercion to make you obey their selected "leaders". Furthermore, the groups didn't force you to live how they demand, under the threat of imprisonment or death.

You also have no citations to back up your claim that without the threat of government, people kill and rape each other willy nilly, and even if they did, the US Police's response times of 15 minutes on average certainly isn't doing anything to stop it, nor is their disarmament of victims. A damn good job it's doing in Chicago, for example. Oh, and let's not forget that when the police DO finally get there, they murder the armed citizens like the well-trained professionals they are.

Private security sure as hell wouldn't kill the citizens, unlike the armed thugs we nonsensically refer to as police, or the law.

There's also the government's tendency to pick fights with other governments for its own benefit, like the war for oil recently, and replacing the "leader" in Ukrain with a plant which baited Russia into attacking them, so the US could start a war with them to force them into accepting their worthless fiat currency.

I prefer to try and limit my posts to contain a one or only a few topics so they can be more direct and to the point. I find that the arguments in the long winded posts get lost in the shuffle. I’ll make an exception with his response but let’s try and move forward one topic at a time.

Your argument lost credibility when you tried to compare modern day USA to medieval times Ireland, that was my simple point.

Regarding your other arguments about currency and infrastructure you seemed to state that the “people” will trade and build what they want. Well that’s fine and dandy but when it comes to major projects and world trade that is beyond the ability of a few individuals to manage. The only way to accomplish these things is with the voice of the collective which I’m sorry to tell you is what a government is.

My kill and rape statement was made from what actually happened in medieval Ireland. It’s history. And if your anarchist society was so wonderful and productive back then it would still exist today. The fact that it doesn’t just shows its vulnerability and it’s lack of lasting power.

Except no, times are no indication of whether a societal structure works or not, that's just your excuse. For example, Socialism will not work regardless of what age it is, fiat currency will never be sustainable, government will never be sustainable, and the reasons for all of those are consistent. The fact that it's 2018 doesn't give or take away credibility, this is just your excuse because you don't want to acknowledge that people can live without a monopoly on violence and arbitration.

There were long distance trade routes before governments existed, your claim that the government is necessary for world trade is completely false. The problem with your arguments is that you believe that the government is capable of certain things simply because they call themselves such. The reality is that the govenrnent is just as human as anyone else, and thus anything they're capable of, the private sector is ALSO capable of. Furthermore, the government is NOT the voice of any collective besides itself. Regardless of whether elections were truly democratic, and they're not, I've already made this point and cited evidence, BUT even if they were, AT BEST it's the voice of the majority oppressing the minority, which doesn't make it moral. The majority in Germany apparently wanted the Jews dead. However, that's not the case, because the government makes decisions regardless of what the people want. Assuming that everyone wants whatever the government does, simply because the Electoral College selected them is hilarious. When was the last time you were able to sync up to the community-wide hivemind? Oh, that's right, never.

Well, no, actually, you have no citations to support your claim, and even if you did, the US is no less subject to the same occurances As I said, the government suppresses our ability to protect ourselves, and their thugs with guns even shoot us when they do arrive. Furthermore, there was ALSO Neutral Moresnet, Cospaia, and Pennsylvania. The fact that the barbarians in a state conquered Medieval Ireland after 9000+ years and multiple attempts does nothing to discredit its longevity, that's longer than ANY state has lasted, as the absolute LONGEST was the Pandyan Empire, at 1850 years.

I’m gonna address your first paragraph only so we can keep this conversation more concise.

I don’t agree that the day of age isn’t a factor in the effectiveness of political systems. It absolutely is. For example your tribal anarchist system may have worked in medieval times when societies were small and more self contained. But not in a society comprised of hundreds of millions of people actively engaged in global commerce. This is why Anarchy I’m extinct in modern developed countries.

Although I’m not a fan of socialism I’d also disagree that it will never work. Fast forward 100 years (probably less) and let’s say robots are conducting all the labor jobs that are currently held by humans. Robots are able to manufacture, pack, ship, harvest, diagnose, treat, and service everything that us humans need to live comfortably. As a result the need for human labor plumits and available jobs cease to exists. Unless we want a tidal wave of low class citizens and the crime that would be associated it might make sense to undertake some sort of socialism where the basic needs for humans are provided by the state and the role of humans takes on a new form. Again, I am theorizing but it exemplifies my original point that the times play a crucial role in the style and roll of governments.

Of course you will, because ignoring my points is your only option here, since you cannot address them.

You're saying that without considering that trade routes existed before the earliest government and that there were no governments before 2332 BC. If your assertion were accurate, they would have been screwed, yet they were organized enough to BUILD trade routes. As usual, you're full of crud. I'd also like to point out that territorial monopolies on arbitration and violence, IE the US, don't take kindly to Anarchy, and as such, would not allow large scale Anarchies to exist, they'd be able to steal less money, and people would realize that Statism is actually just thuggery.

False, for every job that is innovated away, new jobs will form. Losing jobs in manufacturing would only result in more jobs in engineering and programming. For every job that's replaced with machines, there will need to be people innovating, programming, engineering, and maintaining those machines. Even if, hypothetically, the machines could maintain themselves, people would be needed to head the companies manufacturing those machines, and people would be needed for innovating new methods to build and advance those machines. Not only this, but machines can't do creative work, such as software engineering, so the video game, music, movie industries, etc, will always have a demand for human labor. The economic calculation problem will also always make Socialism completely unworkable, even if states were sustainable.

Happy to address each of your points just don’t want to be writing novels back and forth.

You are comparing trade routes in BC to modern day world commerce? I don’t think you know what you’re talking about with that one.

As far is innovation jobs, yes you are right there will be innovation jobs but those will only cater to a fraction of highly educated individuals. Many millions of labor jobs will be lost and the wealth inequality gap will grow exponentially. Think it through for a bit.

Yep. It's the nature of the productivity of technology. Jobs will not be replaced one-for-one, and the gap will necessarily continue to expand.

This is a conversation that needs to be had (by rational people) pretty damn soon.
.

 

[sparky]

Yes. I'm an asshole.

thread tune!!!



~S~

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Yep. It's the nature of the productivity of technology. Jobs will not be replaced one-for-one, and the gap will necessarily continue to expand.

This is a conversation that needs to be had (by rational people) pretty damn soon

In my short time in this world I watched and predicted the death of the typewriter industry, film has been replaced with digital, and many other thousands of jobs destroyed by technology. It all started with the buggy whip.

Are we better for it, or should Godvernment have saved these industries to protect those jobs?

 

[Mac1958]

Yep. It's the nature of the productivity of technology. Jobs will not be replaced one-for-one, and the gap will necessarily continue to expand.

This is a conversation that needs to be had (by rational people) pretty damn soon

In my short time in this world I watched and predicted the death of the typewriter industry, film has been replaced with digital, and many other thousands of jobs destroyed by technology. It all started with the buggy whip.

Are we better for it, or should Godvernment have saved these industries to protect those jobs?

Regarding business and industry, we're certainly the better for it.

At the same time, we have to monitor negative effects of progress and find a way to deal with them.

Technological productivity is leaving people behind, and that number will only increase. And these people vote. So we should probably give some thought to their situation.
.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

May I gently suggest you two geezers create your own thread to work out your ideological differences? Thanks in advance

Don t insult Pumpkin. She has much more sense than any old geezer. I love this debate.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Yep. It's the nature of the productivity of technology. Jobs will not be replaced one-for-one, and the gap will necessarily continue to expand.

This is a conversation that needs to be had (by rational people) pretty damn soon

In my short time in this world I watched and predicted the death of the typewriter industry, film has been replaced with digital, and many other thousands of jobs destroyed by technology. It all started with the buggy whip.

Are we better for it, or should Godvernment have saved these industries to protect those jobs?

Regarding business and industry, we're certainly the better for it.

At the same time, we have to monitor negative effects of progress and find a way to deal with them.

Technological productivity is leaving people behind, and that number will only increase. And these people vote. So we should probably give some thought to their situation.
.

We are and we do.

 

[Mac1958]

Yep. It's the nature of the productivity of technology. Jobs will not be replaced one-for-one, and the gap will necessarily continue to expand.

This is a conversation that needs to be had (by rational people) pretty damn soon

In my short time in this world I watched and predicted the death of the typewriter industry, film has been replaced with digital, and many other thousands of jobs destroyed by technology. It all started with the buggy whip.

Are we better for it, or should Godvernment have saved these industries to protect those jobs?

Regarding business and industry, we're certainly the better for it.

At the same time, we have to monitor negative effects of progress and find a way to deal with them.

Technological productivity is leaving people behind, and that number will only increase. And these people vote. So we should probably give some thought to their situation.
.

We are and we do.

I didn't know that. Okay.
.

 

[rightwinger]

Now Bush is hated by the right and admired by the left.

That’s a rightwing meme. The Left does not admire Bush. Sharing candy with Michelle Obama doesn’t erase his incompetent and deadly regime, which was a total disaster on nearly every front.

I admire Bush 41

I think Bush 43 was one of our worst Presidents

 

[Harry Dresden]

When you rewrite history to fit your narrative, anything is possible. The fucking nutbags here simply can not accept reality. It would require them to apologise for the way they've scorched the earth in DC and for allowing a windbag like Trump to get anywhere near an elected office.

they cant except reality?....is that anything like the people who cant except election results?....because thats reality too....

Accept. Idiot.

like you havent misspelled anything in this forum before.....only an asshole would start with the name calling...are you an asshole LL?..

Yes. I'm an asshole.

Especially when dealing with people who cannot be honest about the most obvious truths.

you dont think its the truth about your little party because you are thoroughly absorbed by them....wake up LL....at one time you were not so controlled...