Ayn Rand is right. There is no higher state than

[Lakhota]

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

 

[Neotrotsky]

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

Really

everyone owned slaves?
all the land in colonist time was stolen and none was taken by treaty ?
what about indentured servants ?

Why does the Left hate America so much

Well good thing we have Papa Obama pulling it back to where
it belongs a soon to be 3rd world nation
That must make the Left happy

 

[bripat9643]

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

Are you claiming they didn't have black slaves in Britain? How does killing people make you rich? The Indians didn't believe you could own property.

 

[bripat9643]

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

Really

everyone owned slaves?
all the land in colonist time was stolen and none was taken by treaty ?
what about indentured servants ?

Why does the Left hate America so much

Well good thing we have Papa Obama pulling it back to where
it belongs a soon to be 3rd world nation
That must make the Left happy

Whenever leftists are confronted with the irrefutable superiority of American, they respond by slandering it.

 

[Sallow]

Lenin was a small person suffering miserably from "Napoleonic Syndrome" - common among the vertically impaired. The topmost picture illustrates it precisely.

Lenin in the top most picture

is that not Karl Marx?

or are referring to some other post?

Beat me to it.

 

[Sallow]

You, me and Irene..are all part of this nation.

That fact entitles you to nothing from me or visa versa.

In any case, I put that up to illustrate that what you may consider "fair" hasn't always been the case.

Contrary to popular belief, if a situation becomes dire enough for a person, and their alternatives are few..they tend to act out. And not always in positive ways.

There are quite a few reasons for making sure people are healthy, well fed, sheltered and reasonably happy.

In other words, welfare is extortion we pay to the mob to avoid being beaten and robbed. Great moral system you have there, ace.

Like every revolution in every nation where there were huge gaps between rich and poor.

Those communist countries we all hate so much didn't become that way in a vaccuum.

The became that way because the vast mass of ignorant rubes listened to demagogues like you.

This is the result of drinking beer while history class was going on.

Damn..all those wasted tax dollars.

 

[Sallow]

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

Are you claiming they didn't have black slaves in Britain? How does killing people make you rich? The Indians didn't believe you could own property.

American Indians had a different idea about property rights. You can't "buy" something you are already a part of..

 

[Sallow]

Really

at the time of the American Revolution
Americans had a higher standard of living than the British citizen

Now that's just hogwash.

Really?
Your revolution "theory" is hogwash

look it up

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.
In comparison to the British, very few of whom owned any property, 70% of the Colonists owned enough property to have the voting franchise. By the latter half of the 18th century, American men were 2-3 inches taller than their English and European counterparts (largely due to more nutritive, higher protein diets).


The Left is almost always bad with history
Probably because they are so quick to attempt to rewrite it

Indeed
“Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.”
which explains the Left's rush into the arms of statism


But hey
if you want to believe the American Revolution was caused
by a gap between rich and poor

it is you story and you can tell it anyway you want

Look what up?

Living conditions in the colonies was pretty horrible. Initially Europe sent prisoners here to colonize the place. Water was undrinkable and disease was rampant. That and the natives were none to pleased with people grabbing their land.

And you really should link your sources.

 

[bripat9643]

American Indians had a different idea about property rights. You can't "buy" something you are already a part of..

That's right. Indians didn't believe in property rights. That was their "different idea."

 

[Neotrotsky]

Now that's just hogwash.

Really?
Your revolution "theory" is hogwash

look it up

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.
In comparison to the British, very few of whom owned any property, 70% of the Colonists owned enough property to have the voting franchise. By the latter half of the 18th century, American men were 2-3 inches taller than their English and European counterparts (largely due to more nutritive, higher protein diets).


The Left is almost always bad with history
Probably because they are so quick to attempt to rewrite it

Indeed
“Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.”
which explains the Left's rush into the arms of statism


But hey
if you want to believe the American Revolution was caused
by a gap between rich and poor

it is you story and you can tell it anyway you want

Look what up?

Living conditions in the colonies was pretty horrible. Initially Europe sent prisoners here to colonize the place. Water was undrinkable and disease was rampant. That and the natives were none to pleased with people grabbing their land.

And you really should link your sources.

This is not taxation
You will have to earn your own keep

I have provided links before where your across the board claims of lie
with no proof on your part

Again, look it up yourself; you are wrong
Perhaps you could support your claim
that the American Revolution was over rich vs poor gaps
there is a new idea

 

[ScienceRocks]

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

Who the **** didn't? Seriously, the negroid was selling there own people and even some of them owned slave there selfs. It is always the white man being blamed, but he is the one that done everything in his power for over 200 ******* years to end it. NOT blacks, Arabs, Indians or any one of you mother fuckers. If it was up to you they would still be your slave.

Heck within Islamic culture there is some of that shit still going on...

Hell whites owned other whites within the colonies. If you were poor or did a crime you were sent to the colonies and you were worked harder then a negroid slave...A negroid slave cost a pretty penny, while a criminal was trash. You where a worthless piece of shit, but of course it is all about a people that couldn't defend there own home land let alone keep there population out of slavery. Who's ******* fault is that? Please name one people that hasn't been slaughtered or fucked over?

TELL ME how the north American indian developed the land? There would of never been a United states or any other developed nation within what is today USA. There wouldn't be computers, electricy, light bulbs and millions of other things. None of those things would of been developed. There would just be a whole lot of tribes killing each other and fighting for ground and hunting space as they had for 12,000 yaers before. O'shit did I just say that they slaughtered and took over other tribes all the time, HELL YES. This is human nature for a population of people to **** over another and to take what is theres. That is how it has always worked.

No USA
NO inventions or idea's that came from it

Kind of sad...The world would be a lot poorer.

 

[sparky]

By 1740, the American standard of living had surpassed Europe's, and the Colonies, with only 32% the population of Great Britain, reached 50% her productivity.

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

Who the **** didn't? Seriously, the negroid was selling there own people and even some of them owned slave there selfs. It is always the white man being blamed, but he is the one that done everything in his power for over 200 ******* years to end it. NOT blacks, Arabs, Indians or any one of you mother fuckers. .

kinda discriminate leaving out the father f*ckers there Matt....~S~

 

[konradv]

The state is BS.

But without it, how do we preserve our rights? Without a state strong enough to enforce them, we have none.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Based on killing and stealing rich land and resources from Native Americans and using black slave labor.

Who the **** didn't? Seriously, the negroid was selling there own people and even some of them owned slave there selfs. It is always the white man being blamed, but he is the one that done everything in his power for over 200 ******* years to end it. NOT blacks, Arabs, Indians or any one of you mother fuckers. .

kinda discriminate leaving out the father f*ckers there Matt....~S~

Wow, that is your case against the truth. You people are really a bunch of ******* brain dead morons. Go live in some third world country and go **** your self.

 

[konradv]

Who the **** didn't? Seriously, the negroid was selling there own people and even some of them owned slave there selfs. It is always the white man being blamed

It was New World slavery that brought the concept of race into the picture however, making one set of people a permanent underclass. Slavery in the past and in other parts of the world was based on social conditions like debt, criminality, war, NOT race.

 

[sparky]

Who the **** didn't? Seriously, the negroid was selling there own people and even some of them owned slave there selfs. It is always the white man being blamed, but he is the one that done everything in his power for over 200 ******* years to end it. NOT blacks, Arabs, Indians or any one of you mother fuckers. .

kinda discriminate leaving out the father f*ckers there Matt....~S~

Wow, that is your case against the truth. You people are really a bunch of ******* brain dead morons. Go live in some third world country and go **** your self.

i'm really not that well endowed Matt

~S~

 

[editec]

Lenin was a small person suffering miserably from "Napoleonic Syndrome" - common among the vertically impaired. The topmost picture illustrates it precisely.

The British Tory press sometimes depicted Napoleon as much smaller than average height , and this image persists. Confusion about his height also results from the difference between the French pouce and British inch —2.71 and 2.54 cm respectively; he was about 1.7 metres (5 ft 7 in) tall, average height for the period.[note

 

[sparky]

Who the **** didn't? Seriously, the negroid was selling there own people and even some of them owned slave there selfs. It is always the white man being blamed

It was New World slavery that brought the concept of race into the picture however, making one set of people a permanent underclass. Slavery in the past and in other parts of the world was based on social conditions like debt, criminality, war, NOT race.

a glimer of hope in a sea of hopelessness?

wake me up when this gets into full blown classism please

(ok, i'll start ) Ayn Rand walks into a bar.......

~S~

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Who the **** didn't? Seriously, the negroid was selling there own people and even some of them owned slave there selfs. It is always the white man being blamed, but he is the one that done everything in his power for over 200 ******* years to end it. NOT blacks, Arabs, Indians or any one of you mother fuckers. .

You represent conservatives well.

The state is BS.

But without it, how do we preserve our rights? Without a state strong enough to enforce them, we have none.

Correct.

Indeed, the ‘state,’ the ‘government’ are made up of people, fellow Americans who work, pay taxes, and raise families. The notion that the ‘state’ is some sort of adversarial entity is idiotic.

The Framers were aware that men could not rule other men justly, hence they created a Republic whose governments, institutions, and people were subject to the rule of law. A legal document – a contract, the Constitution – was drawn up to codify our inalienable rights and acknowledge the fact that these rights could not be abrogated.

The Federal courts were established as the venue for the people to ‘petition the Government for a redress of grievances,’ as guaranteed by the First Amendment. The petitioner would have his complaint reviewed by a judge in the context of Constitutional case law to determine if the state’s action was legal.

It is troubling and telling that many on the right are ignorant of these facts, or if aware of these facts, have contempt for the rule of law.

 

[konradv]

Without a state your only right, if I'm stronger than you, is to sit meekly by while I eat YOUR kill in hopes that I'll leave you some scraps. Libertarians/Randists fall into two groups, those that assume they'll be in the "stronger" group and those that are blinded by talk of "liberty", not realizing that most of them will fall into the "weaker" group.