Libertarians know. Do you?

[LordBrownTrout]

Sounds like you want to dismantle the state. Do you propose your version of a state is better or do you just want anarchy?

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

How do you propose keeping it in bounds? Anarchy is out of the question.

 

[gipper]

Sounds like you want to dismantle the state. Do you propose your version of a state is better or do you just want anarchy?

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

 

[flacaltenn]

Sounds like you want to dismantle the state. Do you propose your version of a state is better or do you just want anarchy?

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

How do you propose keeping it in bounds? Anarchy is out of the question.

The US Constitution is the greatest guide ever to that. You need to make it RELEVANT. By illustrating how inept and inefficient the massive bureaucracy has become. Govt needs to focus on it's PRIMARY responsibilities. Like ensure fair elections, Civil Liberties, defense, borders and immigration. If govt worked CORRECTLY -- we could ALL be "more liberal" on things like immigration. But it doesn't. And increasingly, Congress doesn't WRITE LAW anymore. They write blank check legislation and allows that bureaucracies to "fill in the blanks". This is case with ObamaCare and Dodd/Frank. Neither of which is STILL fully written or implemented. It's too loosey goosey, unmanaged and unaccountable.

In addition, the 2 party is WRECKING the "balance of power" between the 3 branches. Only 4 party bosses in Congress matter. The other 531 could go home and not be missed. Constitution doesn't codify the Congressional rules. They need to be changed. So the PARTIES aren't running that circus. VOICES need to be heard, not muzzled by the party bosses.

Corporate/Govt collusion needs to end. NEITHER party has the cajones to do that. Lparty folks do and have that as a high priority. Govt shouldn't be picking winners/losers in particular markets. Or paying corps. to produce anything that they would be making anyway for EXISTING markets.

List goes on. Nothing gets really changed. Foreign Policy is out of it's bounds. Market intervention (not even just regulation) is out of bounds. Personal LIBERTIES are under serious assault. Fiscal sanity is NOWHERE on the agenda. Can't continue that way. The 2 old codger, inept, corrupt parties NEED TO FUCKING DIE.

The "parties" have become the tyranny that the founders warned about..

 

[FA_Q2]

Sounds like you want to dismantle the state. Do you propose your version of a state is better or do you just want anarchy?

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

As is trying to maintain anarchy.

Anarchy leads directly to small despotic warlords taking the power vacuum that having no state leaves.

 

[FA_Q2]

What forethought did that idiot Obama put into bombing Libya or that disastrous escalation of Afghanistan that did nothing but get Americans killed?

The problem with Obama's escalation in Afghanistan is that it relied on the Afghans to step up to the plate. Clearly, they didn't. Kind of the same thing in Libya. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

He sure hell didn't think about what would happen if he withdrew troops from Iraq before the country was stabilized, did he? Look what happen with that vacuum with ISIS. Dumbass, wasn't he?

Here was the thing. We didn't want to be in Iraq because we were LIED to about why we were there. The Iraqis didn't want us there because we had already done enough damage, thank you much. So Obama was supposed to force an agreement to do something neither we nor the Iraqis wanted to do?

Seriously, how does that work.

You also let the Iraqis off the hook way too easily. They could have maintained the peace we bought for them if the Shi'ites had kept sharing power and oil revenues with the Sunnis. They didn't. That's on them, not Obama.

Democrats got us into WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam. Democrats idiots that I bet all Moon Bat like you voted for supported the invasion of Iraq. Gore, Kerry and that shithead Clinton.

Well, first in 2003, i was still a Republican. I wish I could say the fact Bush lied us into war is what turned me on him. But, no, it was when he fucked up the economy and l lost half of everything I spent a lifetime working for.

I added up the number of Americans killed under Democrat wars since WWI and it was over a million. The Republicans a few thousands so don't give us that Moon Bat bullshit about the Democrats being the party of peace.

Well, first, your math sucks. Let me help you out.

United States military casualties of war - Wikipedia

WWI - 116,516
WWII - 405,399
Korea - 36,516
Vietnam- 58,209
TOTAL- 616,640

So not nearly a million, and some of those happened under Republican stewardship.

I don't think either party is a party of peace. But most of those wars were necessary. They were facing a real honest to god existential threat to US Interests.

I think both parties are wrong with interventionism. I had the intellectual and moral courage to live by my conviction by stop being a Republican because of the hypocrisy. When are you going to do the same and stop supporting Democrats that are the same? I don't think you are smart enough to do that, are you?

Here's the thing, buddy, we've never gone to war without a big yahoo from both sides and the people. The only people who lost their jobs over Iraq were the people who had the good sense to oppose it.

Wrong. NONE of those wars were necessary and nearly all of them were set up, by the political elite you so love, to enrich favored corporations, banks, and the extremely wealthy.

I would agree with that for the most part but not all wars are unnecessary. WWII was going to happen with or without our involvement. Sometimes you are dragged to war and those times there is little that you can do.

 

[Votto]

If you are not dedicated to the destruction of empire and the dismantling of American militarism, then you cannot count yourself as a member of the left. It is not a side issue. It is the issue. Militarists and war profiteers are our greatest enemy. They use fear, bolstered by racism, as a tool in their efforts to abolish civil liberties, crush dissent and ultimately extinguish democracy. To produce weapons and finance military expansion, they ruin the domestic economy by diverting resources, scientific and technical expertise and a disproportionate share of government funds. They use the military to carry out futile, decades-long wars to enrich corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. War is a business. And when the generals retire, guess where they go to work? Profits swell. War never stops. Whole sections of the earth live in terror. And our nation is disemboweled and left to live under what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls “inverted totalitarianism.” Libertarians seem to get this. It is time the left woke up.

Written by Chris Hedges and well done I say. The real enemy is indeed within. When will the American people wake up?


The Real Enemy Is Within

I get it, but I have a question for you.

Had Wilson and FDR not help make the US a collectivist utopia like Germany in order to help fight them all off, would we all be speaking German?

Collectivist regimes are cash cows and war machines. How can we fight them without becoming them?

 

[gipper]

Sounds like you want to dismantle the state. Do you propose your version of a state is better or do you just want anarchy?

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

As is trying to maintain anarchy.

Anarchy leads directly to small despotic warlords taking the power vacuum that having no state leaves.

I will take a few SMALL despotic warlords, over a very large one any day.

 

[gipper]

If you are not dedicated to the destruction of empire and the dismantling of American militarism, then you cannot count yourself as a member of the left. It is not a side issue. It is the issue. Militarists and war profiteers are our greatest enemy. They use fear, bolstered by racism, as a tool in their efforts to abolish civil liberties, crush dissent and ultimately extinguish democracy. To produce weapons and finance military expansion, they ruin the domestic economy by diverting resources, scientific and technical expertise and a disproportionate share of government funds. They use the military to carry out futile, decades-long wars to enrich corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. War is a business. And when the generals retire, guess where they go to work? Profits swell. War never stops. Whole sections of the earth live in terror. And our nation is disemboweled and left to live under what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls “inverted totalitarianism.” Libertarians seem to get this. It is time the left woke up.

Written by Chris Hedges and well done I say. The real enemy is indeed within. When will the American people wake up?


The Real Enemy Is Within

I get it, but I have a question for you.

Had Wilson and FDR not help make the US a collectivist utopia like Germany in order to help fight them all off, would we all be speaking German?

Collectivist regimes are cash cows and war machines. How can we fight them without becoming them?

I don’t buy the argument that had we not intervened in those wars, that Germany would have conquered us. Germany was bogged down and losing when Wilson did the deed. They wouldn’t have beaten the Russians either in WWll.

I don’t know how to prevent governments from killing.

 

[Votto]

If you are not dedicated to the destruction of empire and the dismantling of American militarism, then you cannot count yourself as a member of the left. It is not a side issue. It is the issue. Militarists and war profiteers are our greatest enemy. They use fear, bolstered by racism, as a tool in their efforts to abolish civil liberties, crush dissent and ultimately extinguish democracy. To produce weapons and finance military expansion, they ruin the domestic economy by diverting resources, scientific and technical expertise and a disproportionate share of government funds. They use the military to carry out futile, decades-long wars to enrich corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. War is a business. And when the generals retire, guess where they go to work? Profits swell. War never stops. Whole sections of the earth live in terror. And our nation is disemboweled and left to live under what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls “inverted totalitarianism.” Libertarians seem to get this. It is time the left woke up.

Written by Chris Hedges and well done I say. The real enemy is indeed within. When will the American people wake up?


The Real Enemy Is Within

I get it, but I have a question for you.

Had Wilson and FDR not help make the US a collectivist utopia like Germany in order to help fight them all off, would we all be speaking German?

Collectivist regimes are cash cows and war machines. How can we fight them without becoming them?

I don’t buy the argument that had we not intervened in those wars, that Germany would have conquered us. Germany was bogged down and losing when Wilson did the deed. They wouldn’t have beaten the Russians either in WWll.

I don’t know how to prevent governments from killing.

But that is wishful thinking. You don't know for sure.

Also, you say that the former USSR would have handled Hitler, but they were a collectivist war machine as well.

That is no answer.

 

[gipper]

If you are not dedicated to the destruction of empire and the dismantling of American militarism, then you cannot count yourself as a member of the left. It is not a side issue. It is the issue. Militarists and war profiteers are our greatest enemy. They use fear, bolstered by racism, as a tool in their efforts to abolish civil liberties, crush dissent and ultimately extinguish democracy. To produce weapons and finance military expansion, they ruin the domestic economy by diverting resources, scientific and technical expertise and a disproportionate share of government funds. They use the military to carry out futile, decades-long wars to enrich corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. War is a business. And when the generals retire, guess where they go to work? Profits swell. War never stops. Whole sections of the earth live in terror. And our nation is disemboweled and left to live under what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls “inverted totalitarianism.” Libertarians seem to get this. It is time the left woke up.

Written by Chris Hedges and well done I say. The real enemy is indeed within. When will the American people wake up?


The Real Enemy Is Within

I get it, but I have a question for you.

Had Wilson and FDR not help make the US a collectivist utopia like Germany in order to help fight them all off, would we all be speaking German?

Collectivist regimes are cash cows and war machines. How can we fight them without becoming them?

I don’t buy the argument that had we not intervened in those wars, that Germany would have conquered us. Germany was bogged down and losing when Wilson did the deed. They wouldn’t have beaten the Russians either in WWll.

I don’t know how to prevent governments from killing.

But that is wishful thinking. You don't know for sure.

Also, you say that the former USSR would have handled Hitler, but they were a collectivist war machine as well.

That is no answer.

I know that America entered both wars based on fraudulent information, promoted by the ruling class. As in nearly all of America's wars, they were started by the ruling class using their time tested tactic of a False Flag.

I do not believe Hitler had plans to conquer the entire world. He made his purposes well known. He wanted to extinguish communism and expand the borders of Germany. He also very much admired ruthless American leaders like Lincoln and FDR.

Yes the USSR was just as bad as Nazi Germany. It would have been best to let those two fight it out until they had exhausted themselves.

At any rate, Germany never attacked us in either war. Hitler made it clear that his submarines were not to attack American shipping, no matter how much FDR tried to get them to, early in WWII.

As Washington made clear in his farewell speech, we need to steer clear of permanent alliances and follow a policy of neutrality. What a quaint idea.

 

[Votto]

If you are not dedicated to the destruction of empire and the dismantling of American militarism, then you cannot count yourself as a member of the left. It is not a side issue. It is the issue. Militarists and war profiteers are our greatest enemy. They use fear, bolstered by racism, as a tool in their efforts to abolish civil liberties, crush dissent and ultimately extinguish democracy. To produce weapons and finance military expansion, they ruin the domestic economy by diverting resources, scientific and technical expertise and a disproportionate share of government funds. They use the military to carry out futile, decades-long wars to enrich corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. War is a business. And when the generals retire, guess where they go to work? Profits swell. War never stops. Whole sections of the earth live in terror. And our nation is disemboweled and left to live under what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls “inverted totalitarianism.” Libertarians seem to get this. It is time the left woke up.

Written by Chris Hedges and well done I say. The real enemy is indeed within. When will the American people wake up?


The Real Enemy Is Within

I get it, but I have a question for you.

Had Wilson and FDR not help make the US a collectivist utopia like Germany in order to help fight them all off, would we all be speaking German?

Collectivist regimes are cash cows and war machines. How can we fight them without becoming them?

I don’t buy the argument that had we not intervened in those wars, that Germany would have conquered us. Germany was bogged down and losing when Wilson did the deed. They wouldn’t have beaten the Russians either in WWll.

I don’t know how to prevent governments from killing.

But that is wishful thinking. You don't know for sure.

Also, you say that the former USSR would have handled Hitler, but they were a collectivist war machine as well.

That is no answer.

I know that America entered both wars based on fraudulent information, promoted by the ruling class. As in nearly all of America's wars, they were started by the ruling class using their time tested tactic of a False Flag.

I do not believe Hitler had plans to conquer the entire world. He made his purposes well known. He wanted to extinguish communism and expand the borders of Germany. He also very much admired ruthless American leaders like Lincoln and FDR.

Yes the USSR was just as bad as Nazi Germany. It would have been best to let those two fight it out until they had exhausted themselves.

At any rate, Germany never attacked us in either war. Hitler made it clear that his submarines were not to attack American shipping, no matter how much FDR tried to get them to, early in WWII.

As Washington made clear in his farewell speech, we need to steer clear of permanent alliances and follow a policy of neutrality. What a quaint idea.

That theory would be all well and good aside from the fact that Hitler declared war on the US, not the other way round.

 

[gipper]

If you are not dedicated to the destruction of empire and the dismantling of American militarism, then you cannot count yourself as a member of the left. It is not a side issue. It is the issue. Militarists and war profiteers are our greatest enemy. They use fear, bolstered by racism, as a tool in their efforts to abolish civil liberties, crush dissent and ultimately extinguish democracy. To produce weapons and finance military expansion, they ruin the domestic economy by diverting resources, scientific and technical expertise and a disproportionate share of government funds. They use the military to carry out futile, decades-long wars to enrich corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. War is a business. And when the generals retire, guess where they go to work? Profits swell. War never stops. Whole sections of the earth live in terror. And our nation is disemboweled and left to live under what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls “inverted totalitarianism.” Libertarians seem to get this. It is time the left woke up.

Written by Chris Hedges and well done I say. The real enemy is indeed within. When will the American people wake up?


The Real Enemy Is Within

I get it, but I have a question for you.

Had Wilson and FDR not help make the US a collectivist utopia like Germany in order to help fight them all off, would we all be speaking German?

Collectivist regimes are cash cows and war machines. How can we fight them without becoming them?

I don’t buy the argument that had we not intervened in those wars, that Germany would have conquered us. Germany was bogged down and losing when Wilson did the deed. They wouldn’t have beaten the Russians either in WWll.

I don’t know how to prevent governments from killing.

But that is wishful thinking. You don't know for sure.

Also, you say that the former USSR would have handled Hitler, but they were a collectivist war machine as well.

That is no answer.

I know that America entered both wars based on fraudulent information, promoted by the ruling class. As in nearly all of America's wars, they were started by the ruling class using their time tested tactic of a False Flag.

I do not believe Hitler had plans to conquer the entire world. He made his purposes well known. He wanted to extinguish communism and expand the borders of Germany. He also very much admired ruthless American leaders like Lincoln and FDR.

Yes the USSR was just as bad as Nazi Germany. It would have been best to let those two fight it out until they had exhausted themselves.

At any rate, Germany never attacked us in either war. Hitler made it clear that his submarines were not to attack American shipping, no matter how much FDR tried to get them to, early in WWII.

As Washington made clear in his farewell speech, we need to steer clear of permanent alliances and follow a policy of neutrality. What a quaint idea.

That theory would be all well and good aside from the fact that Hitler declared war on the US, not the other way round.

True and had FDR not been covertly working for years to getJapan or Germany to attack us, we would have avoided war.

 

[flacaltenn]

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

As is trying to maintain anarchy.

Anarchy leads directly to small despotic warlords taking the power vacuum that having no state leaves.

I will take a few SMALL despotic warlords, over a very large one any day.

You should watch Game of Thrones. Even the small despotic ones sometimes become large. It's a risky proposition. Somewhere there is a mathematical expression for how large and rich an group of people can become before it collapses on itself without rule of law and govt. The key variables would be population density, resources, and quality of law. You grow beyond your ability to protect your clan and your borders.

When GOVT grows beyond it's bounds to exercise oversight and management -- or becomes complacent, inefficient and largely redundant, it needs to be pruned and refocused. And the warning signs of all that are usually the attraction of potential despots and tyrants to the leadership that are ONLY concerned with maintaining their power, handing out favors in exchange for support, and enriching their cronies..

 

[FA_Q2]

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

As is trying to maintain anarchy.

Anarchy leads directly to small despotic warlords taking the power vacuum that having no state leaves.

I will take a few SMALL despotic warlords, over a very large one any day.

Then you have no clue what a 'small' despotic warlord does to the people. They rape and pillage without recourse or limit.

There are no constitutional backstops to guard any freedoms at all.

 

[FA_Q2]

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

As is trying to maintain anarchy.

Anarchy leads directly to small despotic warlords taking the power vacuum that having no state leaves.

I will take a few SMALL despotic warlords, over a very large one any day.

You should watch Game of Thrones. Even the small despotic ones sometimes become large. It's a risky proposition. Somewhere there is a mathematical expression for how large and rich an group of people can become before it collapses on itself without rule of law and govt. The key variables would be population density, resources, and quality of law. You grow beyond your ability to protect your clan and your borders.

When GOVT grows beyond it's bounds to exercise oversight and management -- or becomes complacent, inefficient and largely redundant, it needs to be pruned and refocused. And the warning signs of all that are usually the attraction of potential despots and tyrants to the leadership that are ONLY concerned with maintaining their power, handing out favors in exchange for support, and enriching their cronies..

The natural way of the state in general.

The problem is, in my opinion, that technology allows this to go on for longer periods of time and limits the ability of the people in general to 'prune and refocus' the government. We have, as a people, become amazingly complacent with our government and that is allowing it to do essentially whatever it wants. Right now is the time to change directions - while we still retain the right to vote and control the direction of government. Unfortunately, I think that the people will only wake up after we have lost those basic controls and rights making the proposition of returning the government to it rightful place not only bloody but possibly out of reach.

 

[Natural Citizen]

How do you propose keeping it in bounds? Anarchy is out of the question.

What must be done cannot be spoken.

 

[gipper]

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

As is trying to maintain anarchy.

Anarchy leads directly to small despotic warlords taking the power vacuum that having no state leaves.

I will take a few SMALL despotic warlords, over a very large one any day.

Then you have no clue what a 'small' despotic warlord does to the people. They rape and pillage without recourse or limit.

There are no constitutional backstops to guard any freedoms at all.

I don’t think you understand. Do you really think anarchic societies would not ban together to take out these despotic warlords, if attacked? We have a large despotic warlord in the US government. No way to take it out. Which is better?

 

[flacaltenn]

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

That is impossible. Can't be done. Government can't be controlled.

If our job to keep it in bounds, we are failing miserably.

As is trying to maintain anarchy.

Anarchy leads directly to small despotic warlords taking the power vacuum that having no state leaves.

I will take a few SMALL despotic warlords, over a very large one any day.

Then you have no clue what a 'small' despotic warlord does to the people. They rape and pillage without recourse or limit.

There are no constitutional backstops to guard any freedoms at all.

I don’t think you understand. Do you really think anarchic societies would not ban together to take out these despotic warlords, if attacked? We have a large despotic warlord in the US government. No way to take it out. Which is better?

Of course there are ways to take out the despotic El Loco Cheeto Grande. Just ask the little cabals in the FBI/DOJ/Intel groups.. Or there's an opportunity in 2020.. Or impeachment. That office is NOT the tyranny we face. It's the way the 2 party system has focused 2 opposing factions against each other to the detriment of American Leadership and good governance. THAT'S a harder task. It's up to the people to reject that useless polarization and rigormortis. And stop voting for "winners". And start voting on principles and leadership abilities to MAKE govt work again..

 

[gipper]

Sounds like you want to dismantle the state. Do you propose your version of a state is better or do you just want anarchy?

You say "dismantling the state" like it is a bad thing.. Actually it is the best thing that could happen. Anarchy would have its benefits over what we have now.

Agreed. However most Americans have been conditioned to believe anarchy is a dirty word...they were conditioned to think this way, by the every thing that anarchy would eliminate...THE STATE.

The "state" will exist in one way or another. So will the rule of law. OUR job is to keep it in bounds. Not to attempt to survive in anarchy..

How do you propose keeping it in bounds? Anarchy is out of the question.

This is very well stated and my thoughts entirely. We need to eliminate the State, as it exists today.

Doug Casey on Anarchy and Voluntaryism
You’re likely aware that I’m a libertarian. But I’m actually more than a libertarian. I don’t believe in the right of the State to exist. The reason is that anything that has a monopoly of force is extremely dangerous. As Mao Tse-tung, lately one of the world’s leading experts on government, said: “The power of the state comes out of a barrel of a gun.”

There are two possible ways for people to relate to each other, either voluntarily or coercively. And the State is pure institutionalized coercion. It’s not just unnecessary, but antithetical, for a civilized society. And that’s increasingly true as technology advances. It was never moral, but at least it was possible, in oxcart days, for bureaucrats to order things around. Today it’s ridiculous.

Everything that needs doing can and will be done by the market, by entrepreneurs who fill the needs of other people for a profit. The State is a dead hand that imposes itself on society. That belief makes me, of course, an anarchist.

People have a misconception about anarchists. That they’re these violent people, running around in black capes with little round bombs. This is nonsense. Of course there are violent anarchists. There are violent dentists. There are violent Christians. Violence, however, has nothing to do with anarchism. Anarchism is simply a belief that a ruler isn’t necessary, that society organizes itself, that individuals own themselves, and the State is actually counterproductive.

It’s always been a battle between the individual and the collective. I’m on the side of the individual.

I simply don’t believe anyone has a right to initiate aggression against anyone else. Is that an unreasonable belief?

Let me put it this way. Since government is institutionalized coercion—a very dangerous thing—it should do nothing but protect people in its bailiwick from physical coercion.

What does that imply? It implies a police force to protect you from coercion within its boundaries, an army to protect you from coercion from outsiders, and a court system to allow you to adjudicate disputes without resorting to coercion.

I could live happily with a government that did just those things. Unfortunately the US Government is only marginally competent in providing services in those three areas. Instead, it tries to do everything else.

The argument can be made that the largest criminal entity today is not some Colombian cocaine gang, it’s the US Government. (emphasis by gipper)

Doug Casey on Anarchy and Voluntaryism

 

[LoneLaugher]

If you are not dedicated to the destruction of empire and the dismantling of American militarism, then you cannot count yourself as a member of the left. It is not a side issue. It is the issue. Militarists and war profiteers are our greatest enemy. They use fear, bolstered by racism, as a tool in their efforts to abolish civil liberties, crush dissent and ultimately extinguish democracy. To produce weapons and finance military expansion, they ruin the domestic economy by diverting resources, scientific and technical expertise and a disproportionate share of government funds. They use the military to carry out futile, decades-long wars to enrich corporations such as Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. War is a business. And when the generals retire, guess where they go to work? Profits swell. War never stops. Whole sections of the earth live in terror. And our nation is disemboweled and left to live under what the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls “inverted totalitarianism.” Libertarians seem to get this. It is time the left woke up.

Written by Chris Hedges and well done I say. The real enemy is indeed within. When will the American people wake up?


The Real Enemy Is Within

Look at you! Another strawman thread about your litmus test for being a liberal!

Please ask me some direct questions about my take on militarism. I'd bet we hardly differ.