Recent comments

  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 1 week ago Web link Jad Davis
    There's no cure for stupid. "A fool and his money are soon parted."
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 1 week ago Web link Jad Davis
    Now THESE are the people who ought to end up hanging from lamp posts.
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 1 week ago Web link Jad Davis
    It gets worse -- a large percentage of people who use pain meds containing Tylenol do NOT do so under medical supervision. More and more doctors, physician's assistants and nurse practicioners have set themselves up as the keepers of our souls and refuse to prescribe effective pain relief for patients who have a "history" or a "potential" for "drug abuse" -- which isn't even a medical term but a political one. Predictably, this has given rise to a thriving black market in pain meds, the most common of which are Vicodin and Percoset, another medicine laced with poison. Drug warriors are evil incarnate, but at least their motives are clear. What's not clear is why the medical profession has allowed itself to become the state's executioners.
  • roach's picture
    roach 3 years 1 week ago Page Westernerd
    with respect, this article that i am responding to, the one that you have exclaimed is "nice work", is indeed "arguing about the meaning of a word". the article itself is arguing over the meaning of capitalism. so is the "nice work" that you have complimented also supporting the "marxist global agenda"? or is it only when i challenge your half of the cold war dialectic that i am? if you are interested in "stepping outside the dialectic", then maybe you should ponder the idea that economics is not as simple as a marxist/capitalist dialectic. many of marx's "ideas" were taken from proudhon's work anyway, and proudhon attempted to create a mutual credit banking system. mutualism, the original anarchism. i do not believe that the free market is inherently bad or some other rubbish. i just don't think that all human actions boils down to economics, and if that's true, then not everything should be considered as capital, nor held account to the market. nor do i think that capitalism is a synonym for free-market. it has a historical meaning which is far different. you live in society, and that means you have to interact with other beings, and in doing so you have to use viable mediums. capital is one such medium, sometimes useful, sometimes not. language is another one, sometimes useful, sometimes not. i can call my car my "gr" all i want, and my friends will eventually get my meaning, but most people will just think i'm dyslexic or slightly off, and will generally ignore what i say when i'm referring to my "gr". what this article, and other works like it, is attempting with the term "capitalism" (a term that the vast majority of the world's population has associated with the current economic system for at least a hundred years) is essentially the same, and will negatively effect growing ideas about actual free-market thought.
  • roach's picture
    roach 3 years 1 week ago Page Westernerd
    edited ^comment meant as a reply. apologies
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 1 week ago Page Westernerd
    Roach, after reading your post I wish I had included in my post just above yours the following quote from the Hegelian Dialectic review: Hegel's dialectic is the tool which manipulates us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action. Every time we fight for or defend against an ideology we are playing a necessary role in Marx and Engels' grand design to advance humanity into a dictatorship of the proletariat. The synthetic Hegelian solution to all these conflicts can't be introduced unless we all take a side that will advance the agenda. The Marxist's global agenda is moving along at breakneck speed. The only way to completely stop the privacy invasions, expanding domestic police powers, land grabs, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. This releases us from the limitations of controlled and guided thought. http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm We can debate back and forth all day over how we perceive Noam Chomsky might have defined "capitalism" and it won't change Robert's defense of a free and open market unfettered by "regulation" from agents of state. Arguing over the meaning of a word indeed "supports the Marxist's global agenda". Without state agents' interference (that is, in a truly free environment) free individuals will save and/or borrow the resource needed to produce a product or service. Call it what you will, most refer to it as capital. If the product is good and the entrepreneur masterful and efficient in his manufacturing and his assessment of the marketplace, everyone benefits. He does not lobby "legislators" of state for tariffs, laws or embargoes in his favor to handicap or eliminate competition and artificially raise prices and profit margins. All business monopolies are the creation of politicians. The free market filters away the ingredients that give rise to monopolies and unfair business practices. In the absence of politics, capitalism (unless you're simply bound to be averse to that term) is honorable and forthright. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 1 week ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Anyone who feels a need to whine about agents of states murdering and assassinating, "a practice prohibited by U.S. law..." should be reading John Hasnas' "The Myth of the Rule of Law": http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm Samj
  • roach's picture
    roach 3 years 1 week ago Page Westernerd
    wow. it's hard to know where to start with what i think is wrong with this piece (you probably don't care, but i'll try and tell you anyway, since someone decided to just post a link to this peice under a comment i made about real historical capitalism, instead of actually engaging with anything i said). you quote noam chomsky, in an article defending capitalism. have you ever bothered looking at chomsky's views on capitalism? or is he up in those "ivory towers" expect for the two seconds that you find him useful? lemme help you with that. he describes himself as a "libertarian socialist" (that's a codeword for anarchist… but the kind of anarchism that has an actual history dating back further than 1960. libertarian socialism has been a synonym for anarchism since the 1850's). here's a quote from chomsky.. "In a capitalist system, you don’t have any rights. And in fact when modern capitalism developed in the early 19th century – this is post-Adam Smith or anything like that, but Ricardo and Malthus and so on – their principle was pretty simple: you don’t have any rights. The only rights a person has are what they can gain in the labor market. And beyond that, you’ve no right to live, you’ve no right to survive. If you can’t make out on the labor market, go somewhere else. And in fact they could go somewhere else, they could come here and exterminate the population and settle here. But in Europe, you couldn’t do that, so some remnants of the whole feudal system and conservative structures and so on did lead to – after all, Europe had huge labor movements, the German social democratic party grew out of very powerful movements, and they just forced the development of what became social market systems.". you'll notice above that chomsky is not referring to 'mistaking the american system for capitalism', he is describing the real history of capitalism and it's consequences, including massive popular movements that do not like being held to the whims of 'the market'. it is what capitalism has always meant. people have been saying that "capitalism is violent" for almost two hundred years now. it is not a new thing to say. just because you didn't notice it before doesn't effect that. you should realize that the term "capitalism" itself has been used in an insulting way by the left since the left invented in the early 1800's, when french socialists referred to it as 'capitalisme'. it's pretty much always been a reference to 'fat cats with cigars', both theoretically and practically. i know these aren't things one learns in an average school system, but they are true. it was actually french radicals that disagree your understanding of politics and economics that popularized the term 'capitalism', yet you seem to be mad that the same type of people are still using it in the same exact way. so let's go back to the play that seems to come out of the official propertarian handbook (i've heard it many times). "why can't we just go by the definition in the dictionary?". ok. lemme get my dictionary from nicaragua. i bet it'll say something a little longer and more historically articulate than your definition. or, as Chomsky would say, "well, who wrote that definition, and who wrote that dictionary? did it suit their needs to talk up capitalism? are they themselves capitalists? who gets to approve the definition?" i bet you'd be unhappy if i said that we should agree on 'socialism' as defined by a dictionary written by anarchists and socialists during the heyday of printing anarchist materials. and you also refer to yourself as an 'anarchist', and as far as many dictionaries are concerned, "anarchy" is synonymous with chaos, though i would think you would disagree. and don't tell me that we should use the dictionaries that you prefer because "we all agree that they're right" or some other such nonsense. by the same logic we should accept that capitalism is unpleasant for many people. the whole point of your rant was that you don't like how everyone supposedly muddles the name of something you hold in high regard. another problem with your idea of capitalism, is this "voluntary exchange". what about just acquisition? how can an exchange be free and pure if it is an exchange of something that was stolen beforehand? if i steal your car, the give it to my kid, when my kid sells it, it still wouldn't be a "voluntary exchange", because you never volunteered to let go of it in the first place. The U.S. sure didn't nicely ask for the land it currently sits on (yes, that effects all the land titles it has issued over it's history). barrack gold and others aren't nicely asking papuans to move away from the fertile parts of their land that they use to feed themselves so that a chemical hell can be unleashed to melt the rock away, leaving mercury laced water and gold. the original corporations from england didn't ask for any of the many many things that they stole and then sold, creating the economic foundations of the colonies. something usually only becomes "capital" after it is taken from the original possessor (who likely valued it according to their own needs) by it's first title holding property owner (who values it according to the market), thus transitioning it from its many dimensional capacity to it's one dimensional reference point as 'x amount of capital' beyond all of this, you should also stop being so one dimensional as to think that any "ism" can be reduced to an eight word statement. it's a middle school level analysis. even high school asks for more. it's as ridiculous as boiling down the complex, 150 year old political theory of anarchism into "anti-state". Even old school anarchists at least boiled it down to 'fighting against the triumvirate of the state, capitalism, and the church', and then kept describing what they meant for another 20 minutes or 3 pages (depending on the format). "ism"s have histories too, and knowing and understanding those histories is just as important towards understanding the theory as knowing and understanding the theorists. so i think i'll stick to continuing to use the term 'capitalism' as i have been doing so, as a reference to a political-social-economic system that has a long and violent history, including the enclosure process, colonization, enslavement, and world wars.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 1 week ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    A little bit of knowledge can be a very dangerous thing, especially when the only true goal of the one wielding it is profit.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 1 week ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    Back on my side of the court already? LOL Comin' back to you, my friend, with a "back-spin". :> In-alien-able does not mean that you cannot lose them through consent or forfeiture. You, perhaps, didn't see this on my August 31st post above ("back-spin"): "Our natural rights, "rights antecedent to all earthly governments", are in-alien-able, (not in-a-lien-able). In-alien-able means, as 2nd President of the U.S., John Adams, so succinctly put it, they are "rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws"...
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    Maybe I don't know how to read, but it appears to me that Alexander Cockburn thinks the 9/11 conspiracists, which he packaged along with JFK and RFK conspiricists, have NOT been "vindicated", i.e. proven right.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    "I agree, Semmes..." I would add, however, that the evidence put forth by the Architect and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is more logical, and therefor more credible, than that of the NIST and the Warren Comission reports, combined.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    And, apparently, the enormity of the lie makes it credible.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    It is difficult to argue sensibly on this. "Government", by it's very nature, is conspiracy of the most gigantic and heinous variety. The enormity of the truth is incredible. Sam
  • Semmes's picture
    Semmes 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    I have spent at lot of time. I am in the choir. The NIST report is as good as the Warren Comission report. I was only trying to say that Cockburn is a tool. I only addressed some of his points. I have seen otherwise intelligent people see the BBC footage where the reporter/newsreader announces WTC 7 has collapsed 15 or 20 minutes before it goes down. These intelligent people don't believe their own lying eyes and do cartwheels trying to explain why that can't mean what it means. People are so brainwashed and locked into their fairy tale world view you can't even spoon feed them facts in small doses without the cognitive dissidence creating an angry reaction. The real importance of 911 is about the Wars we are fighting that have bankrupted the country, the rise of the Police State here and loss of our liberty. I guess the real story here is about slaves that make their own chains.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    I agree, Semmes, spend just a little time looking at some of the non-governmental research that has gone into 9/11 and one will come away with extreme skepticism regarding the gubbermints explanations. Then add to that that Fires Have Never Caused (any other) Skyscrapers to Collapse and one would have to be much more than "stupid or sloppy" to dismiss ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND FORTY-EIGHT architects and engineers, i.e. non-conspiracy theorists, "willing to put their professional reputations on the line without payment", who apparently think that it was an "inside job".
  • Semmes's picture
    Semmes 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    The way I analyzed 911 and all the stories is as if it were something I was going to invest my money in. Whom are the players, who is putting out information and explanations. Who do they work for or connected with? What is their agenda? Who are the winners and losers in this situation. Why is Cockburn quoting the opinion of an expert connected to Wolfowitz while dismissing the opinions of at least 1500 who were willing to put their professional reputations on the line without payment as merely a small percentage of engineers world wide. He states that a huge crew would have had to enter the buildings during regular business hours to wire it up even though it is a known fact that in the weeks prior on the weekends there was "elevator maintenance" with large numbers of people with materials going in and out requiring the shut down of security. There was a group of Israeli Art students actually living in one of the towers in the weeks prior. Cockburns' other expert is a aeronautical engineer and ordinance expert. So what. You would think he would consult one of the specialized companies in the world to are involved in large project demolition. The part about structural steel going soft is not worthy of comment. He also expresses the standard canard that no conspiracy could exist without somebody leaking it. What about the Manhattan project, D-Day, Gulf of Tonkin, assorted assassinations......on and on. The man is not stupid or sloppy, he is dishonest. He wouldn't get my money.
  • Evan's picture
    Evan 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    I'm skeptical of all the explanations I've heard. I'm not a believer in any of the official or unofficial conspiracy theories. And I'm especially skeptical of skepticism.
  • wkmac's picture
    wkmac 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    Cockburn is not anti-state by any means so as I read him, I keep this in mind. Beyond that, I do agree on the idea of state ineptness which he seems to prove somewhat giving several examples. But then on that same note I'd ask Cockburn why he therefore holds such trust in the institution of the State to begin with in the face of such ineptness proof. If they are that inept to even carry out simple conspiracies, how can they then be trusted to carry out simple gov't central planning and dare we not even speak of the more complex things? I respect Cockburn and Counterpunch as it's a daily read for me along with STR but this one had elements that left me scratching my head. And I don't subscribe to the many 9/11 theories (I think the damn things collapsed eg no explosives) but I'm not closed minded to consider the many questions. I mean I do have to acknowledge the longshot odds of 2 planes hitting these building in such a way as for both to fail and come down in the same way. I do think it beat the odds but I don't discount at all people who question that. I see that as a healthy thing unlike Cockburn who as I see it right now would disagree. Would 10 years after Pearl Harbor have Cockburn slamming Dec. 7th conspiracies of FDR knowing when 60 years later he admits FDR probably did know? What will a Cockburn in 50 years say about 9/11? Why in 1951' you are a nutjob and now Cockburn's remarks are considered acceptable and even intelligent? Cockburn is fair in some criticisms of 9/11 theories and especially the rabidness of it's disciples. But I think what really scares the schitt out of Cockburn is the poll numbers of people who just no longer believe blindly what they are told by the State. This IMO is at the core of what panics Cockburn but then he can always turn that into a conspiracy to sell to the Counterpunch readers!
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    Lawnmower man was cutting grass at 0430 when 99 percent of people are still sleeping rather than for the cutting itself. Misleading headline.
  • Semmes's picture
    Semmes 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    Here we go with the big lie again. Cockburn holds his integrity cheap. He alludes to known mainstreamed governmental cover ups and conspiracies to gain trust and then puts out the neo-con bull shit. This article is pure disinformation. I hope he didn't sell out cheap or all least got the negatives and all the copies of the photographs. I suppose we should scrap our navy. One missile hit or as in WWII a Kamikaze hit and our ships will melt to the gunnel's.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 1 week ago Web link Westernerd
    At 4:30 a.m. it's not a "good deed", it's idiocy. lol
  • Guest's picture
    joe barry (not verified) 3 years 1 week ago
    Great Depression
    Web link Don Stacy
    The promotion of the three primary Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) should come as no surprise. The government is the entity in everyday life that usually rewards venal, unprofessional and vicious behavior on the part of its apparatchiks because that is the primary means by which government gets things done." Weg mit der panik  
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 3 years 2 weeks ago Page R. K. Blacksher
    Ain't it the truth!
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 2 weeks ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    Hmmm. So your position is that inalienables are alienable. Huh? right back atcha. :>
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    "Yes, I agree that one may delegate away rights completely and permanently if one desires. But it seems to me they remain his rights because if he ever changes his mind, it is his natural right to reclaim them." Huh? Isn't that a contradiction, tzo? Either you completely and permanently delegated them away, or you didn't; you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Not take anything from the "promisee"? I just had to delete everything I wrote. My EDITOR (wife) said it was too harsh. :)
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 2 weeks ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    Yes, I agree that one may delegate away rights completely and permanently if one desires. But it seems to me they remain his rights because if he ever changes his mind, it is his natural right to reclaim them. Do you believe that a lifetime contract of servitude should be enforceable? Even if voluntarily entered into, if the delegator of rights changed his mind it would become involuntary servitude. Can a contract justifiably enforce involuntary servitude? Per Rothbard, any contract that is based on a promise of future labor or goods is unenforceable, as a broken promise disappoints expectations but does not take anything from the "promisee." Frustrated expectations are not property trespasses. Of course if the "promisor (sp?)" accepted something up front in exchange for the promise, then he would owe the other what he accepted based on that promise. If I contract to give someone $1,000 in one year if he gives me $10 now, and I fail to deliver, I owe him $10 (plus interest, perhaps?).
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    The above got posted twice, because STR was evidently down. And, rather than waste this space...(there's no "delete" option)... power (n.) c.1300, from Anglo-Fr. pouair, O.Fr. povoir, noun use of the infinitive, "to be able" ~ Online Etymology Dictionary Authority, literally means, the "condition or quality of being author"; and, what one creates, one has the right to control, which explains the STATE created personae[1]. Thus, one may simultaneously have the "authority", i.e. "the right to control", but not have the "power" to do so, i.e. not "...be able" to control. As Ron "Tater Salad" White so eloquently put it, "I Had the Right to Remain Silent...But I Didn't Have the Ability". And, the STATE can have the "power" to control you, without having "authority" to do so. As the so-called Declaration of Independence put it, "deriving their just powers [proper authority] from the consent of the governed". Now the question is, have you somehow given the STATE reason to presume that you have consented to be governed by it, perhaps by utilizing the persona[1] created, by the STATE, just for you? _____________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Artificial persons. Persons created and devised by human laws for the purposes of...government, as distinguished from natural persons. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 113
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    G'day tzo, First question, who can one "loan" or "rent" his right to life, liberty and property to, if "all men" already have them? "All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property...", though it should be noted, and is self-evident, that some do not realize they possess them, just as you stated above. That said, I certainly do agree that one may "delegate" his "natural, essential, and inherent rights of defending life and liberty...and protecting...property". The only difference you and I may have, on this particular subject, is that I say that if these rights are "yours", you do have the authority to delegate them away, completely and permanently, if that is your desire.
  • newjerusalemtimes's picture
    newjerusalemtimes 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    The woman was in obvious neglect of the child, not for allowing her 10 year old child to ride one mile to school, but for allowing the child to ride it to a communized Public School, where the very first thing children are made to do is to Pledge Allegiance to an oppressive Death Cult.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 2 weeks ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    I'm gonna go with LS here. Rights are inalienable because you always have first claim on them. You can "loan" them, "rent" them, or not realize they're yours, but the moment you know what they are you can rescind the delegation of them at any time. This power means that they are always yours and are inalienable, and cannot be contracted away even if you decide you do not want them, because you can always change your mind, and the other contracting party would have no choice but to return them. This pretty much make voluntary slavery contracts invalid from the get-go. This is why it is valuable for governments to make sure that people do not even understand that they possess such inalienable power, because sovereign populations do not get duped into believing that coercive governments are just organizations.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago
    Legal Obedience
    Web link Don Stacy
    "Lysander S. Spooner, one of America's great 19th-century thinkers, said no person or group of people can "authorize government to destroy or take away from men their natural rights; for natural rights are inalienable, and can no more be surrendered to government -- which is but an association of individuals -- than to a single individual"." I seldom disagree with Lysander, but I must make an exception here. Our natural rights, "rights antecedent to all earthly governments", are in-alien-able, (not in-a-lien-able). In-alien-able means, as 2nd President of the U.S., John Adams, so succinctly put it, they are "rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws", rights may not be alienated from the individual by human laws. On the other hand they do belong to the individual, to dispose of as he likes, and he can, therefor, "without committing a crime", choose to "surrender" them to either a corporation [government], or a single individual. What he cannot lawfully do, is surrender anyone else's natural rights without their consent; they are not his to "surrender", just as Lysander stated in the forepart of that quote.
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 3 years 2 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    Glen, this perception is absolutely correct and has been the case for at least 3 decades. When I was teaching in the Detroit Public Schools for a short time, many of the teachers there would never have considered sending their own children to the schools they occupied. Most of these schools were infested with unqualified staff members and a panic mentality that infused them without relief. I'll never forget my first day as an intern (student-teaching). The school where I was posted was full of banners inside that were horribly misspelled. I later found out that they were prepared by the teachers, not the students! Furthermore, even though I was a history, Latin, social studies teacher, I was regularly posted teaching French (I spoke it well) and English. The unfortunate students at some of these school were never taught to compose essays that anyone would ever want to read. They had it drummed into them to compose paragraphs that followed a useless and stifling format consisting of a lead topic sentence, a middle section, and a summary sentence that recapitulated the preceding content. The result? A horribly repetitious cascade of words that were never capable of developing into anything but a of bird-cage lining. I recall having to fill out (the kids did it for me because it took so much time) three kinds of attendance -- to obtain funding of course from the appropriate sources! In addition, while a few of the schools at the time were well run, an east-side high school (Denby Senior High) regularly had as many as 50+ teachers absent. They were in fear for their lives, and they daily warehoused hundreds of students at a time in the auditorium because of the staff shortage. I was glad to shake the dust of that system from my feet, but I'll never forget how sad I was and how unhappy the students were who had made a human connection with me. I still think of those poor kids and what they were subjected to in the name of teachers' unions, overpaid administrators, and the obscene fraud that they were actually getting an education!
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 3 years 2 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    Hi, Glen. Thank you for your kind words. It is significant that so many people within the voluntaryist community have been exploring the need for a program that comprises both the concept of love/empathy and the standard voluntaryist notion of liberty. I have received a great deal of satisfaction reading about your discoveries in this area over the past few years, and the existence of people like you, who understand the nature of this dual focus, has been an inspiration and catalyst. Several people from the local group here (which meets at Cafe Libertalia) have been investigating this possibility for the past 2 years. Until about 6 months ago, they attempted to work within a Sudbury group, but they discovered that many of the members have a tragic unmet need to feel secure by imposing democracy on the children in their schools -- even though they seem to understand the problems of doing such a thing and our reservations about them. It's only been in the last 6 months that we decided to go forward independently. We recently completed a detailed business plan and have been moving forward on a very intense schedule. The possible existence of a local Sudbury school may actually provide a "critical mass" of public awareness that will benefit the Summum Bonum Learning Center, and we have been able to keep on good terms with many members of the Sudbury group.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 2 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    Another point: Public school teachers pay to get their OWN kids out of the public school system at about TWICE the rate that parents in general do. Search for "Public schools no place for teachers’ kids" at the Washington Times (from 2004 but still posted and worth reading). About 20% of public school teachers send their kids to a private school, and in some cities, it's as much as 44%. In other words, those who know public schools best -- from the inside -- are even more desperate than the general public to get their own kids out of our public schools.
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 2 weeks ago Page Lawrence M. Ludlow
    This is a great series, Lawrence -- you are (in the spirit of STR) truly striking at the root. Schools such as Summerhill, Sudbury, and the coming Summum Bonum Learning Center address BOTH sides of the love and freedom duality: they create emotionally healthy kids who WON'T grow up to idolize some new Hitler or feel the need to crush scapegoats to avenge the pain they suffered from a repressive childhood, AND who naturally and easily respect the rights of others. Free and responsible kids become free and responsible adults: we'll never have anything like a sustainable free society without a LOT more such people. I look forward to seeing Summum Bonum grow and prosper.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link strike
    Well, duh? Having an ID makes children vulnerable to "ID theft", but it does not make them "victims of ID theft". But even if we correct that ridiculous statement, this is akin to saying that having toys makes children vulnerable to "toy theft". Ya think?! Only chattel property is numbered. chattel noun 1.a. a movable item of personal property, as a piece of furniture, an automobile, or a head of livestock 2. a slave If the cow [mother] and the bull [father] are both numbered, does it really matter if their calf [child] is numbered? I think not. The only reason the rancher [owner] numbers it is so that he can prove it is his property. Revelation 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man... Cognitive Dissonance "If things are too frightening and too threatening our brains tune it out, because it would affect our behavior, and it would be too painful to accept." ~ Dr. Nathan Hagens
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    "— there isn’t a single man, woman, or child alive who is not in violation of some obscure regulation or cannot be ‘suspected’ of wrongdoing." Wrong! (IMO) That should have read "— there isn’t a single person alive who is not in violation of some obscure regulation or cannot be ‘suspected’ of wrongdoing." Homo vocabulum est naturate; persona juris civilis – Man [woman or child] is a term of nature; person of civil law. ~ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary (1914), “Maxim,” page 2136
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    "...while possession of small amounts of marijuana isn't a criminal offense, "publicly displaying" marijuana is. During stop and frisks, when police ask suspects to empty their pockets, the marijuana becomes visible. That allows for arrest for "public display"..." Someone should advise those agents to also strip search the suspects and then they could charge them for "public indecency", as well. More revenue that way.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Kinda hard to have much sympathy for the kind of people who would just stand there and watch state thugs kidnap their children.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    CSI is great propaganda for the government. As to reality, your chances of finding justice in the criminal "Justice System" are pretty slim. This has interesting implications in the arrest phase...
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    I doubt if this would be possible in the US but it is an inspiring example of participatory democracy.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Not a bad article but it needs more historical analysis.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    Screw Glenn Greenwald.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 2 weeks ago Web link Westernerd
    “when a murderer is hanged, there is only one person at the ceremony who is not guilty of murder.” ~ George Orwell It is nearly impossible, for me, to imagine a more ridiculous statement! But, then, it is about what I'd expect from someone who reportedly wrote to Cyril Connolly from Barcelona on 8 June 1937 stating: "I have seen wonderful things and at last really believe in Socialism, which I never did before".
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 3 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    "...Today the dialectic is active in every political issue that encourages taking sides. We can see it in environmentalists instigating conflicts against private property owners, in democrats against republicans, in greens against libertarians, in communists against socialists, in neo-cons against traditional conservatives, in community activists against individuals, in pro-choice versus pro-life, in Christians against Muslims, in isolationists versus interventionists, in peace activists against war hawks. No matter what the issue, the invisible dialectic aims to control both the conflict and the resolution of differences, and leads everyone involved into a new cycle of conflicts..." http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 3 weeks ago Page Westernerd
    Nice work, Robert. A month or so ago I became mesmerized by a piece I read by Delmar England. http://www.anarchism.net/anarchism_insanityasthesocialnorm.htm It is long, and it took extensive sorting through questionable grammar and sentence structure and punctuation, etc.; but once I made the effort the message became clear, as is yours. Here's a quote: "...Will of God, will of the people, public welfare, constitutional rights, natural rights, national interest, ought, should, gross national product, for the good of the country, the values of society, minority rights, morally right, immoral, race relations, community standards, freedom and democracy, altruism, selflessness, government does, majority rule, freedoms, fighting evil, on and on and on unto infinity. "... This is but a partial list of concepts commonly accepted and frequently uttered. This is the vernacular of oppression with which our senses are inundated without let up from birth unto death..." I think it was Stefan Molyneux who said on one of his videos: "...Enforcement of statism does not come from (agents of) the state. Enforcement comes from fellow slaves. And that is the genius of (agents of) the state..." And even Stefan with his knowledge, I believe, fell victim to "reification" (to regard or treat an abstraction or idea as if it had concrete or material existence), which Delmar England insists keeps most of us in oppression. Thus I've inserted "agents of" the state, since states do not exist except in abstraction. Sam Sam
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 3 weeks ago
    View to a Kill
    Web link Michael Kleen
    “when a murderer is hanged, there is only one person at the ceremony who is not guilty of murder.” ~ George Orwell It is nearly impossible, for me, to imagine a more ridiculous statement! But, then, it is about what I'd expect from someone who reportedly wrote to Cyril Connolly from Barcelona on 8 June 1937 stating: "I have seen wonderful things and at last really believe in Socialism, which I never did before".
  • mkghandi's picture
    mkghandi 3 years 3 weeks ago Web link Mike Powers
    None of them are going to do any remedial learning in business or economics. They are selling their influence to the highest bidder. It is not visible to the average Joe because the media puts a curtain around it. These people don't need to know anything about business or economics. Their sponsors--the people who buy their influence know all anybody needs to know about economics and business and politics too. Congress gets plenty of 'help' in making economic and foreign policy. MKG
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 3 years 3 weeks ago Page Glen Allport
    I second that, Suverans2. And I'll add that my response to Paul's last comment should have included an acknowledgment of his idea that "how the message is presented is important" and that people basically don't want to hear about their own emotional damage. (My response was, I fear, a bit snarky and defensive). So I agree with Paul's pont, and at the same time I think it's important for more people to understand that unlove and other trauma to children HURTS them, and that THAT is a major reason why the world is in such a mess and that liberty is hard to find and erodes back into tyranny every time. Knowledge (in this case of the cause of neurosis and other psychopathology, and of their role in tyranny) is a critically-important tool for improvement, AND, at the same time, many (most?) people shy away from the topic, because it is inherently painful. This argues, again, for multiple approaches from multiple people who understand the paradigm but explain it in their own way; when enough discussions on the topic of liberty AND compassion are taking place, when enough people hear the phrase "the Doctrine of Love and Freedom" and have been exposed to at least some of the framework by different writers and speakers -- some of whom "click" for them even if others don't -- then we'll be on our way to improvement.