Recent comments

This is a really great article. If you get a chance I'd be really interested to hear your thoughts on allowing people to directly allocate their taxes. By far the most common critique of this proposal is along the lines of other people being idiots. So, given this article, I figured this proposal would be right up your alley. Here are a few especially relevant entries from my blog... http://pragmatarianism.blogspot.com/2012/01/unglamorous-but-important-th... http://pragmatarianism.blogspot.com/2011/12/taxpayer-division-of-labor.html

I do not have a social security number or a birth certificate for my son that was born in january 2010. we live in virginia and i have recieved the laws governing vital statistics. my question is this.... can medicaid deny benefits for him not having a social? also, is there any statutes or laws that can have a private health care deny him insurance. any help is much appreciated!! thank you

Good article Paul. Internet based communities are a good first step but in the end you have to have real-time, meat space communities in the traditional sense of the term. "Boots on the ground" as the military sorts call it. It is better perhaps essential that you have a thousand persons in one place rather than have ten thousand scattered all over the rest of the country. Even radical individualist Stirnerites can't stand alone.

No, S2, I'd not call this one a "nit" :-) I don't have figures so could be wrong but my impression about the relation between government and the organics fad is opposite to yours. I see organic veggies being "pushed" at high prices in supermarkets, and the wealthier the neighborhood the harder the push. I have the firm impression that limousine liberals are promoting it, and they are in bed with government. A year or two back I made a foray into the fruit trade and explored importing some from central America. One eager exporter there after another was quick to assure me that his plant practised "sustained" agriculture - as if I cared. All that mattered to me as a prospective importer was quality and price. Other growers told me that they had offered organic products but could not sell them into the US - the demand was not such as to compensate them for the much less efficient growing needed. So yes, it may well be that Big Ag favors chemical assistance, but I have no problem with that - on the contrary, it seems to me what has enabled the Earth to feed a dramatically growing population, and which will continue to do so. My fingers are far from green, but I understand that a very efficient way to grow things is by hydroponics; a controlled environment (eg plastic greenhouses) and growing beds of gravel through which water is circulated, in which are dissolved specific nutrients. Clean healthy food results - but it's a highly chemical process. Any objection to that?

Definition of NATIONAL 1 : one that owes allegiance to or is under the protection of a nation without regard to the more formal status of citizen or subject ~ Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, 11th Edition The word "or" makes this definition a little intriguing, to me. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language states that the following three words are synonyms for each other, so I am wary of all of them. "And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you..." SYNONYMS: citizen, national, subject These nouns denote a person owing allegiance to a nation or state and entitled to its protection: an American citizen; a British national; a French subject. As an individual secessionist, I consider myself an "American, since America was, (according to my Father and Mother et al, the land of my nativity, but I am not a U.S. citizen". Earthling has a nice ring to it.

Exactly, jd-in-georgia, I don't, for one moment, believe that the so-called BIBLE is "The Word of God"; but I refuse, as so many do, to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are still pearls in those books, even after the CHURCH thought that they had "sanitized" it enough for the commoners.

Jim makes an interesting point about defenders vs attackers http://www.strike-the-root.com/1492#comment-5381 which referred me to this article. And following on Jim's "Based on the precedent of the Slippery Slope, my advice to anyone reading this in, say, 2079 is to be very wary of the word "we." I concur Do not discount the "I". Challenge the premise of "We". Oui! There is *No We*: Challenge the Premise. http://zerogov.com/?p=2334

The best things in life are free... especially ideas. Imagine if everyone could think for themselves? As long as there is a manipulative monopoly on information dissemination, real progress will always be flowing with the rapidity of a glacier.

Worth glancing through all the parts to the piece. Most of us know this, but the essay outlines the history of the incestuous yoke of governmentalists and religionists from the beginning of written history. The control of how the minds of the proletariat are shaped and controlled has been the obsession of all agents of both state and religion. Copyright encapsulates that joining-at-the-hip. Sam

I love the way Atlas Shrugged Jsu Garcia (as Francisco d'Anconia) dropped the "e" and the "s" on his name. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZFK7b5Io_s Atlas Shrugged Trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcyYjmjcPj8 Antonio Buehler is wearing a T Shirt with d'Anconia Copper emblazoned on his chest. Who is Antonio Buehler? See "From the Right To Resist the 'Duty To Submit' by William Norman Grigg" as it relates to "Austin Police Brutality Against Army Ranger Captain--[Antonio Buehler]--For Taking Photos Of Cops Abusing Woman In Cuffs" (Posted under the caption "Armed trolls do NOT like to be photographed").  http://tinyurl.com/Troll-Watch

Hi Jim, If you go to private messages, click on "Write new message", at the bottom of the text window you will see the html tags that can be used here on STR, to close one of these where you want to, you simply use the same html tag but with a backslash in front of the html letter, letters or word. The word "strong" is bold, "em" is italicized, "a" makes your text blue, and ul indents the paragraph. If this isn't clear enough let me know and we can do a bit more by e-mail. Also, there's a trick to embedding a link, so if you'd like help on that, just let me know. p.s. Almost forgot; if you create your post in that private message box you can preview what you have done, by clicking on, yep, "Preview message", then copy and paste it into the comment box when you are satisfied with it. For some weird reason there is no "Preview message", with "Comments". You can, I believe I have already mentioned earlier, go back and "edit" your comment.

Never mind "my opinion", S2, just consider the reasoning. Is it sound or not? What I said was that no human being (no reference to "living being") can be enslaved totally (not with respect to "time", but with respect to his nature.) Yes. And yes, thank you, it does follow that he cannot therefore be 100% enslaved, regardless of whether or not he volunteers. This is quite a discovery! Total slavery is impossible. This fits well with the accounts of people who have been tortured, yet survived. The tyrant took everything but their spirits, their inner persons. However, I can't see that the converse is true - that 100% freedom isn't possible. Indeed, it certainly is possible! All that's required is that the enslavers (yes, the "system") vanish. Let's help them do so. BTW, you and others manage to use _emphases_ in STR forum posts - bold, italics, etc. How do you do that? When I see a window to post, the only option seems to be Notepad-like text. '

Woke up way-y-y too early this morning and had trouble getting back to sleep, so y'all are stuck with me for awhile. lol Okay, here goes... ETYMOLOGY [of the name JESUS]: Middle English, from Late Latin Iesus, from Greek Iesous, from Hebrew yesû'a, from yehôsûa', Joshua ; see Joshua1 (Source: American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language) ETYMOLOGY [of the name Joshua]: Late Latin Ioshua, from Hebrew yehôsûa', Yahweh [sic] (is) salvation; see hwy in Semitic roots (Ibid.) So? Where is this leading? Technically yehôsûa' should be translated "halloo Yah", which means, "call upon the name of Yah", which in turn is idiomatic[1] for, "call upon the authority of Yah" NAME, n. ...8. Authority; behalf; part; as in the name of the people. When a man speaks or acts in the name of another, he does it by their authority or in their behalf, as their representative. Here is where this is leading. The PTB in the Roman Empire of that day, (just as the PTB of the Roman Empire today), did not want anyone calling on any authority but the CAESARS...they are jealous gods. Sound familiar? ;) Act 5:27 And bringing them, they stood in the sanhedrin. And the high priest asked them, 28 saying, Did we not command you by a command that you not teach in this name? And, behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine and intend to bring on us the blood of this man. (Literal Translation of the HOLY BIBLE translated by Jay P. Green Sr.) And what was this "doctrine"? Act 17:7 "...these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king..." Man, this is fun!! And what is the ONLY decree we read of in the so-called New Testament? Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world [the Roman Empire] should be taxed. What these "high priests" were afraid of is that the CAESAR would catch wind of their "doctrine" and they too would be nailed up on a stake for sedition[2]. Act 24:5 For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world [the Roman Empire], and a ringleader of the sect [party] of the Nazarenes... Basically sedition is kind of a 'catch-all charge'; it's what your government may try to charge you with some day...when they can't really find any evidence to charge you with anything else. I'm taking the time to type this all out, in the hopes that at least one of you will read it. Sedition. Communication or agreement which has as its objective the stirring up of treason or certain lesser commotions, or the defamation of the government. Sedition is advocating, or with knowledge of its contents knowingly publishing, selling or distributing any document which advocates, or, with knowledge of it purpose, knowingly becoming a member of any organization which advocates the overthrow or reformation of the existing form of government of this state by violence or unlawful means. An insurrectionary movement tending towards treason, but wanting an overt act; attempts made by meetings or speeches, or by publications, to disturb the tranquility of the state. See 18 U.S.C.A. § 2383 et seq. See also Alien and sedition laws; Smith Act. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 1357 _____________________________________________________________ [1] idiom noun ▸an expression whose meaning is different from the meaning of the individual words. For example, “to have your feet on the ground” is an idiom meaning “to be sensible.”

Always wonderful to hear we can now more efficiently kill people we shouldn't be killing.

"Every state constitution... contains language that refers to the people as the source of all political power, which is derived from them." Mere propaganda, to make slaves more comfortable in their slavery. This is similar to calling politicians "public servants" or saying "they work for us". They don't, and never have.

"I can see no reason why government should have followed the establishment of farming" I suspect it was the presence of accumulating surpluses, fixed in place. And the fact that theft is easier than farming. So yeah, the association of government (big parasitic government anyway) with agriculture makes lots of sense. And that association will continue until countervailing factors (such as personal firearms and communications tools) break that association. Also, there is protection. Say you are an early farmer and you have planted a field in wheat and vegetables. Come harvest time you find both deer and humans have raided your fields so your harvest is reduced. You hire a "protector" to keep them out. Eventually your protector owns you, because protection implies submission. Rather than asking why government resulted from agriculture, we should wonder whether it was even possible for agriculture to fail to produce government.

"The sickest part is that there is no _written_ law that compels such conduct." Completely irrelevant. This is, after all, blatant theft; something government constantly engages in, and MUST engage in to survive. One does not ask a mugger to produce documents proving his right to take your wallet. I thought I was being smart, putting some money in 1mdc (a digital gold currency). Little did I know this was backed by e-gold, whose gold was located in the United States. This country stole all assets in 1mdc by raiding e-gold. And really, it doesn't matter where it was located since the US claims jurisdiction over the entire world these days. A mattress is a better bet. Another good bet is not having too many assets in the first place; assets attract thieves. What I don't understand is the defective self-interest of the parasite class. If they had any sense they'd keep their depredations to a low roar. When the entire society is impoverished because no institutions can be trusted, we won't be able to support that many parasites any more. They must not be very smart.

This seems to be an appropriate place to put this: "The Venn Diagram Memes" by Stephanie Herman, Geke.us I believe it will give newcomers a real "feel" for the term "corporatocracy".

Hmmm. Frito pies have been the downfall of many a weight loss or fitness program. But they are so easy to make and they taste really good too. Not especially good for you though.

They should have had, (IMO), several from the movie The Matrix. Here's one of my favorites. Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around. What do you see. Business men, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.

Thanks, Sharon. The Field (1990): McCabe: "There's a law stronger than the common law." Priest: "What's that?" McCabe: "The law of the land." What is the "law of the land", "the law" of "all land", it's the "law of nature". And, what is "the law of man", not just some men, but "all men"? It's the natural law of the human race.

TWICE, I tried to post the above comment to the original article. I wasn't actually denied, merely informed that "Your Comment will be Published Within 24 Hours" Is there something that I suggested that might be un-publishable in TheDailyNewsEgypt.com--perhaps the fact that the military already controls the news?

Suverans2, I suspect that this was not always the case,tho-you might be one who utilise an 'escape for the diligent'? Care to share the details? Work? Labor? Payment? &c. Are you sulf-sufficient;Energy,food production,Heat/cool,property tax? Do you patronize the Government monopolies?

Voluntary slavery is alive and well. Employee = EMPire + LOYalist. If every means of sustaining your life is cut-off and you have to submit(apply) to one of the States fictions(CORPoRATIONs) for the means(Babelbux) to obtain sustenance.;after laboring for the Fraudulant Reserve Nots you have to again submit back to the Fictious State your 'voluntary' exchange becomes not so voluntary and you are indeed a slave that 'owes his soul to the company store'.(like the folk song states.And the old Book of Genesis unequivocally teaches. ) Gen 47:15 And when money failed in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came unto Joseph, and said, Give us bread: for why should we die in thy presence? for the money faileth. Gen 47:16 And Joseph said, Give your cattle; and I will give you for your cattle, if money fail. Gen 47:17 And they brought their cattle unto Joseph: and Joseph gave them bread [in exchange] for horses, and for the flocks, and for the cattle of the herds, and for the asses: and he fed them with bread for all their cattle for that year. Gen 47:18 When that year was ended, they came unto him the second year, and said unto him, We will not hide [it] from my lord, how that our money is spent; my lord also hath our herds of cattle; there is not ought left in the sight of my lord, but our bodies, and our lands: Gen 47:19 Wherefore shall we die before thine eyes, both we and our land? buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give [us] seed, that we may live, and not die, that the land be not desolate. Gen 47:20 ¶ And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh's. Gen 47:21 And as for the people, he removed them to cities from [one] end of the borders of Egypt even to the [other] end thereof. Gen 47:22 Only the land of the priests bought he not; for the priests had a portion [assigned them] of Pharaoh, and did eat their portion which Pharaoh gave them: wherefore they sold not their lands. Gen 47:23 Then Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, [here is] seed for you, and ye shall sow the land. Gen 47:24 And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth [part] unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones. Gen 47:25 And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh's servants. Gen 47:26 And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, [that] Pharaoh should have the fifth [part]; except the land of the priests only, [which] became not Pharaoh's. It is interesting to note that their is an escape for the diligent. :) http://loveforlife.com.au/content/08/07/30/standing-upon-land-john-josep... http://books.google.com/books?id=MemsAAAAMAAJ&dq=right%20of%20conquest&p...