Recent comments

  • Kent McManigal's picture
    Kent McManigal 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    As I've said in the past, the NAP/ZAP is essential, but not sufficient.
  • zygodactyl's picture
    zygodactyl 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    I can answer that from both sides. Assuming that all atheists are also evolutionists; It would be irrational to believe that our ape ancestors wore clothes. Therefore, mans' ancestors have been nude for who knows how many tens of thousands or millions of years. We were born to run so to speak, and we cool best with sweaty bare skin while we run. Now, for the religious folks. Note in my first comment that I said "Nowhere in the bible does it say man must wear clothes." Your mention of Adam and Eve in the book of Genesis does not invalidate my statement even slightly. The fact that there exists nude and nearly nude cultures even to this day proves that man is not hard wired to be ashamed of his body. Cain killed his brother, but almost nobody does that, therefore it does follow that we must be ashamed of our bodies because Adam was. The bible says that we were made in Gods image. Are Christians who support indecency laws saying that Gods image is indecent? Hmmmm?????? Where you trained as a child that those parts are disgusting? Yes? Then you have made my point! I could not care less whether people wear clothes all the time. Clothes are useful tools. I am looking at this from a psychological angle. There is no rational reason to be ashamed of ones body. It is what it is. There is nothing "disgusting" about the human anatomy unless it's filthy or diseased. I suspect the origins of man-made clothing laws originated from the ruling class who wanted to make their subjects feel inferior because of the rags they wore as compared to the wealthy elites fine top-of-the-line garments. You see, in a nude society the rich look no different than the poor. People were probably only wearing clothes when it was cold outside, but the rulers then created a law making year-round clothes wearing mandatory. They probably did it by using religious leaders to twist around the meaning of what Genesis actually said. I found this hilarious brief video while hunting for the above link.
  • zygodactyl's picture
    zygodactyl 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    This article answers your questions Glock27. Brian
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    As I understand that story, Glock, they only became aware of "shame" after the first recorded politician in history had convinced them that their Creator had lied -- that they could enjoy "...government of the people, by the people, for the people..." (symbolized by the partaking of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: "voting" -- subscribing to central [monopolistic] political authority). "Serpent" is a poor and incorrect translation of the Hebrew. "Whispering Enchanter" would be more accurate English. But the translators got one thing right: political authority represents aggression "...more subtil than any beast of the field..." Politicians are psychopaths -- capable of looking you in the eye while relieving you of your possessions "...for the better good..." of course. You, like I, were an educator in government ("public" ha ha) schooling. You, like I, promulgated that attitude. You, like I, are on this forum to recover from that demeanor. I think. I can't speak for you. You, like I, need to decide whether we are to accept the feasibility of this story as having at least some veracity for our lives and for our behaviors; or whether we should accept government-funded science, which proclaims (as funding time looms) they are just about to substantiate abiogenesis. Those first two created human beings, according to the story, had been given free access to the tree of life: governance "...of The Creator, by The Creator, for the people..." The Hebrew throughout that particular best-selling tome uses "tree" ("branch", etc) to symbolize philosophy, character -- point-of-view. What's your favorite tree? Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    This is a good review of Zwolinski’s article, Paul. I always enjoy your "hands-off" approach, which is where I stand. You linked to your MYOB article, from which on another thread I recently commented, "...if I practice MYOB I won't need to crusade for NAP -- it's included with the purchase..." My oft-repeated lament: none of us has ever experienced freedom from monopoly state, so any projection I might have of LATEOS ("life-after-the-end-of-state") is purely speculation. Your guess is as good as mine as to how various situations might play out in total anarchy (<==pdf, defined as "absence of central political authority"). I observe the tendency of so many of us to get caught up in intellectual/bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo due to that lack of first hand experience: "libertarian theory". My guess is that there is a latent desire on the part of most to "...do the right thing..." -- which is probably the closest and most succinct definition of what libertarianism -- as well as NAP -- is all about. Of course "doin' the right thing" is up for grabs when you're caught up in "legal" definitions -- which is why I try to refrain from bureaucracy. It is also my hunch that we will be surprised at how extensive neighborhoods will become in joining together to protect the properties and safety of residents from aggression by the bad-asses who will remain after LATEOS. My little Des Moines neighborhood -- located in "the hood" -- is a current example. I needn't worry about prowlers when I'm out with the truck. We look out for one another. Sam
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Glock, Because you have not read your Rothbard, you are unaware of the clear definitions that have already been laid out in spades. Rothbard clearly discusses the custodial role that parents play in the life of young children. That is why the misuse of that custodial roll can be construed as aggression. Again read your of bard and catch up on the language here.
  • BrianDrake's picture
    BrianDrake 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Yes, I am refining the definition. Language is subjective, and as long as you clearly define your terms and are consistent in those definitions (i.e., you don't equivocate), you can use any words you want. My refinement is not an attempt to redefine per se, but mainly to distill the fundamental concept being discussed. Having read much literature on the NAP, I've come to the the conclusion that we're really talking about the issue of consent and the NAP is basically a prohibition on violating consent. I think you can use the standard definition/understanding of aggression (initiation of force; though even that is only one definition of several) without my refinement and still make use of the NAP, but I think it requires a much more involved/complex discussion (involving, among other things, a careful consideration of just escalation and proportionality in response to conflict). For simplicity and clarity, declaring that what you mean by the NAP is that you may not violate the consent of another is more of a simplified conclusion than an attempt at outright redefinition. One reason I find this useful is that if someone, like Zwolinski, is going to glibly reject the NAP for its alleged shortcomings (such as not addressing fraud) then they're less likely to be receptive to a complex response and will likely accuse such complexity as an ad hoc attempt at salvage, thus "proving" their point. Instead, pointing out that they've missed the essence of what the NAP means, through a simplified clarification of its conclusion, engages successfully (I think) at the level of discourse being offered (mainly beneficial to the "audience", not necessarily the detractor). If a more rigorous discussion is pursued, then more complex explanations still exist.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Web link A. Magnus
    POLAND: Seems they have more balls than America does. It seems to me that the time for chit chat is over. Do or do not, there is no try.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    I believe your fears may be headed our way. As I watch and read news it is getting to be more scary by the day, especially when I read where the Boy In the White House revised the "Posse Comitatus Act", making it legal to permit military forces to come in and conduct business like Law Enforcement. He signed this executive order in January. After the Justice Scalia (sp), addressing a graduating class told them this reality exists--like it or not it is coming. This seems to be one of the reasons that FEMA has been busily constructing internment camps for American Citizens and the government handing over multitudes of military equipment to Law Enforcement Agencies across the country. The Nazi Monsters are not going to end, but rather grow. Simply looking at history is predicting this.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    , BrianDrake: Are you implying in paragraph 2 that some form of concise definition of aggression, violence, etc needs to be forged so when the term is being used everyone will be speaking the same language, or do you hold to common language usage as your guideline for defining the terms. I note that in line 3 of paragraph 2 that you seem to be attempting to refine the term to get it into a more precise meaning?
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Sorry to be so bothersome, but I believe that female mutilation is a far worse situation than the snipping of a little bit of skin from a newborns penis.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Zygo: Check out Genisis when Adam and Eve began covering themselves, ergo the beginning of the feeling of shame and the need to cover those disgusting parts of the human anatomy. Of course, if you don't believe in the bible, then why mention it? Just curious.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Zygo: I know you cannot answer this question because you are circumcised as am I, but is there any evidence anywhere about uncircumcised individuals who's sexual sensitivity is decreased by it. Does the cricumcised males penis head vacate the skin covering?
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Thunderbolt: Not sure about the "spare the rod, spoil the child" I got my butt whipped so many times when I was a little fellow. The result was that I hated my father and would defend mercilessly my mother against him. I think spanking was merely a cultural thing. I spanked my kids, but I had a limit--dependent upon age. No more than six licks regardless. When they were little fellows my spankings were rather light. When they reached the 1st grade or six years of age the spankings stopped and I used other methods of dealing with the problems. In school I had a few whoopins from teachers. Once was enough. Public humiliation was the worst part of the paddeling, not the paddeling itself, ergo, I have not started any wars and I don't believe I am a monster. The same goes for my kids. With all this talk I am beginning to lean towards the idea that judges should issue public spankings for certain crimes, or maybe the criminal gets to make a choice public spanking or jail. In jail you are not publicly humiliated and maybe publlic humiliation needs to be done more, but is humiliation a form of aggression. I've got no idea.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    So far, regarding this circumcision issue I believe you have made the most penetrating point. I guess from my perspective, what is really the big deal about to circumcise or not. I do not recall the first circumcised individual I ever observed, but I remember the feeling "What's wrong with him." I looked at him as being abnormal, but soon learned it was a practice of choice for the parents. That is why I have said earlier, someone must come up with a clear definition of aggression, violence, etc. I think all individuals use the term as common language with a common understanding of the terms. I am saying, in the case of this site, it must be more clear than common language terms if honest dialogue is going to occur. This may be a stupid point to some, but I have to believe there are a few who recognize this same need. "nobody ever discusses circumcision or spanking" It's an apple orange issue. Most people don't give a fuq about those issues, except in school where spanking is illegal. I believe that in some crimes committed that judges should order public spankings of the offender rather than waste of tax payer money with keeping them in jail. But of course, if we put them in jail, then it keeps jobs going! I would be interested in knowing how many members here would agree with public spankings for criminals who commit non-felony crimes. I guess the problem with this is it still falls under aggression--maybe the criminal should be given the choice, public spanking or jail?
  • BrianDrake's picture
    BrianDrake 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Fraud is theft through deception. It is not just chocked up to caveat emptor. If you give your consent to an exchange when the other person has purposely misrepresented what they are exchanging, then the fraudulent party obtained your property without your consent (i.e., you consented to trade X for Y, not X for Z. If Z is provided instead of Y through deception, then the other party did not fulfill their side of the agreement and thus have obtained X without consent). Obtaining the property of others without their consent is just another way of saying "theft". Defining aggression purely in terms of initiated force is common, but not immediately accurate in describing the violations the NAP condemns (it can be ultimately reconciled as accurate, but requires a more complex discussion). The actual issue is that of consent. The NAP is simplified, less confusing, and more rigorous if you consider aggression as any action involving non-consensual interaction with the property of another person; i.e., aggression is violating the consent of others. This definition clearly includes violent actions (e.g., assault, rape, murder, kidnapping) and non-violent actions (e.g., various forms of theft including fraud, trespassing, refusal to make restitution for accidental damage). Determining if consent has been given of course requires determining who has the authority to give or deny consent for that which is contested (a human body in the case of violence, external resources in other cases). This is where an understanding of ownership is required. The libertarian case for self-ownership (i.e., the ownership of your own body) and ownership of resources through first-appropriation and consensual exchange is the most coherent and capable of being followed (unlike, for example, universal ownership which effectively requires inaction and thus death).
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    That would about size up the US government, Yes it would.
  • Kevin M. Patten's picture
    Kevin M. Patten 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Paul, I mean to say how charible and giving people are in their hatred towards this topic, whenever it can be brought up. It brings out the worst in people, and I've already admitted as much with myself. "You won't find vitriol there." No doubt Paul - not a measured report by any means. A bit of a tirade. And I have written more than a few. This is a personal issue that has been building up frustration within me for some time. Seeking the anger from others might be my fault, but if I feel it important enough to discuss cogenially with others, and cant seem to do so - ever! - my "report" will reflect something as to how I experience these tital waves of resentment.  "They are too busy haranguing each other to have a discussion." I understand how difficult this is in the real world. A few nights ago in LA, during a protest against police brutaity and for Kelly Thomas, I tried to explain to someone how - if you follow the link here about "Religion" - any semblance of criticism towards the practice of sucking off amputated foreskins is greeted with calls of Anti-Semitism, along with another lengthy rant about the Holocaust. I couldnt even finish my 3-4 sentences before I was called a fascist, by some friggin kid hiding behind a mask for god's sake. You're right - its tough to have even-handed discussions about this personal stuff. Jokes about statism, welfarism, and people who go off to fight in horribly iillegal wars - all can usually be done with a handshake and smile. But with racism, religion, rape, genital mutilation - the critique, i feel, has to be served icy cold. No one understands it any other way. 
  • Thunderbolt's picture
    Thunderbolt 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    It is fascinating how many Hitler-like monsters we have had here: Lincoln, Wilson, Truman, FDR, LBJ, George I, George II, Obama. Hitler with nuclear weapons is a scary thought. Do we have that now? I hope we live through it. Killing millions of people in an afternoon is a sobering possibility. As George Carlin said, " We like war. We are good at it. We get a lot of practice. We especially like to kill brown people."
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago
    Schoolteacher Cheating
    Web link Don Stacy
    I think I would wager, that from somewhere upon high, the teachers were drawn into this plot, mostly to save their jobs. I taught 32 years in Special Education and never had a cheater; how can you cheat at learning to tie your own shoe? Among other simple tasks. The only intellectual challenge I had was how to generate a curriculum to meet the specific need of the student. Reason being, there are no real Special Education curriculum materials in the market place. I got out because I was not, according to Bush. a highly qualified teacher despite having my Masters in Special Education. Your option was to return to college and take three specific classes deemed critical by legislators or take a test at $200 each. What was that all about? Control. Glad you had a positive experience Paul.
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    Jim, thanks. You have inspired me to read it again. You received a lot of good information from it and have really done us a wonderful favor by identifying some good reasons for taking a second look at this work. Thanks again.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    It didn't numb my mind quite that much, Lawrence.  It wandered a fair bit, and yes the world would have been much better had he stuck to painting, but it does follow a certain logic.   It has two parts. The first, and more interesting to me, is autobiographical. It relates seqentially how he acquired his Weltanschauung. I could understand it, and in my article I tried to pinpoint just where he went wrong - which premise was most false. It was the earliest one: that the State is a valid and importent entity, worth helping to strengthen. There were also flawed steps of reason; for example he saw that foreign-looking Jew in Vienna and concluded that no Jew could also be a patriotic German. An amazing and tragic extrapolation.   The second part is more about how he planned to build the NSDAP as a party, and then direct the State how to flourish. There is, as I also said, some useful material there for anyone building any movement. I was less interested in all that, for I don't believe government will vanish as a result of "building a movement." The most interesting item in that part, to me, was his decision to abolish parliamentary procedure within the Party. He said it wasted time, while emulating the methods of their opponents. Instead, one Leader would make decisions, delegating specified functions to deputies who would also rule their departments and be accountable for performance. However he could not possibly have implemented that choice unless he had already proven to his comrades that he could deliver the goods; ie pull in truckloads of converts by his speeches. They must have seen him as a kind of superman. That was a really key moment, and it happened in about 1922.   That Hitler was wrong on almost everything is true of course but I still think Mein Kampf is worth reading as a record of what enabled him to cause so much misery.
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    Jim, I remember getting about halfway through this book (Mein Kampf), and finally I put it down. Why? Because it reminded me of having a conversation with the usual half-drunk boob down any-stupid-street USA. The prosaic assumptions and low-brow accusations just piled up higher and higher. This, combined with the German overuse of substantives made it a lumbering mess of a read. Oy veh!  
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    Ha! Sad, but true--and I'm referring to Mein Kampf, of course. Reading Hitler's stuff is pretty mind numbing. He really should have stuck with painting. The world would have been a better place, and his paintings really are not that bad. More and more, I realize that many artists are really very disturbed people, and it is a big mistake to give them political power. But I guess that goes for anyone in any profession when you think about it
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    I think it is a good sign that Americans are engaging in less violent intervention in this area than in the past. My observations during childhood were much as Kevin's . And I think that barbaric practices such as circumcision are, indeed, a stepping stone to later aggression by parents against their children. I recall a psychiatrist friend of my former wife--he was always a rude and insulting "host" to me--who demonstrated in his person the potential for "medicalized" bloodthirstiness and totalitarianism that pervades far too many physicians and "healthcare" professionals. They are all to willing to spout the politically correct "soviet" science of their day as if it were true for now and all time--only to wake up years later and realize they had it all wrong (if they are honest about it). Far too many doctors are in favor of imposing a regime of mandatory health practices, which is why so many ancients fled in terror at the approach of a doctor, and with good reason. As Thomas Szaz pointed out frequently, people who attempt to "medicalize" social life by pretending to find medical excuses for mandates and prohibitions enforced at the point of a gun are the enemies of civilization--and it would be redundant to say "free civilization." When I think of today's abuses by medical professionals--especially psychiatrists--I cannot help but think of the Soviet-era concentration camps where people who were defined as mentally ill because of their non-soviet political beleifes and were buried alive.  
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Jim Davies
    Lawrence: I got suckered into purchasing this text and now you are saying it is nothing more than the ravings of a loony?
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 3 weeks ago
    Schoolteacher Cheating
    Web link Don Stacy
    Schools are where kids learn to cheat. I was astounded when, as a brand new teaching assistant in college, I discovered that some kids in class cheated (probably had a sheltered upbringing). I gave them zeros on their papers, along with a note on top in red: "YOU CHEATED!" Strangely, the kids in question became fans of mine, and straightened themselves out, at least as far as I could tell. Guess I was the first person who told them it was wrong.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    How about this one, Sam? "VOTE TO INCREASE PRAYER." That should solve all the problems. I actually don't mind the less statist anti-abortion posters, and even sympathize with them to an extent (e.g. "It's a baby, not a choice.") Some people understand effective advocacy: directly affect the mom's state of mind, and stop trying to get some bozo elected.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    "My vitriol stems from a very recent witnessing of how the largess of our society acts to this issue – both online and in the real world." I am having a difficult time understanding you. What does largess have to do with anything? Are we speaking the same language? Let's assume I thought circumcision was a bad thing, and hoped to slow it down a bit. First thing I would do is figure out how to influence people. Ah, there is a book for just that purpose: Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends & Influence People". Sold a gazillion copies, because it works. You won't find anything like the above tirade in that book. You won't find vitriol there. "nobody ever discusses circumcision or spanking" That's very true. They are too busy haranguing each other to have a discussion. I have tried a few times; it was laughable. Nobody wants to discuss things, because that implies tolerance for differences of opinion. I have gotten the impression that people who bring up these subjects are more interested in building themselves up by berating others, than they are in actually reducing the prevalence of the practices they (allegedly) object to. "Holier than thou," as they used to say in the old days.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Thunderbolt, can you give us a source for that view, that parental spanking produces violent children?   I'm thinking that the correlation might be rather weak. Recently I wrote about a well-known monster, whose father did not spare the rod. But he had three siblings, who did not become violent. His elder brother was a good-for-little petty thief and would-be blackmailer, but nothing worse; his two sisters lived normal, undistinguished lives. Yet they all had the same father.   True, Alois Jr had grandsons in New York, one of whom became an IRS enforcer. But it's a stretch.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Kevin: Whether a boy is circumcised or not I believe is a non-relevant point. Circumcision is more a point of freedom of choice by the parents. I am confused about your statement about "nobody talks about circumcision or spanking. Orange and apple here. I am beginning to believe the central issue is to have a clearly defined definition of aggression, violence, coercion, threat and etc. As I read, and not only your points but others as well I get the feeling people are hurling these words about without any honest definition of any of the words. I guess I also am guilty of this verbal crime. I know I am being kind of funky here, but it is an issue I wonder about when I read. Someone or some group of people will have to come up with clearly defined terms. Aggression and violence could be viewed as a person with an expression of aggression and violence on their face as they approach you. Does violence end at the tip of my nose or does it end somewhere else, like three feet away from me. Recently, in Texas, a "no knock warrant" was issued and a police officer was killed by the home owner. The cops never announced that they were police officers. Fortunately for the young man defending his pregnant girlfriend and their other child he took action to protect his family from a home invasion, and a grand jury did not find sufficient grounds to charge him with murder of a police officer which could have resulted in life in prison or the needle. He did get nailed for having pot plants and seeds. I am not sure but to me violence and aggression ended at the tip of the judges pen. Personally I believe the judge should be charged with depraved indifference and negligent homicide. I was circumcised at birth. It was tradition and also believed it was more healthy for the male child to prevent infections and etc. With nearly 70 years here I cannot put my finger on a point of my life wherein I felt any behavioral deviancy. It did make me physically different than those whom were not circumcised. The first time I ever observed an uncircumcised male I was rather shocked. I thought, "What's wrong with him! Well. Now I know better and it does not make me feel any different about the individual and I certainly hope they do not see any difference with me. I was breast fed as an infant and I don't think it has made much of a difference in my life. Now these are merely personal reflections and no intention to reflect negatively about what you have shared. All of us have some evil in us and some good. I guess fortunately more of us have more good than evil, but then again that is an issue that needs to be clearly defined. Where do we start Kevin??
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago
    A Foul Smell
    Page Mark Davis
    PS: The Latin verb that Augustine uses in Book 4, Chapter 4 of City of God is "infestare." I think it is soooo appropriate. After all, what is that infests the world and causes more damage if not government?
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago
    A Foul Smell
    Page Mark Davis
    Mark, thanks for this article. That quotation of Augustine is my favorite of virtually everything he wrote. I am currently reading Butler Shaffer's book, Boundaries of Order, and he defines the peace-making role of boundaries, which is too often ignored. He points out that well understood and well-defined boundaries are a peacemaking mechanism. And more and more, I think that that is their primary role--especially because, as you pointed out, there is scarcity among physical goods. Only one person can ultimately have control over the use of any one physical object, and that is the purpose of the concept called property and of well-understood boundaries. Thanks, L
  • Lawrence M. Ludlow's picture
    Lawrence M. Ludlow 1 year 3 weeks ago
    The Meaning of War
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    Good post. The only think I might add to it is that there should be room under this listing for people to inscribe their names if they favor war. Anyone who speaks in favor of it must sign such a statement and show it to all of his children and relatives---and to the people at his church! They may all pile on in favor, but at least they couldn't pretend afterward that they never were for it, as so many Bush-leaguers did as the first decade of the new millennium grew long in the tooth.    
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Wow! Circumcision. When will we get to see Strike-the-Root play bunnies?
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Sam. Were you aware that the Boy in the White House revised the "Posse Comitatus" act and signed it in January making it totally legal to utilize the military as a police force, an executive order no less, and the Constitution clearly states that only Congress can make and pass laws" not that this is right, but that it is a continuing interest story in mans search for freedom.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    As I said, Kevin, the message here is this: FREEDOM DOES NOT WORK Now, we at STR know better. I think. We understand that without central political authority there will still need to be individuals and organizations arise among us who can and will act upon serious crime -- sex predation, child molestation, the whole shmear. Many will want to jump right back into collectivism -- fearful that the free market simply cannot produce freedom. Since none of us has actually experienced the absence of central political authority, we can only surmise how all that will play out (and we do a lot of that here at STR). Actually, I suggest you read this (pdf) "...but with the court sentencing many depraved and sick individuals, forcing them to be with others, and have been for many decades, I am unsure how this institution could be called libertarian in even the slightest way..." Your key word here is "...the court sentencing..." Courts are not libertarian. AA is. You need to check the link I provided. I also recommend all who read this watch the documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-_xPU3KC5E But as you do, understand that AA has no leader(s) who are vested with the authority to check your credentials when you step in the door. That's what is libertarian about it. You are a member if you say you are a member. If you assault or threaten people, a couple big bruisers will perhaps lock onto each of your elbows and escort you out. Or somebody will probably call the cops. But "AA" won't, and can't. Ms Richardson maintains throughout her "documentary" a classic collectivist mentality. She is good at the "freedom-will-not-work" message. She blames the bad things individuals are capable of on AA. And none of us got to AA because we were "nice" folks. I had my first AA exposure in Huntsville, Texas, behind the big, big wall. I was not a very nice man (or so a host of Texas policemen and "judges" had diagnosed). In freedom (the absence of central political authority) men will still be men, women will still be women. Crusaders will abound. Bad things will take place. I will still need to defend myself. Attending an AA meeting won't change that. It can help me stop drinking alcohol, and if I get sober I might change my behavior for the better. I'm not beating the drums for AA here. I've actually drifted away from the meetings since I started back trucking. But don't blame it for psychopathic judges' co-opting of the one free institution on the street. Sam
  • Kevin M. Patten's picture
    Kevin M. Patten 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    what does libertarian literature say about cults? of course people are free to be brainwashed, but with the court sentencing many depraved and sick individuals, forcing them to be with others, and have been for many decades, I am unsure how this institution could be called libertarian in even the slightest way. but yes this is off the topic of circumcision
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Kevin: "...I’m writing a report about Alcoholics Anonymous, taking notes from one Ms. Monica Richardson’s activism. She reports a great many stories of women getting prayed on, with the courts sentencing not only addicts put also rapists and pedos. Great place to express your anonymity, no?..." What's the message here, folks? It's this: FREEDOM DOES NOT WORK And that is exactly the message you are intended to receive. It is exactly the message Monica Richardson's documentary "The 13th Step" portrays. It starts right out with the lament: "AA is not staffed with trained professionals..." Well, Duh! AA is not allied with any organization that might employ "...trained professionals..." It is probably the most libertarian assembly you know of. The psychopaths who operate "courts" have every bit as much "right" to order people to Catholic Catechism or Baptist Sunday School as they do to AA meetings -- except for the fact the churches have "trained leaders" who would balk. And that, my friends, boggles the minds of collectivists. A totally free fellowship with no leaders or rulers having any power to manage or control -- with one purpose and one purpose only: to stay sober and help other alcoholics achieve sobriety. AA has no leaders to resist those robed lunatics' defilement. As a result, many members and chairpersons dutifully sign the court papers -- I wouldn't (and would always argue against it at business meetings). Anything predators of state cannot regulate, they will co-opt. Alcoholics Anonymous is a classic example. They detest and fear the idea of anything -- anything -- being free. Our primary defense is to abstain from beans and to encourage others to so abstain. Mind you, internet "regulation" is in the offing. Just like AA has been defiled by "court ordered inmates", the web is being infiltrated by collectivists who gravely influence Google, Yahoo and the many other "engines" that can direct you and me to (and away from) various web pages and sources of information. The white man has introduced and will introduce "legislation" requiring various prerequisites to the posting of essays and/or opinions. Off topic of circumcision, I know. But important -- and Kevin was sincere in his essay and his response to comments. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    I'm a strong fan of your MYOB crusade, Paul ("crusade" in jest, I hope you know). In fact, those who practice MYOB needn't crusade for NAP -- it's included with the product. The crusade to end the "right" of parents to circumcise (including the use of the M word to describe it) is closely akin to the crusade to stop the "right" of moms to abort fetuses. The only difference is age of offspring -- and virulence of campaign. Right now the lifers seem to be ahead of the choicers in anti-abortion billboard drives. I'm struck by a road sign I pass regularly (I'm a trucker): "PRAY AND VOTE TO END ABORTION" There is always the argument: if you believe in prayer, why vote? And if you believe in voting, why pray? Seems some root-strikers need to follow my mutilation (pun intended) of the old u.s. marine adage: pray, vote, or get outa my face. Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 1 year 3 weeks ago
    New Schiff Appeal Memo
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    I'm not normally wrong, but may have been yesterday, about this; I said that a sales tax would "necessarily charge everyone an equal, flat rate". That's not quite true.   In many European countries the governments impose a sales tax (actually a VAT, because it's much harder to avoid) unevenly. They apply a zero rate to basics like foodstuffs, and higher rates on goods that are desirable but not essential, then punitive rates like 25% on things that make live really worth living. So while it's much rougher than a finely-tuned tax on earnings, it does punish the rich more than the poor, and so Irwin's argument (that the latter would arise in protest to prevent a sales tax being implemented at rates high enough to yield as much revenue as the i-tax) probably isn't valid.  
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Thank you, Brian. And first, apologies for my second question; it was silly. Any parent would be far more upset about the fact of their son's resentment at what was done to him, than by the size of a surgeon's bill.   I'm first astonished that the C-rate was and is so high. I'd read the fractions upside down. In the 1960s an 85% majority of boy babies got cut? - wow. I checked "Prevalence" in Wiki and it seems that's so. Interesting trivium: "In the United Kingdom, prevalence was roughly 25% in the 1940s, but declined dramatically after the National Health Service  (NHS) did not cover the costs of the procedure." So: government health care may have a virtue, after all.   Your restoration link suggests to me that it's a bit iffy. Stretching and taping... or surgery that may or may not work. I was thinking that a series of skin grafts from elsewhere on the body might do the job, but they don't get a mention. Is there a doctor in the house?   A last question: given the large numbers of adults involved, does anyone know the extent of the indignation? I've not been aware of marches on Washington, angry buzzes on the Net, etc.  Even on STR, I think Kevin's article was the first to bring the subject front and center.  
  • Kevin M. Patten's picture
    Kevin M. Patten 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Thanks everyone for weighing in positively. To address Paul specifically. First, I have absolutely NO intention to shame other men, or to give any one an “inferiority complex.” I am saying that from my own experience, being a 28 year old male, one who has had wonderful relationships and never had a single complaint from any of my girlfriends, it is specifically regarding both the culture and the reaction I have seen in the last few weeks, this whenever I bring the issue up. Notice how circumcision always seems to bring out the schizophrenia in people. One example is highlighted in the article, but there are a couple more. IE: This is an unusually sexualized society, one in which depraved jokes are the norm, and which body organs are readily discussed and laughed at. Not for everyone, but especially with people in my generation. But then: “Fifty percent of the penis skin? FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY FOR ED?!” Suddenly they turn cold. The interest wanes dramatically. In none of my other social investigations have I encountered a reaction this visceral, except for racism and rape. But if it’s so benign, so much like a dental procedure, why would this reaction be seen at all? So, I’m worried about the causality of aggression in our society, as well as the reason why so many mothers have a hard time breastfeeding and bonding. The La Leche League Foundation has been screaming about this for 30 years. This single action has no greater repercussions in society? No ripple has been created? Let it be said: I HAVE never and WILL never go up to any parent and interrogate them about their kids. I have no interest in doing anything so obscene. This anymore than looking at badly-gone circumcisions, just to fuel some internal hated. My vitriol stems from a very recent witnessing of how the largess of our society acts to this issue – both online and in the real world. From my own personal concerns; why was ever an aggressor, and so sensitive to emotional pain, and why I didn’t breastfeed well? People who insist theyre absolutely okay, I truly wonder – because people nobody ever discusses circumcision or spanking. But here’s one more hypocritical anecdote that can usually be found: Exactly what Sam said. Your MYOB campaign. So, I’m writing a report about Alcoholics Anonymous, taking notes from one Ms. Monica Richardson’s activism. She reports a great many stories of women getting prayed on, with the courts sentencing not only addicts put also rapists and pedos. Great place to express your anonymity, no? And yet no would ever tell me that the desire to reduce sexual assaults is somehow immoral, or not worth it, or that “I cant save them all.” This is ultimately why I didn’t feel the Vietnam was a horrible example. A great deal of the New Left – protesters, students, teachers – had never been to Vietnam. They only felt the repercussions of damaged men who came back home, and were violent, and addicted. That population – and Im n not comparing their numbers – were what was experienced at home. Its not so dissimilar if you accept the premise that Male Genital Mutilation has possibly created some aggressive tendencies in our society. Serial Killers? Rapists? I have no idea. Human behavior is hard to pinpoint, but we have so much data of pain causing psychological disruptions, as well as a lack of empathy.  It truly against culture of ignorance, and the people who dont submit to reason, evidence, and empathy. Give a pinch of all, and nobody would ever inflict this on their baby boys again. Again: Thanks everyone. Sorry if I'm a bit verbose.  Cheers!
  • zygodactyl's picture
    zygodactyl 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    I am among the 85% of boys born in the '60's who were circumcised. I remember as a little boy looking down and wondering why my skin in that area looked so different in color, and why it looked scarred. It wasn't until my first visit to the locker room in Junior High school that I learned what an uncut penis looked like. I had never even heard the word _circumcision_ until that time. Practically every boy had been cut, a a few weren't. Nobody in my school made fun of uncircumcised boys. I agree with you Jim that circumcising baby boys is an act of unmitigated aggression! How dare parents and doctors cut and remove skin from a boys penis which reduces his future sensual intensity during sex! Yes, the foreskin can be restored. http://www.askmen.com/dating/dzimmer_60/62_love_answers.html Brian
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 1 year 3 weeks ago
    The Meaning of War
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    August, 1973.
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 1 year 3 weeks ago
    The Meaning of War
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    Jim, for we hard copy CLF owners, what issue was this in?  :-)
  • Thunderbolt's picture
    Thunderbolt 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    Kevin: This is a serious issue. I have wondered about the long range implications of genital mutilation at the time of birth. Certainly children who suffered from spanking have indeed been correlated with extreme tendencies toward aggression, especially toward their own children. It is, I think, very likely that you are right on target about the psychological impact of circumcision. "Spare the rod, and spoil the child" is a religious doctrine that has produced monsters, some of whom have started wars.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    The key thing is that to circumcize a baby boy is an act of unmitigated aggression, and so is ipso facto unlibertarian; the infant has no defense. There are horrid things done to baby girls as well, which are arguably even worse.   Is the mutilation surgically reversible? - and if so, who pays?   Presumably, in a free society the parents would be obliged to pay, if the grown boy demands it. Hence, an inter-generational dispute. Fear of that should act as a strong deterrent for parents against having the knife wielded in the first place.  
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 3 weeks ago Page Kevin M. Patten
    "Females defending the practice also acquire a psychosis in order to do so." Keep in mind that when you point a finger, you have three other fingers pointing back at you. In my lifetime I have seen circumcision go from a simple aesthetic or religious choice that nobody made a fuss about, to child mutilation and torture equivalent to total extermination. Maybe a little moderation is called for? Are you trying to give an inferiority complex to boys who happen to be circumcised? I always wonder about people who get wrapped up in crusades. They never know when to stop. They don't even perceive that their lack of balance can only discredit their message, which might actually be one worth hearing, and would be better heard if not accompanied by flecks of spittle. Otherwise, here's a thought: mind your own business.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 1 year 3 weeks ago
    The Rules
    Page Paul Hein
    One good thing about having so many rules, is that there are always plenty to break or ignore. Something most people don't seem to realize, is that one chooses (or not) to obey a rule.