Recent comments

  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 14 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    G'day jd_in_georgia, Loved your example of the "desire for revenge"; that was William Shatner at his very best.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 14 weeks ago
    Consideration
    Page NonEntity
    G'day NonEntity, Are you a U.S. citizen? Check Yes__ or No __ Would you say that one has voluntarily, albeit perhaps ignorantly, accepted the so-called "social contract", i.e. has "submitted himself to the dominion of the government", if he checked the "Yes" box and then signed his legal name thereto, so he could receive a member-only "entitlement", i.e. "the right to receive something [a benefit] or to do something [a privilege]"?
  • jd-in-georgia's picture
    jd-in-georgia 3 years 14 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    KHAAAAAAN! An excellent read, Mr. Wallace. Is this not the inner demon that truly is the seed of downfall, for governments as well as individuals?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 14 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    Hey Paul, It just dawned on me where we might part ways. You write about "rights" as though there are only one kind, and therein may lie virtually all our differences. I realized, after reading my own reply to you, that I would have agreed with you, had you said, legal rights, civil rights, statutory rights, or political rights[1] keep members of the political corporation submissive, because, in my opinion, they do. A good example is the political right to vote; it fools the weakest members of the corporation into believing that they have complete "control" over what their government does, which of course they do not. The key to understanding rights is understanding that all rights are "entitlements". The primary thing that determines whether one is "entitled" to a particular set of rights is "membership". For example, one is not entitled to "political rights" unless he is a member of the political corporation. Another is "civil rights"; Noah Webster (c.1825), said it well, "civil rights, the power or rights which a man enjoys as a citizen." [Emphasis added] And, a "citizen" is what? citizen, n. ...2. A member of a state; a person, native or naturalized who owes allegiance to a government, and is entitled to protection from it... ~ Webster's 1960 New Collegiate Dictionary, page 151 [Emphasis added] Do you think this might bring us closer together? __________________________________________________________________________________________ [1] I failed to consider these other "rights", because I am a free man, and as a free man I am only concerned with my "natural rights". All men are equal in the eyes of the law, the natural law that is. Under man-made law this is not true, it is the law of "status", the "the legal character or condition of a person or thing". (Source: The 2010 American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edition)
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    G'day Paul, Let me give this one more shot, since I feel that you were baiting me with that post. Mark Davis wrote, “This seems like a long, repetitive strawman argument to me because I don't know anybody that considers the concept of rights to be equivalent to some kind of force-field.” Seems Mark Davis may have been wrong about that, because you wrote, “Rights do not protect us; they protect the ruling class by keeping us submissive.” [Emphasis added] That says, not only that rights exist, but that they are “equivalent to some kind of force-field” protecting the ruling class. Well they aren't, Paul, in fact, they are quite the opposite. The masses having knowledge and understanding of man's Natural Rights[1] is the ruling class' nightmare. "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe That is because, why would anyone fight to be free if they believed they already were free; similarly, why would anyone defend their natural rights if they didn't know they owned any? And, for some unknown reason you appear to believe that rights keep us [sic] “submissive”. [I now understand why you believe this. See my next post for the explanation.] Frédéric Bastiat wrote, “Each of us has a natural right [a “just claim”] — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property.” [Emphasis and bracketed information added] Maybe if you had a “just claim” to something it would keep you submissive, Paul, but it sure as hell doesn't keep me submissive. It is the knowledge and understanding of my natural rights, my “just claim” to my life, liberty and justly acquired property that adds to my resolve to defend them. Allow me to explain that last statement with an analogy. Ever had an aquarium, Paul? Well, if you had, and you were attentive, you might have seen that a smaller fish, who had “staked his claim” first, could, many times, defend that territory even against a larger, more aggressive fish, which was added later. But, whether he could or not, even this stupid fish instinctively knew that he had a “right” to that property, because he was the first to claim it, and his instinctive knowledge of that “right”, I believe, made him stronger, and his foe weaker, than otherwise would have been the case. This is because one will naturally defend, far more aggressively, that which he has a “just claim” to, than that which he does not have a “right” to. If one does not have a “right” to a thing, that is to say, a “just claim” to a thing, it is not his, Paul, it belongs to someone else, to whoever does have a "just claim", i.e. a "right", to it, and I think, way down deep inside, most of us instinctively knows we should give it back. ___________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Legal rights (sometimes also called civil rights or statutory rights or political rights) are rights conveyed by a particular polity, codified into legal statutes by some form of legislature (or unenumerated but implied from enumerated rights), and as such are contingent upon local laws, customs, or beliefs. In contrast, natural rights (also called moral rights or inalienable rights) are rights which are not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of a particular society or polity. Natural rights are thus necessarily universal, whereas legal rights are culturally and politically relative.
  • Guest's picture
    Samuel Marks (not verified) 3 years 15 weeks ago Page B.R. Merrick
    The link from "As this strip clearly shows" is down... please reup (perhaps embed within this article?) http://www.s-anand.net/calvinandhobbes.html#19881106
  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    LOL. The first (oldest) comment said to join the military and save for college. You cannot "be all that you can be" if you are dead or endlessly returned (enlistment "extended") to the Middle East until you ARE physically or mentally dead.
  • iliad's picture
    iliad 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    Excellent article Bob. When you boil it down to its basic components, it really is that simple. Treat others with respect.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    "Dependence", and the more absolute, the better, is the name of the game.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Bob Wallace
    Great article. And, sound advice, "This problem of feelings of humiliation followed by the desire for revenge is part of human nature. It’s not going to change. The best we can do is minimize the problem, by not humiliating people, by treating them respectfully." Thank you, Bob Wallace.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    Miranda v. Arizona (1966) is a "Landmark ruling, citing the Fifth Amendment, says suspects must be reminded of their right to avoid self incrimination". Non-U.S. citizens, i.e. non-members, do not have the "civil rights", which are endowed to members of the STATE by the U.S. Constitution. Since seceding I have not once been read any so-called "Miranda rights" before, during, or after being arrested. Fortunately, as a free man, I have the "natural right" to speak, or not speak, to whomever I wish. I temper that "natural right" with, "all things lawful[1] are mine, but all things are not expedient", when making my decision to speak, or not. ____________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Lawful. ...the word "lawful" more clearly implies an ethical content than does "legal." The latter [legal] goes no further than to denote compliance, with positive, technical, or formal rules; while the former [lawful] usually imports a moral substance or ethical permissibility... ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 885
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    G'day AnarchoPhil, Perhaps you didn't see this. "But when I saw my girlfriend and everyone else taking their classes, I got a little jealous. I returned the car, canceled the check, and entered my sophomore year of college. But I regret it now." ~ James Altucher
  • Guest's picture
    AnarchoPhil (not verified) 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    Don't go to college says the guy with the degree...
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    Silber may pull no punches, but it's in a subject he knows nothing about: "If you join the U.S. military, you want to be a murderer and/or you want to support murderers." Whether he is helping fix the problem, is another question entirely.
  • Guest's picture
    Temujin (not verified) 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    Most of his podcasts are first rate. This one even more so.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Per Bylund
    I would recommend listening to Gary Chartier's presentation here: http://agora.io/etienne/archives It is the top right video. It relates to this very strongly.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    G'day once more Sam, You are most certainly "in" a "Sovereign State", as regards other men, if your "President is responsible for the rotation of the earth on its axis"; in that "state" you are, in my opinion, subject only to "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God". "That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to [coming after] the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, [in the natural state] every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent." ~ CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70. [Bracketed information added] What the so-called Christians of today don't appear to realize is that "no man can serve two masters (supreme magistrates)". If one is a U.S. citizen who is his "first", i.e. "supreme", magistrate? MAG'ISTRATE, n. [L. magistratus, from magister, master; magis, major, and ster, Teutonic steora, a director; steoran, to steer; the principal director.] A public civil officer, invested with the executive government of some branch of it. In this sense, ...the highest or first magistrate...is the President of the United States ~ Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language Oh, by the way, Sam, Yisra'el, literally translated, means, "prince (sar)/princess (sarah) of God ('el)", or "prince and princess of the Supreme Magistrate", if you prefer. And what is a prince? "1. In a general sense, a sovereign". And what is a princess? You probably already guessed it. "A female sovereign". "Define your terms, you will permit me again to say, or we shall never understand one another...” ~ Voltaire May I call you "fellow citizen"? ;) Suverans2
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Yeah, and what will happen if they sell it to Libya or Afghanistan?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    G'day Sam, Thanks. There are a few neighbors around me who have gotten a "kick out of it", too. The last man, with lights on top of his car, who spied it, "invited" me to pull over so he could talk to me. The first question out of his mouth was, "Where's your tag?" To which I answered, "On the back of my car." After politely explaining that I was not a U.S. CITIZEN, nor was I a CITIZEN or RESIDENT of the STATE he worked for, he bid me good day and left. Our last several encounters with agents of the STATE and COUNTIES have been similar, but, so I don't misrepresent, they haven't all been that pleasant. When you give men of low self-esteem a little delegated authority, an assortment of weapons, and a license to use them, it can sometimes turn ugly. Speaking of "President", Sam, did you know that the Aramaic[1] word for god, in the so-called "Old Testament", (singular) is 'el (pronounced ale), which is the short form of the word 'ayil (pronounced eye-eel), which, according to Dr. James Strong's studies means, "specifically a chief (politically)". (See H410 and H352 in any of the older versions of Strong's Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary.) And, that the number one meaning of 'elohiym (plural of 'el), also translated God, gods and goddesses is, "1a) rulers, judges" (See H430 in Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Lexicon.) Exo 23:32 Thou shalt make no covenant[2] with them, nor with their gods [rulers, judges]. Sound advice! I thought that this information might be of use to you, (and perhaps even one or two others), in some small way. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ [1] Aramaic n. a Northwest Semitic language that was the lingua franca throughout the Near East from c. 300 B.C. to c. A.D. 650; it replaced Hebrew [Ibriy] as the language of the Jews [sic][a] and one of its dialects was spoken by Jesus and his disciples ~ Webster's 1988 New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, page 70 [Emphasis and bracketed information added] [a] It was the language of the house (ten tribes) of Yisra'el, as well, not just the "Jews", i.e. members of the house (two tribes) of Judah. [2] H1285 Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Lexicon definition: 1) covenant, alliance, pledge 1a) between men 1a1) treaty, alliance, league (man to man) 1a2) constitution, ordinance (monarch to subjects)
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    I like the "State of Nature" plate. Think I'll build one if I ever decide to rescind my "car free" status. I refer to myself as "A Sovereign State". My President is responsible for the rotation of the earth on its axis. A good State in which to be, I is, I is. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    A "late bloomer" to the internet, I immediately recognized the dizzying array of labels being used by those of us espousing freedom and liberty. I began a list as I came across a new one, but this is only partial: Various Libertarian and Anarchist Labels • Agorism • Anarchism • Anarcho-Capitalism (Mises/Rothbard) • Anarcho-communism • Anarcho-syndicalism • Anti-Positivism • Apriorism • Carsonian mutualism • Classical Liberalism • Collectivist anarchist • Communism • Consequentialism • Eco-Libertarianism • Eco-Socialist-Libertarian • Establishment liberal left • Explicitly anarchist, pro-decentralist libertarians (Kinsella) • Geoanarchism • Geoism • Geolibertarianism • Georgism • Green-Libertarianism • Individualist anarchism • Individualist/collectivist anarchist Individualist/collectivist anarchism • Left Libertarianism • Left-Rothbardians • Legal Positivism • Liberal socialism • Liberalism • Libertarian Populism (James Ostrowski) • Libertarian Socialism • Libertarianism • Localism and decentralization • Logical Positivism • Market anarchism • Minarchism • Modal Libertarianism • Modern Liberalism • Moral consequentialism • Mutualism • Natural-rights libertarianism • Neo-liberalism • Neolibertarianism • Objectivism • Panarchism • Plumbline Libertarianism • Praxeology • Primitivist Anarchism • Progressive Libertarianism • Punkish/syndicalist/queer radical social anarchism (above two from Rad Geek site) • Queer anarchism (“sex workers?”) • Radical minarchists • Right Libertarianism • Rothbardian strain of market anarchism • Schmodal Libertarianism • Social Darwinian right-wing economics • Socialism • Socialist-Libertarianism • Syndicalist Anarchism • Utilitarianism (Friedman’s strain of Anarcho-capitalism) • Utopian socialism • Voluntarism You may find a number of libertarian labels I didn't include. But it appears there are almost as many labels as there are those who wish to be free of state. Sam
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    "That men should take up arms and spend their lives and fortunes, not to maintain their rights, but to maintain they have not rights, is an entirely new species of discovery..." ~ Thomas Paine Bad news, Thomas, we still have them around in our day and age. :(
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    The concept of "rights" is just another tool that enslaves us. This article just shows how ephemeral they are, able to be ignored at the least provocation. Rights do not protect us; they protect the ruling class by keeping us submissive.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    "1. The United States Constitution, which declares that the government derives its power from the consent of the governed (in this case, the governed want their raw milk and local meat!)" I'm having trouble finding that in their U.S. Constitution; could someone please point out the Article and Section for me?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Derek Henson
    "...citizens can be punished without any specific legal pretext." citizen, n. ...2. A member of a state; a person, native or naturalized, who owes allegiance to a government, and is entitled to protection from it ~ Webster's 1960 New Collegiate Dictionary, page 151 allegiance, n. 1. The relation of a feudal vassal to his superior, or liege lord ~ Ibid., page 23 vassal, n. 1. Early Law. One who has placed himself under the protection of another as his lord and has vowed homage and fealty ~ Ibid., page 942 "Citizens" are members of a political community [a STATE] who, in their associated capacity [as members of a STATE], have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of a government for the promotion of their general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights. Herriott v. City of Seattle, 81 Wash.2d 48, 500 P.2d 101, 109 ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1991), page 244 Same sh*t, different day.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    "That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to [coming after] the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, [in the natural state] every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent." ~ CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70. [Bracketed information added]
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    Anarchy has more degrees than witchcraft : ] (almost). I prefer this definition> http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/definitions/archist.htm Scroll down to number 12 on this very useful chart. http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/faq.html#part12 The whole FAQ sheet is decent.
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Sharon,So happy you approve, How did the children like the turtle story? Dr.Seuss is interseting subject that i have not taken the time to research. He does have some wonderful subversive writings which i enjoy to no end! He also has statist, and in todays PC world racist stuff.I think he was payed/commissioned by the U.S.Gubbermint to write the cartoons, which he than used the money to get his writing career off the ground. I absolutely hate compromising my principals and when i do,i never seem to get over it.(totally sucks) If only everyone could live,never having to do that.What kind of world would that be i wonder? Anyway,i hope i helped.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    The ruling class must like the idea of revolution.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    They like poking sheep.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    You are wrong, Michael. Sweatshops are consistent with freedom, as are prostitution, drug addiction, and other such things. The point is not to make freedom palatable to people by lying about it, or imagining it will be utopia. It's good enough that it will be better than all the alternatives, and it is that.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Since employees of civil government have so egregiously infused themselves into what semblance of a market there is left it would be difficult to define "sweatshop" with any objectivity. If you're not a prostitute or a drug dealer or perhaps another participant in a "black market" you wouldn't know much about a "free market" (or market-anarchism) to start with. As an anarchist I do not "support sweatshops". Do I ask for the parasites of state to intervene to "prevent" the not-so-good jobs from coming about? No. There will be good jobs and bad jobs. But the free market will allow employment for anybody wishing to work. There will be no "unemployment". Sam
  • rita's picture
    rita 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    And it's not only convicted criminals who suffer -- government cutbacks have public schools screaming for volunteers, but in AZ, at least, you can't even sit in a classroom and read to children, in full view of the teacher, if you have a criminal record. Meanwhile, nursing homes, hospitals and organizations like Big Brothers/Big Sisters are chronically understaffed because of punitive laws that place drug felons in the same banned class as convicted child abusers and thieves.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    G'day Paul, (A cordial greeting takes very little effort, plus it lets everyone know to whom we are responding.) I think you know the "support" that Paul Hein was asking about was "public enthusiasm for this tax", i.e. member enthusiasm. And, I believe that member "enthusiasm for this tax" would be about equal to the sheep's excitement about being loaded onto the truck headed for the slaughter house -- they don't like it at all, they may even raise a ruckus about it, but they'll stick with the herd until the bitter end, they'll almost never "withdraw from membership in the group". It may help for members of the STATE (STATE citizens) to think of this "tax" as the "rental-fee" for using the car that the original purchaser voluntarily gave to the STATE when he voluntarily, (albeit ignorantly), signed the back of the Manufacturer's Statement of Origin. I know, I know, someone here is bound to say that there was a gun held to their head as they signed it. The good news is that if that is true, and they can prove it, their signature will be null and void, from the beginning. Actus me invito factus, non est meus actus. An act done by me against my will, is not my act. Good luck on that one. What most of us do not realize is that it is the following Maxim of Law we are really contending with. And, it only holds true for voluntary servants, by the way. Quicpuid acquiritur servo, acquiritur domino. Whatever is acquired by the servant, is acquired for the master. 15 Bin. Ab. 327. ″The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State: individual so-called ‘ownership’ is only by virtue of Government, i.e. law amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.″ ~ Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session. (Brown v. Welch supra) Again, this only holds true for voluntary servants, the Government does not write laws for non-members, i.e. free men. Free men are controlled by the natural law.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    Or, maybe, because they are already in bed with the Beast?
  • A Liberal in Lakeview's picture
    A Liberal in La... 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Michael Kleen
    That news will be welcomed by the sales reps and biz dev people who've been pushing the scanning machines. Also, there's an interesting tidbit in the middle of this article: "Meanwhile, the TSA has now told its 40,000 airport screeners that they have the right to unionize on a limited basis -- defeating the Bush administration's original insistence that the DHS should be nonunion in order to ensure maximum flexibility and accountability." So, once again we find clear and convincing evidence about the ways and means of the left-right, crony capitalistic police state. And, oh yes, at least a few of the new TSA employees would need to be equipped with submission devices such as Tasers. And let's not forget about the two-bit colleges that are pushing degrees in criminal justice. An expansion of the DHS is like manna from heaven. In other news: Tim Geitner will be visitig northwest Arkansas this morning and the offices of NanoMech this afternoon. Geithner Does Northwest Arkansas (And Calgary)
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    "In my state, and probably yours also, you cannot buy the rulers’ permission to operate your (?) car without providing proof that you’ve paid the tribute demanded yearly in order for you to pretend that you actually own the vehicle." ~ Paul Hein Word status Meaning (noun) position (noun) condition Synonym state (generic term) Therein lies the problem, you may be in the wrong "state". In my "state" you can, "Create your own custom license plates at BuildASign.com! Using our online design tool you can create custom license plates..." like THIS for a one-time-fee of about 15 doll-hairs. DISCLAIMER: Do not do this unless you are in the right "state" (legal condition).
  • Mitrik_Spanner's picture
    Mitrik_Spanner 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Totally disgusting. how much longer is this sheriff Arpaio going to last before he gets canned? I once thought I might live in AZ. Now I think it full of Tea Party loons.
  • A Liberal in Lakeview's picture
    A Liberal in La... 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    The subtitle of the article: "Do we really even exist? Fooling ourselves into thinking we do is the one thing that makes us who we are" Maybe that's editors' humor. Julian Baggini's last two sentences: "But it does not therefore show that this 'I' is just an illusion. There is what I call an Ego Trick, but it is not that the self doesn't exist, only that it is not what we generally assume it to be." Interpretation: The editor(s) of The Independent didn't finish the article, or didn't pay careful attention to what they read. Baggini should request a right to veto the titles and subtitles chosen by editors for his pieces.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Page Paul Hein
    "Is there such support for the license plate/sticker tax?" There is. It is needed to pay the salaries of the bureaucrats who take your money for the sticker. Makes sense, huh? I always thought the state should simply issue randomly, generic plates, with numbers in the range from 0 to 99, black on white, no "art" plates. Then all they would have to do is call for the "red car with license 67" and have a better chance of catching the bad guy, since people would actually be able to read and remember the plates from a much greater distance. This would be so even though multiple cars would have number 67. Or maybe use 3 digits instead of two. Of course this assumes the whole point is to make it possible to catch criminals. Of course, since the government IS criminal, this can't possibly be the real reason for license plates. They are there to enslave us, plain and simple. They are something like the tattoos on the arms of inmates at Bergen-Belsen.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago
    Authority: God vs. Man
    Page Guest
    "Aside from the entertainment value of Henry’s escapades, what I was most struck by is that so many people were willing to subordinate themselves and to sacrifice and throw away their lives for a complete artifice. Here is a clue for those who do not know. There are really no such things as kings and emperors." Well... Unfortunately, it's not just fantasy that is maintaining the kings in their positions - otherwise you could just walk up to old Henry and stick a knife in his gut. There was the threat of exquisite torture, and the promised destruction of one's family and associates. Most kings don't care if you believe, as long as you fear. And the same effects are observable today, although the state prefers to clothe their revenge in the legal niceties. It's certainly possible to fear too much though.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    They can't help but undermine their own position.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Getting a lawyer is a solution, but not a very manly one.
  • tzo's picture
    tzo 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    I think, Paul, that may depend upon the situation a bit. Money is a useful exchange commodity in a complex market. The more complex, the more useful and necessary. If the market, aka society, breaks down completely, then direct barter may be more valuable than indirect exchange. But I agree that in the long run, humans have consistently assigned value to PMs, and so by definition they have value in human transactions, and so the breakdown would have to be pretty severe indeed in order for you to not to be able to find someone who would be willing to take some off your hands in exchange for necessities such as food and water. Stranded in the desert, a gallon of water would be worth more to you than a ton of gold. Of course. So the question becomes, if the society breaks down, how desperate will it get? I have a hard time seeing things deteriorate to the point where you would end up starving with a stash of useless PMs. I also have a hard time seeing myself being hit by lightning tomorrow. Could happen, though.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    This reminds me of the Julio Buitrago incident (look it up) that outraged people so much that it was a prime cause of success of the Sandinista Revolution. The state cannot help but make itself look like a heartless bastard. A good thing for revolutionaries, too. I guess I've seen my last Seagal movie.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Well, gold and silver do have real tangible value, just like anything does. They also have trade value, more universally recognized than anything else but fiat currencies - and the latter do not historically have staying power when governments print more of them, unlike gold and silver. Nothing wrong with barter, as long as you can find what you need. It's when barter gets clumsy where gold and silver become useful. It makes no more sense to have only guns and a garden, with no gold or silver, than it does to have gold and silver, with no guns or a garden.
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Sad but true. The chickens beg help from the fox who is watching the hen house. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHhTXunC2Uo Another fox story.> http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/jessica/letter9.shtml#top
  • Sharon Secor's picture
    Sharon Secor 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    Totally awesome comment. I'll be sharing those vital lessons via that story with my children this very evening. Thank you so much for sharing your time and wisdom. Best Regards...
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    One of my favorite dr s. is> Yertle the Turtle it tells the story of a turtle 'king' who has his subjects form a stack of turtles to serve as his throne. The turtles comply, first a stack of ten, then bigger, bigger and in classic Seuss style the stack grows to an alleged multiple hundreds allowing Yertle to be king of ever more things. Finally, however, one meager turtle, Mack, complains. He is at the bottom of the stack – he has been there the whole time, he is hungry, tired and imaginably uncomfortable. Yertle will not budge and instead calls for more turtles so he can be king over even the moon. many lessons to take from this 'childrens' story. 1) authority is never satisfied and always seeks to expand. 2) the subjects usually obey until the tipping point. 3) even the smallest member can bring down the 'king'. and more! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBB5LnCqFZY
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 3 years 15 weeks ago Web link Sharon Secor
    G'day Sharon Secor, It is my opinion that gold and silver do not have "tangible, real value". I believe that they are merely a "perceived value", which, in my opinion, can be easily demonstrated by this. I suspect that in a hardcore SHTF scenario there will be a real scarcity of safe food, potable water, and adequate shelter (includes clothing); at that point in time what kind of "tangible, real value" will gold and silver have to you and your family? I think chasing after gold and silver may be a fools errand, but I could be wrong; there may still be individuals who prefer "shiny stuff" over real, tangible value. We've probably all seen movies where greedy individuals have a cave collapse on top them because they can't escape while carrying arms full of gold, silver and/or jewels that are weighing them down.