Recent comments

  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 25 weeks 5 days ago
    How I Got a Job
    Page Paul Bonneau
    Interesting perspective Paul. Just for amusement purposes, I recall years ago, when the economy was going in the toilet like it is now, Readers Digest ran an article on what companies were looking for in employees. You might have been there at the time of your successful adventures. The key point in the article was that companies were not looking for the smartest and brightest in the field, but rather those individuals who had the best social skill with the ability to get along with others, clients, and etc. I don't know if this is applicable today or not, but I would have to believe it needs serious consideration. I hate it when I walk into a shop, the attendant begins attending to me, the phone rings and he or she immediately starts providing service for the phone in and leaves me standing along.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 26 weeks 12 hours ago Web link KenK
    The brass hats didn't object to CSA flags of any sort. If it kept the cannon fodder amused and placid until it was time to throw them into the meat grinder, well, so much the better.
  • Douglas Herman's picture
    Douglas Herman 26 weeks 1 day ago
    How I Got a Job
    Page Paul Bonneau
    Nice insightful personal POV column Paul. I liked the summnation.   Up here in the "Last Frontier" I see kids taking your advice to heart, folks from all over the world. Girl from Hawaii by way of Oberlin university with a PBKappa, getting her feet in the door in the fishing industry, for one.   Always enjoy your stuff "Old Man!" Keep on keepin' on.
  • Douglas Herman's picture
    Douglas Herman 26 weeks 1 day ago Page Harry Goslin
    Thanks Harry,  Brilliant sarc/ satire column and well-written. Here in Alaska, I read one MSM columnist say Cecil would not be around to protect his cubs. Guess he never realized male animals abandon and sometimes try to EAT their chilluns. That's why a Moma Grizzly bear, with cubbies, is the most deadly land mammal. Doug P.S. Eastern AZ? Getting any monson there? I measure 22 inches or rainfall over 11 months last year in Tempe
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 26 weeks 2 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    To become "prominent" one must gravitate to collectivism. Individualism is the absence of prominence. I think. I've perused many "libertarian" and "anarchist" (quotes intentional) writers. Many write exceedingly good stuff. For collectivist-leaning readers. Many have a "plan-for-freedom" (voluntarism is one example -- why would one find the need to plant an "ism" in the middle of doing and thinking voluntarily?). I stumbled upon one writer rather by accident. I read the only major essay I could find that he wrote before he up and died. It received no acclamation. Certainly not among the "libertarian community" it didn't. And won't. I skimmed parts of his article, laid it down; picked it up later, read more, then laid it down (in disgust). I couldn't "just leave it lie", so I tried again to read it to completion. I even went so far as to go through it and "correct" grammar, sentence structure, syntax, etc. Later concluded his was the best phraseology -- he knew what he was saying. I think Marc Stevens went through the same process. England had knocked me over the head with my own icons. And that's why his article had initially rubbed me the wrong way. It was dead on. It challenged me to become free -- not just talk about being free (or whine about not being free). His name was Delmar England. The essay, "Insanity As the Social Norm". Don't try to read it. You won't like it. Trust me. Per Bylund knew the man. He told me in an email that England's family had preserved other of his writings, and were going to try to have some or all published. I've seen nothing of that. I suspect that I never will. I googled "Delmar England". Came up with only obscure stuff. No actual biography. I don't know whether he was a PhD or a high school dropout. It really does not matter. What matters is what he wrote. The market for freedom is not good, my friends. Few want to really be free, I perceive. Many want to make a buck or two trying to show you how to be free. But only a remnant have a desire to be genuinely free. I suspect. Sam
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 26 weeks 4 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Point well-taken, Paul.  But you would think, after wielding that kind of wealth for any measureable amount of time, they might learn a thing or two, even if by no other means than sheer osmosis.  It appears that many of them understand how to turn their talents into lucrative enterprises, and keep the money-magnet pulling wealth their way, without ever examining the further dynamics of it all.  It almost seems to defy possibility -- that they could remain that philosophically sheltered, yet it appears to be the most common outcome.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 26 weeks 4 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Alex, you are giving the people in question far too much credit. Some of them may well have a lot of talent for acting, painting, etc. It does not follow that they understand economics, any more than (for example) a garbage man might. And then some of them may actually have a brain, but be lacking in experience. Hollywood after all has little to do with the real world.
  • pc's picture
    pc 26 weeks 6 days ago Web link KenK
    The author makes the common vexillological misake of identifying the Battle Flag as the "Stars and Bars".  In reality, the Stars and Bars is this flag: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America...
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 26 weeks 6 days ago
    Like Magic!
    Page Mark Davis
    Thank you Mark for your kindly response. I don't have a whole lot of time left, and it seems to be the best that I can do as I have found no solutions. I watched some of the RNC debates the other night and could not help to find it more like a Circus event, yet a few did express a growing hatred of the three branches. Thanks again for the supportiveness you have supplied.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 27 weeks 18 hours ago Web link KenK
    This should read "didn't bother the elites then".
  • PaulTheCabDriver's picture
    PaulTheCabDriver 27 weeks 2 days ago Page Harry Goslin
    Yes, but a white farmer would not nearly make as nice a rug.
  • livemike's picture
    livemike 27 weeks 2 days ago Page Harry Goslin
    Palmer should have killed a white farmer, then there would be no chance the Zimbabwean government would prosecute.
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 27 weeks 2 days ago Web link A. Magnus
    Annnnnd... let the games begin!!
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 27 weeks 2 days ago
    Corruption Abounds!
    Page Paul Hein
    Lovely Sam. Not much more than that can I say, but the sand paper of the world.
  • Glock27's picture
    Glock27 27 weeks 2 days ago Web link A. Magnus
    helpfuljosh, When has the government ever been helpful? Right now they are attempting to legislate a bill to increase the authority of the government to intervene on States which have legalized medical marijuana, so they can arrest the sellers and the users. Unlike most all members of this site, I am not totally against government, just big, big, greedy, self-aggrandizing, egoistical, all self important better than thou, intruding, coercive, secretive puss government to include just about every member in all three branches. Government has a limited function in society, and it is nothing closely or remotely resembling what is currently in play or has been in play. From my understanding Dr. Merecola is a fake. Can't prove it, but according to some sites I have visited his recommendations and suggestions are not sound or reasonably based. Thanks for the link. Didn't read it all as it tended to be old information that has circulated for decades.
  • helpfuljosh's picture
    helpfuljosh 27 weeks 2 days ago Web link A. Magnus
    I read this article on alcohol consumption and all the false health claims today and wanted to share it: http://reset.me/story/how-alcohol-changes-your-brain/ So we sell this in shops and pretend it is pretty harmless while forbidding weed and other drugs. We even allow alcohol brands to advertise. What sick world do we live in that we allow corporations to toxicate us on a daily basis and cannot count on a government to regulate this industry. I don't want to go back to prohibition, but isn't it at least crazy that we allow mass marketing for something that bad? More info on the effects of weed, here: http://ilovegrowingmarijuana.com
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 27 weeks 4 days ago
    Corruption Abounds!
    Page Paul Hein
    I definitely prefer the firing squad. :-)
  • Glen Allport's picture
    Glen Allport 27 weeks 5 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Right on the mark, Paul, as always. Initiated coercion, especially when centralized in a large government, is never libertarian in nature. You'd think all libertarians would understand THAT, at least, but . . .  One historical note: You're quite right that Britain was less violent and more sane in their approach to ending slavery (which they did well before the US and of course without a war), but there's a LOT more to the story. Anyone interested will enjoy Jim Powell's excellent Greatest Emancipations -- an engaging read supported by staggering levels of evident research and detail. Ending slavery in Britain and elsewhere was a vast, multi-generation chore that spanned the planet and was opposed by huge classes of very wealthy men. Greatest Emancipations has been my default waiting-room material at the dentist and whatnot for the last six months; nearly every page brings interesting details I'd not known before.        
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 27 weeks 5 days ago
    Corruption Abounds!
    Page Paul Hein
    As to my comment about taxation: there is no "good" (or "better") taxation. Sort of like the choice between execution by guillotine or by firing squad. "Income" taxation, however, was blatant control and nothing more. "Revenue" was merely a bonus. Title 26 (the white man's "internal revenue code"), once a paperback size publication, now requires a library to contain. Nobody knows how many "amendments" or divisions or subdivisions are in the thing. Nobody can submit a confession of voluntary taxation ("file-a-return") honestly. Because no matter how many "experts" and/or "professionals" (a huge industry in itself) to whom you take the same set of figures, you will always get different "tax due" lines. The exemptions and credits, deductions, brackets, deferrals are so numerous that nobody can calculate them all for any one set of figures. And, as stated earlier, there is no "legal" definition for "income" -- only "adjusted gross income" or "taxable income". A slice of Mom's apple pie could definitely be looked upon as "taxable income" by some standards (presuming the white man has standards, which he doesn't). So I won't argue against the idea that a "property" (whatever that's supposed to mean) tax is "better" or "worse" than an "income" tax. Taxation is robbery, plain and simple.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 27 weeks 5 days ago
    Corruption Abounds!
    Page Paul Hein
    Of course everybody can have an opinion as to how "states" came into being -- like "evolution" (how "life" came to be) or "big bang" (how "the universe" came to be"). I personally believe (and you've read my posts on this) that "nations" and "countries" were the brainchilds of genie such as the likes of Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan, who developed the first empires. They came to see the waste of, once they breached the walls of peaceful cities, raping all the women, slaughtering all the men, women and children, and leaving their carcasses to rot on the desert floor. They saw that empires could come into being by "allowing" the captured to not only live, but to form governments that appeared to be "of-the-people". And to "contribute" large segments of their production to the king. Those are the emperors who came to understand capture bonding -- "Stockholm Syndrome". Which is represented today by each and every "vote" or voluntary submission ("filing" ha ha) of confessions ("tax returns" ho ho ho). The enormity of the truth is incredible. As to "ownership" you are absolutely correct. Naked I came, naked I shall return. Sam
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 27 weeks 6 days ago
    Corruption Abounds!
    Page Paul Hein
    "You own nothing as long as you believe in government." Whether you believe or not, you still own nothing - except that which you are willing to kill in order to keep. However, at least the unbelievers are not mentally enslaved as the believers are. That's worth something. As to better or worse forms of taxation, there definitely are differences, basically boiling down to the ability to avoid the tax. While there are untaxed incomes to be made from the black market, there is no escaping property tax unless one IS government. If you don't pay it, over and over again, year after year, you are kicked off your property. I never did find Rothbard's idea where the state came from to be very plausible. I think the state originated in the wealthy people.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 28 weeks 19 hours ago
    Corruption Abounds!
    Page Paul Hein
    "...If enough people—it need not be a majority--recognized the government as an illegitimate gang of thieves, it could not survive..." Correct. It requires "...enough people..." to come to understand. "Understand what?" you ask. That "...the government..." is a mindless, useless abstraction. That there are people. Some are producers, and some are predators. Predators over history have developed incredible and all-pervasive tactics to make themselves appear "necessary" to producers. Rothbard, in "Anatomy of the State", uses the example of mobs who hijacked caravans in times past. All of a sudden the mobs are now the "protectors". They are "necessary". If you love your safety and your freedom, thank a mobster. They are the ones who have given rise to "families of nations", "countries", "counties" et al. And there are no "good" (or "better") forms of theft (taxation). The "income" form of theft is probably more egregious than "property" forms of theft. At least with "property" you have something that is standing still and can be counted and valued. To the predators, "income" cannot be defined. Oxygen is "income" when you think about it. So they define "income" as "adjusted gross income" to come up with the scheme that serves to swindle you. You own nothing as long as you believe in government. Not "legally", you don't. You are granted the privilege of possessing it for a time. Whining, wailing, gnashing of teeth on the part of the proletariat is the bizarre, weird factor in the science of rulership. It's part of what keeps it all alive. It forms the basis of the "problem". Thank g-d we're here to "solve" your "problem". The enormity of the truth is incredible. Sam
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 28 weeks 1 day ago
    Corruption Abounds!
    Page Paul Hein
    I too hate the property tax and consider it the worst tax. Most of the proceeds are used in the evil government indoctrination centers, even if you homeschool your child, and the rest for those lazy louts in the fire departments - even if you install a sprinkler system in your home (I have done so) which is far better than any fire department. The property tax is even environmentally destructive, as it forces people to put into production marginal lands, better left fallow, in order to pay the tax. Again, there are no rights in this picture. There are only a favored group of parasites that we have to put up with, at least until the revolution comes.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 28 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Thanks for that link, it was a good one.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 28 weeks 3 days ago Web link TheMPP
    I don't need an island. Probably wouldn't move there if I owned one. I'm a sovereign state. That means I am free where I am. My comment was in favor of what has been called "Sentinelese". People living on that island don't call themselves "Sentinelese". I suspect writers and would-be colonizers are the ones who have come up with the appellation "Sentinel", or "North Sentinel" and labeled them "Sentinelese". They and their ancestors over the years have apparently joined hands and resisted "nationalizers", "nationalization" and "nationalism". I also suspect some of the inhabitants are freer than others. Some may be sovereign within themselves and amongst their families, friends and neighbors (probably not well understood in the community, and thought to be odd-balls ("radicalized") -- perhaps even dangerous odd-balls). Others probably are dependent upon "tribal leaders", et al., to provide "central authority" and decide issues for them. Just like cross-sections of folks all over the world. Sam
  • TheMPP's picture
    TheMPP 28 weeks 3 days ago Web link TheMPP
    I know, right?  How do we all get our own island?
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 28 weeks 3 days ago Page pc
    Stefan Molyneux has some interesting observations about slavery here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31E1gHowYcA Apparently no matter how bad slavery was in the US, it was much worse in Muslim Africa and the Middle East, where male slaves were all castrated and the survival rate of slaves was essentially zero. It's why there are no black populations left there, unlike America. Everything is relative... I was looking through the minutes of the Montgomery Convention, where the Confederacy formed. The impression I get is that what distressed these ruling class Southerners the most was the fact that the part of the Constitution protecting slavery was increasingly ignored by the Northern states. Back then it seems the Constitution was not a figurehead, but actually adhered to. But the Southerners could see where things were going. If ignoring parts of the Constitution was permitted to proceed, then there was no Constitution. Thus the secessions...
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 28 weeks 3 days ago Web link KenK
    Life is a game, and approximately half of the players are psychopaths. If one keeps that in mind, s/he can be free. And happy. And enjoy the game. The psychopathic half of the player lineup are backed by gentlemen (and gentle-women -- lord have mercy!) with guns. That is what is called "jurisdiction". It matters not how Black's or other statist publishers define "jurisdiction", that phenomenon is simply force of arms -- coercion. You can have jurisdiction also if you just get yourself a gun. I would advise against brandishing it about. The psychopathic half of the lineup try to make certain they have the greater number of armed players. That is part of how the game is set up. Those with the greatest firepower have the first claim on "jurisdiction". But they are inept, inefficient, pompous. And easily circumnavigated. The cheerleaders -- capture bonded all -- seem to be heavily weighted on the side of those with the most arms. You win the game by sneaking under the fence and out of the park. Liberty is on the outside of the playing field, not the inside. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 28 weeks 3 days ago Web link TheMPP
    Good for "the-Sentinelese"!
  • Thunderbolt's picture
    Thunderbolt 28 weeks 6 days ago Web link KenK
    Wonderful essay and advice, Sam. I assure you that you are correct. When I was fighting he feds over taxes, I was consistently advised not to fight, since I could not win. One attorney said that he had not won a federal case in five years. I remember seeing that about 92% of cases are settled with a plea bargain, including many, many people who are innocent. I was told that I would never see my wife or children again, if I did not comply. I was high-profile. So, off to the clink I went. You can only guess the fantasies I have had. This idea is one of them. Being innocent or right will not protect you. Thoreau said that one should cultivate poverty like fine sage. The genius David B. King never allowed his income to exceed non-taxable levels. I am sending you the federal reserve notes. I am 70 now. I expect full payment when I am 130. If Ray Kurzweil is correct, you will be a spring chicken at age 140. Besides, I need the bike.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 28 weeks 6 days ago Web link KenK
    You've struck upon an excellent idea. I suspect it's only viable, however, for individuals who wish to (and plan to) stay small and independent. The key word here is "small". If you buy and sell for a living -- as an individual -- and employ few if any helpers in your enterprise, you might pull it off. For a time. If you deal only with people you trust not to be "statist" in mentality. And if you do so quietly -- and tell nobody. Anonymity is the road to success for a free marketplace. But whatever you do, never, never, never expect the white man to "obey-the-law". Never, never, never expect "rights". The only thing granted, sustained and guaranteed by the group of psychopaths acting under the umbrella of "the state" is wrongs. Please be aware of that. Keep in mind that a huge percentage of all populations are infected with "capture bonding" (Stockholm Syndrome). Psychologists and psychiatrists who publish definitions of that term are themselves infected. Because either they do not see or they refuse to admit that they see that the overwhelming majority of the population are afflicted -- not merely a small number of bank employees in 1973 in an obscure robbery in Stockholm, Sweden. Or Patty Hearst. Every "vote" is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome. Every submission of a confession ("filing" of a tax "return") is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome. Well, of the latter, you might say it is a symptom of fear of an illusory beast that does not exist. Same difference. The hardest thing for libertarians to grasp is that "the law" is meaningless -- window dressing for coercion. No matter how you slice it, if you grow large and "go viral" as the current buzzword describes it, the white man is going to get you. He will force you into his "court". Once he gets you there, you will lose. In the event you enjoy a minor "victory" (like in the gambling business, the government business allows you to "win" now and again to keep them cards and letters comin' in -- sort of a "shill mentality"); you will still lose. Unless you have deep pockets for "legal" (another joke) counseling, in which case you've already spent large sums to "win", which is losing. Or unless you actively engage in the vast arena of mercantilism. Most of you have watched this video. The speaker talks in the first few minutes about the vast, incalculable myriad of laws on the books that can "getcha". I presume it's because the white man has constantly and consistently stuck his tentacles into the "holes" like the one you describe -- and come up with ways to prosecute you. Ask Bernard von NotHaus. Or Robert Kahre. Especially if you are "high profile". So don't "go viral". On the other hand -- and for exactly this reason -- I say you can be free. Here. Today. Where you're "at". The white man is too pompous and stupid to interfere with your liberty. Unless you allow it to happen. So go ahead and loan me 1,000 federal reserve notes. I'll pay you back in 60 years. I'm 80 now, so that should give me some time to gain liquidity. Meanwhile, I'll give you my old bike as collateral. What's your interest rate? Sam Sam
  • Thunderbolt's picture
    Thunderbolt 29 weeks 7 hours ago Web link KenK
    I think the solution for Uber, Homejoy, etc., is to neither be an employee nor an independent contractor. By mutual consent (best in writing), the service provider and the client can agree that, instead of payment for services, the client will lend money to the provider for thirty years, automatically renewable, of course. Personal loans are neither reportable nor taxable. The provider should, of course, pay back the loan within 120 years or so. I can lend money to you for any reason I wish, for as long as I wish. Let us see someone fight that one in court. Let it go viral. Perhaps I sell chairs. Why could I not rather let you hold the chair as collateral for a loan of thirty years? No income; no taxes. P.S.: There is no reason that a provider cannot lend money to someone who arranged the meeting for Uber/Homejoy. Gotta love those crypto-currencies.
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 29 weeks 1 day ago Web link Westernerd
    I'll check my privilege, if you will check your ignorance." (no, Paul, not saying it to you- saying it to them)
  • floppytilleyhat's picture
    floppytilleyhat 29 weeks 1 day ago Page Paul Bonneau
    I loved this article. If anyone's interested, there's another article with a similar viewpoint written by a Brit over at Takimag.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 29 weeks 1 day ago Web link Westernerd
    "I'll check my privilege, if you will check your tyranny."
  • ReverendDraco's picture
    ReverendDraco 29 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    "Hell, even I am thinking of buying one, “just because”; and I’ve never owned a flag in my life." Same here - and I've never been a fan of the Confed flag. . . as the losers, the colors should have been struck and relegated to history books and museums. But. . . all of the brainless caterwauling over the flag has got me considering the purchase of one, "just because."
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 29 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Good point, Paul.  Authoritarians never learn how burning books and banning symbols of resistance to their authority only fuels the popularity of those books and symbols.  Also, this is another example of how coercion is typically counterproductive to desired goals.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 29 weeks 2 days ago Web link A. Magnus
    It's one thing to pass a law (or regulation), another thing to enforce it. Some grumpy old bastards with nothing to lose are going to be disarmed? Not gonna happen.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 29 weeks 2 days ago Web link A. Magnus
    This article advocates fascism. The troika here is actually (from what I can tell from the article) pointing more in the direction of the free market, hard to believe though that is.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 29 weeks 3 days ago Web link TheMPP
    "However, Feuerstein does not mention that Sweet Cakes owners Aaron and Melissa Klein did more than simply refuse service to the couple. They posted a copy of the couple’s legal complaint on the Sweet Cakes Facebook page with their home address visible, which led to a wave of harassment for the couple, which included hateful comments and threats on social media and news websites." Let's not gloss over who aggressed first. And the Kleins did nothing that was illegal or even wrong. The complaint was a public record, available to anyone. Would the author prefer the alternative, that accusations come from anonymous sources, as for example in the Spanish Inquisition? As to threats, for one thing, threats are a dime a dozen. Who cares about a threat? And, they were not made by the Kleins anyway, so are irrelevant. Conservatives are worked up about these cases, and they (and we all) should be - even if their statist preferences about gay marriage are wrong. http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2015/07/administrative-law-and-tyra...
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 29 weeks 3 days ago
    Pilfering for Pluto
    Page Alex R. Knight III
    Good one, Alex. Even assuming one has an interest in such exploration, government is a package deal, particularly in an empire. You don't get the planet flybys without the war, dead babies, torture, theft and ruined economies. Would people be exploring space without government? Of course! It's an interesting thing, and lot of people would put their money and efforts there, to participate. No doubt those little American flags were passed out for the purposes of a photo-op. Some whores went along with waving them, but there must have been quite a few who thought the whole thing was silly. Maybe some were thinking, "If I wave this flag enough, I get to keep my job." One can only speculate.
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 29 weeks 4 days ago
    Pilfering for Pluto
    Page Alex R. Knight III
    PyschoticNut:       http://www.iflscience.com/space/real-cost-nasas-new-horizons-mission-pluto          
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 29 weeks 4 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Awesome, Glen!  Thanks! I hope you enjoy it!  :-)
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 29 weeks 4 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    Yeah, I expected no response from her and got none, even though I e-mailed this essay to both of her known e-ddresses.  I also ground-mailed a copy of The Voluntaryist quarterly newsletter.  
  • PSYCHOTICNUT's picture
    PSYCHOTICNUT 29 weeks 4 days ago
    Pilfering for Pluto
    Page Alex R. Knight III
    The figure I've read is upward of $900,000 in total. In addition to that you have costs of infrastructure, test equipment, etc. I doubt were taken into account but I get what you're saying.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 30 weeks 10 hours ago Page Tim Hartnett
    Corporations are "fictitious persons" created on paper by the state.  As for freedom of speech for corporations: The state giveth and the state taketh away.  Natural law does not apply to "fictitious persons".
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 30 weeks 19 hours ago Page Tim Hartnett
    Anarchists and libertarians are prone to follow Thomas Pynchon's observation: "If they can keep you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers." ( ~Thomas Pynchon http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/235.Thomas_Pynchon) Each time I read or hear a debate over "the-constitution" I'm tempted to advise the participants to go back to basics and read this: http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/library/AnatomyState.html It's easy to get caught up flailing away about the "police state" (yes, indeed, all states are police states -- they may appear in the beginning to not start out as such, but each and every monopoly upon violence will most certainly become one). Few want to simply go back to basics -- as the late Murray Rothbard did -- and understand that the state is an agency of coercion made up of psychopaths with a penchant to "rule". As long as "we" play along with their game and squabble over the details of their "rule", they win. Sam
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 30 weeks 2 days ago Page Glen Allport
    Eh, I'm not quite as depressed about it. People really are figuring it out. We have millions now in the liberty constituency, all we really need at the moment. It does help to be armed; very calming. BTW I don't agree about the effect of trolls. Yes, sure, if the trolls pile on and the opposite side makes no good arguments, the trolls can win. But one calm, honest, decent responder can take the wind out of the trolls' sails and make them look silly. Argumentum ad hominem does not survive well in an environment where the person attacked can respond instantly; it's more effective in old media. Yeah, it's a "study", but we all know what studies of human behavior are worth, don't we?
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 30 weeks 2 days ago Page Alex R. Knight III
    "...we might well assert that, to the extent that gun violence is a problem in society, what we have is a violent persons problem." Not the least because, worrying about "gun deaths" apparently excuses murder by knife or baseball bat. Thinking instead of violent persons eliminates this absurd result. Good luck engaging a politician in logical dialog though. These people don't give a rat's ass who gets killed.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 30 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Hein
    Good job, Paul. With some luck, Virgil might think himself through this conundrum. 1) Complaining: I can see both points - either we should complain long and loud about surveillance (such as this article), or we can ignore it as Sam says. 2) Evading: I believe we should make life as difficult as possible for the snoops, within the bounds of our tolerance. Turn it into a form of entertainment. 3) Fatalism: We can never be sure we can beat the snoops at their game. 4) Arms: Being armed means we don't care that #3 is true.