Are you Anti-Government, or are you Anti-Big Government?

the ladder.

we will only be free (in my humble opinion) when we become wise and can recognize the truth.

I believe our system's foundations are adequate enough to provide the freedoms we seek, however, our lack of knowledge on how exactly to access our freedoms responsibly is terribly lacking.

I can't wait until more people find out they can already use gold/silver in private contracting today and that there are many ways that they can keep their affairs in the private and away from "government" intervention.

Constitutional Government?

Prior to 1913, the people had direct veto power to the spending policies of the Federal Government. Because if the government wanted to borrow money, it had to go to the people for it. There was no central bank.

It had to sell bonds. If you didn't want to go to war, you didn't buy bonds. If you didn't want the pork project that the government had in mind, you didn't buy the bonds.

It was a very simple, effective system. A Republican System that gave direct veto power to the people on economic policy. And by extension, a direct veto on all policies foreign and domestic. And it worked very well until 1913. That's how come government managed to stay small. Because it didn't have an unlimited credit line to go on a shopping spree. For 97 years. And make you pay for it.

End the Fed and we can end most of the troubles of this country and most of the world.

The reason the NWO calls us Terrorists because we are a threat to their plan. I am Anti Big Government and and want as small of Government as we can get away with.

A post below had an interesting perspective that made me think.

At what size of government does it cease to be a magnet for tyrants and criminals? What size is necessary at all?

Clearly, if all people were honest and peaceful there is not much need for government. But we know that will never be.

And clearly tyrants are drawn to government power. The more power available the worse the tyrant.

So at what size and scope is adequate to deal with dishonest and violent people and at the same time keep tyrants in check?

Then there is the issue of government goods and services that some think are necessary. Roads, military, etc. I think there is some need for some of these but again what is the right balance?

If we had no government sponsored military would we have the planes, tanks and ships we need to defend ourselves? I doubt it. But clearly we have a military run amok.

Ahhh, the big question... What is the right size?

I'm anti big government for sure, but, the more I widdle away, the more I'm left with the realization that the gov't can't be trusted not to be corrupt about the most basic things.

Am I a terrorist? No. I don't see the point in violently tearing at what's already here when so many Americans currently condone it.

Yes, when the time comes that we get enough consensus to change things, the gov't may be too big for violent or non-violent resistance, but terrorist activities aren't going to change that. Also, if the gov't were a reasonable size, it wouldn't be a threat to so many people and there wouldn't be a threat of a time when it is too late to resist so we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I just think government needs to downsize from time to time like the private sector.

Otherwise they will eventually consume the private sector and / or racketize it.

This is already clearly happening when you have shrinking private sector employment and expanding public sector employment and marketplaces that are anti-competitive due to government interferance / favoratism.

George Washington (1732 - 1799), First Inaugural Address, Apr. 30, 1789

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.

"The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government are justly considered... deeply, ...finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people."

"As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality."

I believe that we need government as a servant of the people; albeit, a "troublesome" one at that. I believe because we lost touch with it is why it is now the "fearful master" that Washington warned us about. He also gave us the solution to keep it within and under our control: At all moments to exercise responsible action over it always! We got lazy and sloppy and look at the mess we've got now. However, we're in it to get it back, and we will!

Principally and ideologically, I am anti-government altogether. That is, I am anarcho-capitalist, and take the an-cap position on every political issue, i.e. against the government. But in reality, I do not believe that an an-cap society is feasible within my lifetime, so technically I could also be considered a limited government or minarchist guy along with most libertarians.

Principally and ideologically, I am anti-government altogether. That is, I am anarcho-capitalist, and take the an-cap position on every political issue, i.e. against the government. But in reality, I do not believe that an an-cap society is feasible within my lifetime, so technically I could also be considered a limited government or minarchist guy along with most libertarians.

Principally and ideologically, I am anti-government altogether. That is, I am anarcho-capitalist, and take the an-cap position on every political issue, i.e. against the government. But in reality, I do not believe that an an-cap society is feasible within my lifetime, so technically I could also be considered a limited government or minarchist guy along with most libertarians.

I would make a distinction between "government" and "state."

Without question, I am against the state -- a dangerous, evil, awful institution that threatens life on earth.

"Government" is a broader term that could include the state as a form of government but could also conceivably include alternatives.

People and things are all "governed" in some way or another; so to that end, I'm for some form of VOLUNTARY government.

The state, on the other hand, is a monumental disaster and deserves the scorn and contempt of all decent people.

You need to make the distinction between our government, and our politicians. Our politicians ARE NOT the government. They are elected, appointed and hired to serve the public within the framework of government. They all take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. The Constitution establishes what government is, and what it is not.

When politicians act outside the restraints of the Constitution that they have sworn to uphold, they are no longer acting as agents of government. This is because they are playing outside the rules. And, they are breaking the law.

If you support our nation and our Constitution, you are not anti-government. If you are a public servant, and you use your position to enrich yourself or others, you violate the Rights of the American people, and you violate your oath to the Constitution, that would make YOU anti-government.

Never allow criminal politicians to hide behind the idea that they are "the government". When they violate the law, they are not protected by any sort of immunity, and they can be prosecuted.