An Anarchist's Frustration
Submitted by snickodonnell on Thu, 01/17/2013 - 10:15You believe that war is just when an American flag is present on the battlefield. I do not.
You say that taxation is the price we pay for civilization. I disagree.
You claim that men with guns and badges have a higher claim on my life and property because they were elected, or appointed, to a position of power. I am offended.
You think that an organization who has the final say in any disagreement, even involving itself; a monopoly on aggressive force; the sole power to declare legal tender; and the ability to fund itself through involuntary means isn't going to abuse this power? I know better.
Yet somehow, I am the idealist?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know many liberty lovers are not anarchists, as I am, but surely you understand my frustration when someone claims, "Oh, you're just being idealistic."
Here's another
Here's another one:
http://sites.google.com/site/waterlime/ron-paul
I'm all for government if
I'm all for government if joining up is voluntary and there are no monopolies. I would join a government that could demonstrate that participating would be better than going it alone. But forcing people to join a monopoly government is something akin to slavery.
The only
just government derives its power from the consent of the people. No consent means tyranny. Nothing wrong with voluntarily contracting with intentional community managers, etc. People who want to be ruled can contract for it.
Right on.
And succeed if not satisfied. Options are not available because no one would sign up under the current circumstances plaguing all governments.
So what's up here at the Daily Paul?
Why do I have to read through articles where Anarchists talk about their frustration and about committing crimes. Why does this forum even exist if it's goal seems to be to organize attacks on the government endorsing criminality?
Does it exist for the sole purpose of using Ron Paul to serve an Anarchists agenda of destruction, to spread lies and call Ron Paul an Anarchist because he knows there's a tie between voluntary interaction, and liberty?
Ron Paul says the only legitimate purpose of government is to protect liberty, and if an Anarchist says to be an advocate for liberty means you need to be an Anarchist and anti-government, they've left you like a beached whale dying under the weight of your own blubber.
So now supporting liberty means you need to be an Anarchist who's trying to destroy government. Liars, users, and destroyers...
Here is my motto: "Freedom, liberty, and their common defense"
An Anarchist and I share nothing in common because they won't defend liberty, and won't offer anything to that purpose. They want to be sovereigns in a free market of violence serving their self interest.
Why do I have to read through
False. You DON'T have to.
You're very boisterous, but in all of your posts, you speak in empty platitudes and generalisms. Endorsing criminality? Where? What crime? Who's organizing attacks? Be specific, or retract and STFU.
Says who? Be specific. Your generalized anti-anarchy trolling is vacuous, and embarrassingly so. Moreover, by leveling these (empty, ill-defined) charges against anarchists, you must necessarily be advocating government in its current size and form, or even growing government. Otherwise, if you seek any cuts at all to government, by definition, you also seek to destroy it. There is only a difference in the degree of destruction sought.
I thought it was "It's a justice thing"? Well, one platitude is as good as the next, I suppose.
More generalizing? Shocker!
You're this board's version of Mitt Romney: "I love the liberty I love, for the freedom and liberty I defend, that is provided by the liberty and freedom that gives us the freedom to defend it. God bless freedom, and the common defense of liberty that freedom liberates us to pursue.
But SCREW ANARCHISTS!"
That's the short version of your existence here at DP.
Cheers.
My website: dailypolicyjournal.com
You make sense
I think Jesus came up with the solution for how to organize society without the use of violence:
"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself."
Luke 10:27
But like Nietzsche said, "God is Dead." And so we find ourselves slipping into universal madness.
Nietzsche wrote a story
In that story the last pope told Zarathustra his opinion of God,
The New York Times misreported, yet again.
Free includes debt-free!
That's the BEST answer??
I have only ONE question to those who believe in the "authority of the state".
"By the consent of the people and you've been overruled Anarchist."
So you believe that "authority" comes from numbers? I do not consent, so what do you and your numbers do? Arrest me? Kill me? If I get more "numbers" on my side, do we get to arrest you and kill you? Sounds like mob rule to me, but hey, I'm just a crazy anarchist, some low-life scum who deserves your boot on my neck...
As far as all limited government types working together with us anarchists, I already do that. I worked hard to get people exposed to the only "politician" who made sense (I created and still drive the "Ron Paul Liberty Corvette"). I attend Republican meetings and try to open people's eyes to what truth is as often as I can get a conversation going about it. I even stand and for the pledge out of respect for those who truly believe in the fiction. I figure that working towards "limited government" is a step in the right direction and education will help others see the error of using force to get others to "comply" with their way of thinking...
It starts and ends with individual liberty.
If you get a gang, that does not give you authority, it gives you power.
The bans on Coercion, Deception, Theft and Murder have been civil code since before Moses.
All these things destroy voluntary actions and peaceful relationships. What's the profit in that?
Is it possible to to create a government that does not act like a gang of thugs?
Free includes debt-free!
It starts with a collective defending individual liberty.
"Is it possible to to create a government that does not act like a gang of thugs?"
Certainly NOT by any means you'd offer Anarchist, because what you want is a gang of thugs, gangland pseudo-government, goon squads paid for and doing the bidding of those who want to use them to serve the principle of self interest.
You are anti-government and just want to destroy. You WANT gangs of thugs, you WANT to buy power in a free market of violence. You are a phony, a liar, and a hypocrite.
Freedom, liberty, and their common defense.
LMAO!!!! Protecting
LMAO!!!! Protecting individual freedom starts with forming a collective? Please look up the word "antonym" in your dictionary.
Anarchists have no desire to simply change the name of gov't to "goon squad".
We want to end the institution of monopolized coercion and violence.
Jebus Crikey, Your whole argument is,"if we dismantle the gov't, it'll just change it's name to something derogatory and create itself again, and my team might lose the election."
Do you really think relabeling a group of thugs as "gov't" will somehow magically make them beneficial?
Alas, gov't NOTHING MORE than a gang that you trust unconditionally, because you can't possibly be satisfied with the results of gov't. Gov't operate at a LOSS, proving that they obviously DECREASE satisfaction of life .
... And, no, I don't need to give another man a badge to defend my liberty. I will defend my neighbor's liberty with as much enthusiasm and honor as the military defends the oil.
It's the AGGRESSION that anarchists have problem with, and do not want to support. Defense of our freedoms is not an issue.
You are a Judas Goat, FreedomsReigning. You aren't protecting freedom, because you don't know what threatens it. FEAR of your neighbor is the enemy of freedom. Fear the guy who strips your freedom for the sake of security, not your neighbor.
Your anti-freedom rants are nothing more than a circle jerk wherein you assume that anarchy would dismantle the gov't, change it's name to "thugs", "goons", "mafia", etc., and re-establish it.
That's not anarchy at all. "An" means without, "archy" means ruler. Anarchy means, literally, a society without a ruler, one where everyone does what they think is best, one where the cooperative individuals prosper and the violent plunderers are severely limited in their scope and range.
This ain't Utopia, it's just better than a gang of violent aggressors with unlimited resources, or, as you call them, gov't.
"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."
collective force will be used to take your individual liberty.
"Protecting individual freedom starts with forming a collective?"
Yes, because collective force will be used to take your individual liberty. You'll need backup, and I don't care that you can't figure out what happens. You only have one hope: "Freedom, liberty, and their common defense." You're going to have to care about and contribute to somebody elses liberty.
If liberty, and freedom is no longer what the collective justly wants, than it doesn't matter what scheme you dream up trying to replace it, because collective force will still be there serving mans covetous nature.
"We want to end the institution of monopolized coercion and violence."
Yes, you want "a free market of coercion and violence"; goon squads sold to the highest bidder serving the principle of self interest which will then serve mans covetous nature without any public debate, representation, or consent. The man who buys the most violence wins, because all you now have is violence so might will make right.
"Do you really think relabeling a group of thugs as "gov't" will somehow magically make them beneficial? "
Words have meaning Anarchist, and the reason you hate the word "government" is because it has meaning, and you hate what it represents. What it represents is something that stands between you and the free market of coercion and violence you covet.
Government stands between you and the free rang warlord economy you'd create, and so you define it as your enemy, so now YOU are the enemy of those who don't want to be ruled by warlords.
"Your anti-freedom rants are nothing more than a circle jerk wherein you assume that anarchy would dismantle the gov't"
You have NO IDEA how to be free, because you don't know what threatens your liberty. or that when it comes. it will come with collective force, and much more than you and your little neighbor can meet, bought and paid for in your free market of coercion and violence.
LOL, don't look now, but you
LOL, don't look now, but you already have a collective force trying to take your individual liberty...and they are using fear to do it.
Tour entire argument is uf we don't have a gov't, then the gov't will enslave us. Then you back it yo with straw man and red herring dribble. After that you identify me as the enemy of YOUR "liberty" towrap things up.
Wow. Just wow.
"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."
Keep laughing, it means even less to me than your tears.
"you already have a collective force trying to take your individual liberty"
I am well aware of that, too aware, and if you Anarchists could somehow succeed, there would still be collective force trying to take my individual liberty. In fact, you're trying to make the case for a free market of coercion and violence, of collective force taking liberty without any debate, consent, representation, or transparency.
What you want is a Warlord economy where those who pay for it can take liberty with collective force, and I would rather just serve justice on you Anarchists for thinking you were going to destroy my Country with a free market of collective force and coercion.
"Tour entire argument is uf we don't have a gov't, then the gov't will enslave us."
You can't afford to understand what my point is. A free market of coercion and violence is not government, it's Anarchy, and Anarchy is why governments are created to begin with, so that force will serve justice, and those who oppose justice will need to try and make their case in public rather than with their wallet in a free market of coercion and violence.
Could we get a counter on your big lies?
Could we get a counter on your big lies?
Let us do an experiment, you keep telling the same lies over and over again , we count them, then we see if we suddenly start to belive them.
This might be instructive to propagandists such as yourself. We might also learn how obdurate you are.
Obdurate = hardened in wickedness
Did you just mention a
Did you just mention a thought crime as your lil "cherry on top?
"I would rather just serve justice on you Anarchists for thinking you were going to destroy my Country..."
Why, yes you did.
So, because people are short-sighted at times, and make mistakes, and get greedy, there is no "perfect" situation here on earth. Utopia cannot be achieved. The choice is rather simple:
1. A free market of force and coercion, with organizations competing for customers by providing the best service.
OR
2. A monopoly on force and coercion, with no way to judge it's effectiveness or economize it's costs.
Well, a free market for a service ALWAYS under every circumstance, and without exception outperforms a monopoly FROM THE VIEW OF THE CUSTOMER (ie: YOU).
A free market for food will feed FreedomsReigning better than a food monopoly.
A free market for clothing will cloth FreedomsReigning better than a clothing monopoly.
A free market for entertainment will entertain FreedomsReigning better than an entertainment monopoly.
A free market for transportation will transport FreedomsReigning better than a transportation monopoly.
A free market for education will obviously educate FreedomsReigning better than an education monopoly.
A free market for health care will take better care FreedomsReigning"s health better than a health monopoly.
A free market for protection and justice will protect FreedomsReigning and provide him with better justice than a protection and justice monopoly.
Of course, if we tried, FreedomsReigning would get all psychotic and start killing all of the protection and justice providers EXCEPT HIS OWN... out of fear, no less.
Then again, FreedomsReigning would only be able to enslave a couple people before he ran out of resources, then he would be broke, outlawed, and BEGGING for someone to voluntarily exchange with him. He thinks others would join in his plundering, but his business plan is so obviously unsustainable, that the idea is laughable.
FreedomsReigning, what ever your neighbor did to you, I'm sorry, but you shouldn't use that to justify MORE violence. I suggest the golden rule. It works wonders. No, wait, I forget. The golden rule is scary, and, therefore, your enemy.
People are NOT inherently "evil", and you can't provide any evidence to the contrary, because none exists. Just because your religious text says so doesn't make it true. People ARE inherently SELF-SERVING, and will choose between good and evil based on the expected results. If a person can gain more by violence than by cooperation, they will be violent.
...And what better way to make violence beneficial than by convincing people through propaganda that the gov't's violence is necessary to stop some other imaginary violence, that, for unknown, inarticulate reason that is never subject to rational analysis, is "bound to occur".
There is no difference between a gang of thugs and a gov't, NONE!!! You say that the gov't is elected by the majority. YOU LIE!!! The winner never gets +50% of the people to vote. Just under 60% of the population typically votes for president. A mere 10% margin is considered a landslide. This means that 55% of 60% of the population choose your master, or roughly 1/3. (I find it amazing that 40% of Americans have no need to control others with Guns-N-Badges, Inc.)
You disagree? Then articulate one difference, just ONE.............
25% of Americans are afraid of CHANGE(conservatives)
35% of Americans are afraid of RESPONSIBILITY(progressives)
BUT
40% of Americans want no part of it.(Adults)
"I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."
Common misconceptions about anarchists/voluntaryists
It's not that they want to end government, they merely want to SECEDE from government. There is no reason why a group of peaceful people who wish to form a completely voluntary society shouldn't be allowed to leave the statist society that enslaves people.
A true Non-agressive anarchist understands that complete liberty means complete responsibility for your actions, and it doesn't work without the golden rule.
Please stop portraying all anarchists with the same brush. A better term to use in this forum is Voluntaryist. The violent anarchists which you refer to are typically on more socialistic sites, not here and do not truly understand true liberty or the NAP.
A voluntaryist believes in the right to life, liberty and property and is a SELF-governer -- the ultimate minarchist.
________________________________________
Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. ~Thomas Paine
Than go start your own Anarchist society?
"It's not that they want to end government, they merely want to SECEDE from government."
Than start your own Anarchist society, but good luck finding anybody to fight for it. Anarchists are cowards who just want to live free off of the labor and sacrifice of those around them, under the umbrella of security created by the borders, military, and law that people obey, yet they want to secede, and to be free of justice while they live in the society justice creates.
The only place Anarchy works is when the Anarchist is the last person on earth, which may explain why their only objective ever seems to be to destroy.
"A true Non-agressive anarchist understands that complete liberty means complete responsibility for your actions, and it doesn't work without the golden rule."
The Golden rule does not stop people from CHOOSING to use force to take what they covet. You're going to need a system of justice, and if you intent to use collective force imposing justice on people, you're going to need more than your wallet and a gun.
If that's all you have is violence, than don't act all surprised when you're facing down another collective using violence to get what they want, and what they'll justly want is to be free of your coercion and violence bought and paid for by whichever warlords boots you lick this week.
"Please stop portraying all anarchists with the same brush."
Than stop calling yourself an Anarchist. Words have meaning, and I know you wish they didn't; but they do, and you chose to call yourself an Anarchist so that's what you are. Don't get angry at me for your choices. Take responsibility for your actions, and you chose to invest yourself in failed ideas.
You chose to beach yourself and die under the weight of your own Anarchist blubber, so don't expect me to pretend I don't see you there, or mistake you for something other than what you are.
"A voluntaryist believes in the right to life, liberty and property and is a SELF-governer"
Your self government gets destroyed by collective force whether it's a bigger government or a free market of coercion and violence, and ultimately justice is IMPOSED on all the self governed tyrants through collective force, by bringing more force to bear than you can defend yourself against.
Even criminals and tyrants will try to defend themselves when push comes to shove, and they won't want justice imposed on them. They'll even start screaming about how I don't have a right to impose justice, and how I'm breaking the NAP.
Anarchist can't explain their justice system, because they need to explain how they're going to use collective force bought and sold to the highest bidder in a free market of coercion and violence to serve justice, without any representation, consent, debate, or transparency.
You will serve a warlord Anarchist, and that warlord will use collective force to take liberty, and while he does, you'll stand there picking your Anarchist nose talking about the NAP.
what you want is a gang of
Sorry, I think you misunderstood him. He wants no government, not the one we have right now.
"It's a justice thing."
Bahahaha. Dude, you are a ridiculous caricature of a gung-ho liberty-lover anti-anarchist. If you're not a collection of government goons operating under that handle to disrupt this forum, you should be.
My website: dailypolicyjournal.com
Live by destroying, and be destroyed.
"He wants no government, not the one we have right now."
I know that. He's Anti-Government, but doesn't know how to spin it so that it makes any sense.
Anarchists want to destroy my Constitutional Republic and replace it with something, yet they don't know what to call it, because they're liars and frauds who just want to destroy. They can't explain what it is they want to create, because most of them don't want to create anything, and when those who do TRY, it starts sounding like what it is, government.
"Dude, you are a ridiculous caricature of a gung-ho liberty-lover anti-anarchist."
I thought I made myself clear? I don't give a damn what any Anarchist thinks, says, or wants, because everything they do is about trying to destroy. They're two faced liars and nihilists, frauds and cowards.
Justice isn't my rule. It's not something I made up. It's one of those underlying laws, and people who want to destroy ultimately get destroyed, if not in this life; after.
Live by the sword, die by the sword. Live by destroying, and be destroyed.
No destruction
No destruction, we will just ignore you and your tyranny away.
What if you held an election and no one showed up?
Good luck claiming any legitimacy for your gang of thieves ( government).
May I suggest putting your head under the covers?
"No destruction, we will just ignore you and your tyranny away."
May I suggest putting your head under the covers? The blanket has served humanity well and been proven a sound defense against the boogieman. If that doesn't work, try clicking your heels together.
My tyranny? ROFL. Am I now some kind of super secret agent man defending a tyranny of liberty?
You should never turn your back on government force BTW, because collective force will never go away, and violence can't be ignored. That's the whole purpose of violence. You either impose it on somebody to take what you unjustly want, or use it to defend against those who would.
When liberty minded people leave collective force to the covetous horde, they will soon be facing violence.
Those who want to take your liberty love using government, just like they'll love using a free market of violence and coercion to take your liberty. That way they don't even have to pretend to care what you think.
"What if you held an election and no one showed up?"
I'd show up, and my representative would win. :) That's the only good thing about Anarchism, the Anarchists don't vote or take part in the debate.
"Good luck claiming any legitimacy for your gang of thieves ( government)."
I don't need to do anything, but you do. The whole world is with me on this; government is better than Anarchy.
So the solution is violence no matter what
quote: You should never turn your back on government force BTW, because collective force will never go away, and violence can't be ignored. That's the whole purpose of violence. You either impose it on somebody to take what you unjustly want, or use it to defend (no that is aggression if I do not want it) against those who would.
So you want to use violence to
A. You either impose it on somebody to take what you unjustly want,
plunder, theft, sociopathy, psychopathy
or
B. or use it to defend against those who would [steal kill ].
institute organized theft and murder to protect people from theft and murder
sociopathy, psychopathy
So yes it is tyranny that you promote, because you will initiate violence in the name of protecting from violence and anarchists do not want what you are forcing down our throats.
It is not defensive if it is used to impose your so called solution.
quote: government is better than Anarchy
By any rational measure governments have killed more of their own subjects than any external threats (wars) and internal threats (common criminals) .
The assertion is false (government is better than Anarchy), you lose.
Breaking down your comment,
Breaking down your comment, which is a microcosm of your existence here at DP:
Truly, I enjoy your repetitive vapidity. Keep up the good work! I'm sure you'll be in line for a promotion in no time that will get you out doing some government trolling in person rather than with a keyboard.
My website: dailypolicyjournal.com
Anarchist have no response to what I'm saying.
Like I've said many times. Anarchist have no response to what I'm saying.
Let blah blah blah be the last thing that comes out of your Anarchist mouth as you die suffocating under the weight of your meaningless and worthless words.
Insults can't shut me. Blah blah blah can't shut me up.
You'll have to offer me reason and logic, something an Anarchist can't do because as nihilists they don't believe that there's any objective basis for truth.
So in the end, when dealing with n Anarchist, all that comes out of their ass/mouth is: "Blah blah blah generalization blah blah blah platitude blah blah blah anarchists are the devil blah blah. Blah blah cheesy platitude blah blah new generic motto blah blah empty generalized rhetoric blah blah Blah blah. "
Only those who listen can hear
Only those who listen can hear.
If you are stamping your feet and plugging your ears with your fingers and shouting nanananana then you are not listening.
Ron Pauls a voluntaryist...
Ron Pauls a voluntaryist... anarchist... sit on that socialists
Anarchists are users and liars.
Ron Paul isn't an Anarchist.
Anarchists are users, liars and frauds. Is that what Ron Paul was acting as, a fraud, a fake government representative doing everything he could to destroy government and using the people he represented by misrepresenting them?
Anarchists are Anti-Government, and Ron Paul is Constitutionalist, a Libertarian, and a Republican, not an Anarchist.
That's right; thumbs down you pathetic phonies.
Come on, make the case, convince me! Don't just hit the thumbs down button and run away.
Convince me that Ron Paul is an Anarchist and phony who's been living the life of a fraud, that he's anti-government and been doing everything in his power to destroy my country. I'm listening? Go for it?