If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   Police departments receive training in dealing with 'sovereign citizens'. Regicide?   (latimes.com) divider line 378
    More: Interesting, sovereign citizens, Contra Costa County, Santa Rosa County, oaths of office, finches, money orders, West Memphis, monarchs  
•       •       •

9550 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Apr 2013 at 11:53 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



378 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-07 07:02:21 AM

Kittypie070: All these sovereign citizens are conscious of are the privileges which they imagine they're entitled to. Never a whit of any sense of responsibility or obligation at all, unless it's to express a kind of spite toward the very existence of those two concepts.
.


"Libertarians" have rights.  The rest of us have obligations.
 
2013-04-07 07:39:20 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-04-07 08:35:51 AM

pedrop357: The moment they came out for any reason, they abdicate all the autonomy you talked about a second ago? Gee, sounds like they really can't do their own thing.


You know what they call a walled-in compound that the inhabitants aren't every allowed to leave?

Prison.
 
2013-04-07 09:57:57 AM

cig-mkr: So, a person can't purchase a few hundred acres, construct shelter, cut wood for fire, hunt and fish, live off the land, and barter for goods without being a terrorist ? As long as they don't use publicly funded resources I say leave him alone.


The problems start sometime after the due date for the property tax bill...
 
2013-04-07 11:20:01 AM

Satanic_Hamster: No, but some cops expect you to show ID at the drop of the hat.  Even made it up to the Supreme Court a few years back.


Agreed, but my point is I still want to know, however, why sovereign citizens get treated better than regular civilians.

Their position seems absurd, but they also mostly get away with it.  That alone would seem to recruit new wackos.
 
2013-04-07 11:51:52 AM
thiefofdreams
Perhaps you can take a step back for a minute and see it as we do. We care for our fellow man, we take care of him. We try to be good neighbors and feed the poor. We do believe in society as a whole. That each one of us is a part of this country and as such we all deserve the rights and respect due to each of us.

Only if it's voluntary.

I remember the stories my grandfather told me when he was a farm in the great depression and how they could not have survived without aid from the government and society.

Sure they could have, if they had overthrown capitalism and collectivized the means of production. When people are secure in their position, without the pressures of rent/taxes/mortgages and the threat of being fired, they are generally willing to support others based on "from each according to ability, to each according to need"; that can be decentralized to avoid the problems of 20th century 'communist' technocracies by putting each workplace under the total control of the people who work at it, and leave it up to them how to distribute their product. Without the aforementioned pressures, and with the spirit of solidarity, people will provide for each other, and you won't have (to paraphrase The Grapes of Wrath) starvation amidst waste (fruit rotting on the ground because the hungry can't buy it; boarded-up houses because the homeless can't find work).


tirob
You seemed skeptical that Anarchists could ever be capable of making this "left to right" move; I assure you that it happens all the time.

Syndicalism is an economic program, not a political one. I hope I didn't deny that a Syndicalist to Fascist shift was possible; Mussolini was even a Syndicalist once. Fascism, especially in the Italian version, was something of a successor to National Syndicalism. Since the CNT was Syndicalist far more than it was Anarcho-Syndicalist (I only recently learned that the CNT leaders went to the barricades during the May Days- to beg the workers to stand down!), I can see some CNT people going over to the Falange. But Anarchist to Fascist is a different animal. To say "it happens all the time" is a complete absurdity. I can't think of an example of it happening once in the years I've been directly involved, or hearing of it before that.

This kind of rhetoric has appealed to more than one person who started out as a left libertarian such as you describe yourself.

Yeah, and there's a headache-inducing rise in 'Mutalism' these days, trying to fill the gaping chasm between Anarchists (-Communist, -Syndicalist, -etc) and so-called "Anarcho"-Capitalists (who have some truly insane and dystopian ideas about how capitalism could work without a State to protect property). There's some danger of Mutualists becoming Capitalists- how they aren't, I'm not sure. They still seem to believe in private property and trade. The only difference seems to be that they have a better stance on homesteading; namely, Mutualists say that once property is abandoned, the new owner can homestead it and the previous owner loses all rights to it; Capitalists seem to say that the previous owner has rights to property in perpetuity as long as they ever made any improvement to it, which I suspect includes the act of purchasing it. I don't see how Mutualism can survive, since its anticapitalist stance on property (in Mutualism, use = ownership; in Capitalism, title = ownership) makes quid-pro-quo trade and money and so on superfluous. I suspect it's mostly an angry backlash to the non-Anarchist nature of Syndicalism (in the non-Anarchist form, hierarchical and authoritarian; too often, there's confusion between Syndicalism and Anarcho-Syndicalism).

Unfortunately, Mutualism carries a risk of granting legitimacy to "Anarcho"-Capitalism, which is a 'movement' (as much as anything is a movement if it lives only on the Internet) of the Spencerians, as you put them. "Anarcho"-Capitalism is of, by, and for former Republicans who take the small government, pro-capitalism argument to its logical conclusion, and then try to make it work. They LOVE insurance corporations, police, and courts; shiat that Anarchists find completely odious- privatized tyranny is still tyranny. But "Anarcho"-Capitalists get along with Mutualists and Mutualists get along with Anarchists, so, yeah, there's some danger there.

Not that I think Mutualists are completely wrong, especially when it comes to the fact that there is a need to have fleshed-out economic ideas (I won't say an 'economic program' since that sounds a little too deterministic). So I argue with them about how an organized gift economy could be structured to solve the same problems that they feel need to be solved with money (such as Price Signaling).

As for Right-Libertarians, I and I think most Anarchists are occasionally willing to work with them when conditions warrant and based on clear principles. For example in Arizona a few years ago, Anarchists appealed to Right-Libertarians to be against SB1070 or something like it, which had the bonus effect of creating a rift between them and nationalists. We all hate the government and seem to think it would be fine for each 'side' to go do their own thing after we get rid of it. There might be some conflict when it comes to homesteading but a good 95% of humanity will probably choose the Anarchist way of doing things (gift economy, use-based ownership, solidarity, organization) and, if we get to this point, be organized enough to crush the Capitalists, so I'm not too worried.


Chaghatai
The problems start sometime after the due date for the property tax bill...

I've heard that the reason property tax was invented was to force people to use a unified currency, and I've gotta say that it makes sense. If you MUST come up with a couple thousand dollars per year, then you MUST participate in the economy. Freedom!
 
2013-04-07 12:17:58 PM

thiefofdreams: You see it as a means for the government and society to encroach on personal liberties. I remember the stories my grandfather told me when he was a farm in the great depression and how they could not have survived without aid from the government and society. I also remember us winning WW2 due to the country knuckling up and working their collective asses off for the greater good.


I believe in and naturally follow what I might call the actual 'social contract' in that I follow most all laws, help others when I can without serious risk, don't harm people, etc.

I just don't subscribe to the "social contract" as seems to be put forward here and in other places when it's used solely as a way to justify more encroachment.

As I said before, how often does anyone online, on tv, etc. use the term/euphemism "social contract" as anything but a way to justify more government?  I've never heard it used as a way to calm people down or limit society itself.
IE., "I understand you folks don't like strip clubs, but they're not hurting anyone and part of the social contract requires that we tolerate people's objectionable behavior as long as they don't hurt people or harm society.  See, we're all in this together and the good of society requires that people be allowed to do their own thing sometimes."

Again, I'm not against what I'll say is the actual concept of the 'contract'.  I'm against the way the concept is used (misused) only to justify more encroachment.
 
2013-04-07 01:03:38 PM

RanDomino: tirob
You seemed skeptical that Anarchists could ever be capable of making this "left to right" move; I assure you that it happens all the time.

[explanation of sydicalism/anarchism relationship].



I'll buy the dichotomy you propose between syndicalism and anarchism, and I'll take your word for it that you yourself have never personally witnessed an anarchist-to-fascist crossover, but it's happened, both in the Spanish example I cited earlier here and elsewhere.

RanDomino: [Mutualists].


I go to bed less ignorant every day.  Hadn't heard of them until now.  I think that what you write about them is evidence that the anarchist-to-rightist crossover issue that I alluded to is alive and well today.

RanDomino: they LOVE insurance corporations, police, and courts


Provided they're privately run.  Anarcho-capitalists--I would call them Spencerians; all antistate, pro-private property roads in this country eventually lead back to Spencer--hate Social Security, Medicare, any government program that provides food to poor people, and, in many cases, all federal and most state and local authorities.  If you believe that Spencerism lives today only on the internet, I disagree; people like the Koch Brothers have funded think tanks and other institutions who hire PhDs, journalists, and such to crank out "information" in support of the cause, and they back candidates for public office, both locally and nationally, who they believe share their views.
 
2013-04-07 01:08:58 PM

RanDomino: I've heard that the reason property tax was invented was to force people to use a unified currency


There's some other theory behind their use. However, property taxes were first introduced in ancient Egypt; the exact reasoning is lost to time, but probably boils down to "the Pharoh wants his army fed, and the Priests are going along with the gag".
 
2013-04-07 01:24:22 PM

RanDomino: thiefofdreams
Perhaps you can take a step back for a minute and see it as we do. We care for our fellow man, we take care of him. We try to be good neighbors and feed the poor. We do believe in society as a whole. That each one of us is a part of this country and as such we all deserve the rights and respect due to each of us.

Only if it's voluntary.
.

You seem to imply that things like Social Security, EBT cards, etc., are funded by money that is taken from us by force.  I know that I don't like paying taxes, and I have been known to complain about paying them now and then, but I pay them every time--voluntarily--because I know that that everyone else here does, or I like to think so, anyway.
 
2013-04-07 02:05:37 PM
I have been studying these goobers for a long time. There is also a group in the UK, Canada, and Australia called "freeman on the land" who are almost exactly the same as the SCs in the US. As you can see from the scribblings of Pedrop357 they are almost all incapable of coherent thought and most of them are mentally ill.

There are some basic concepts that they just don't understand such as:
What common law is
The fact that something is public property doesn't give the public unfettered access to it.
That you are require to adhere to the rules, regulations, and taxes of the society you are born into. The ONLY way out of this is to leave that society.
There are many other basic ideas they don't get (again see Pedrop357) but these three are the ones that cause them the most trouble.

You will find that almost everyone of them came to this "philosophy" because they were trying to avoid paying something they owed, be it taxes, a mortgage, or a fine. Everyone of them will bring up that fact that they want to use drugs if you talk to them long enough. Every. Single. One.

What you will also find if you talk to them long enough is that there really is no philosophy. There is not one concrete idea that they all agree on.

I fully expect to see this ailment listed in dsm-v or dsm-vi
 
2013-04-07 02:16:26 PM

Bravo Two: bunner: thiefofdreams: USA Love it or Leave it.

Is it OK to mourn it?

Bunker, I love you.


Took the words right out of my mouth :)
 
2013-04-07 03:24:54 PM

CMYK and PMS: As you can see from the scribblings of Pedrop357 they are almost all incapable of coherent thought and most of them are mentally ill.


Your mom's incapable of coherent thought.
 
2013-04-07 04:30:59 PM
CMYK and PMS: As you can see from the scribblings of Pedrop357 they are almost all incapable of coherent thought and most of them are mentally ill.

Your mom's incapable of coherent thought.


Dude you're just proving the point

/Mom's dead
//no really
///86 years old
 
2013-04-07 05:43:03 PM
Damn, there's a lot of crazy in this thread.
 
2013-04-07 05:50:32 PM
pedrop357:
more encroachment.

more government

more encroachment.


A Las Vegas "libertarian" according to your profile!  Congratulations.  Just like some of my best friends.  They crack me up.

Want less government in your life?  Stop using electrical power from the Hoover Dam, which was paid for and is still maintained (and protected from sabotage) by our federal tax dollars.  And don't pay taxes to maintain and police I-15, likewise a federal government project, which provides access to and from Vegas from southern California, Vegas's biggest tourism market.  You'll *really* be off the grid then, because your city will be out of business.

Look, it's all right with me if you want to go off into the hills someplace and live there with your guns and your fishing rods.  But forgive me if I take with a grain of salt your complaints (and similar complaints from casino barons and their paid PR people) about the government while you sit there and reap the benefits of things that taxpayers paid for and continue to maintain.
 
2013-04-07 05:58:07 PM

pedrop357: thiefofdreams: You see it as a means for the government and society to encroach on personal liberties. I remember the stories my grandfather told me when he was a farm in the great depression and how they could not have survived without aid from the government and society. I also remember us winning WW2 due to the country knuckling up and working their collective asses off for the greater good.

I believe in and naturally follow what I might call the actual 'social contract' in that I follow most all laws, help others when I can without serious risk, don't harm people, etc.

I just don't subscribe to the "social contract" as seems to be put forward here and in other places when it's used solely as a way to justify more encroachment.

As I said before, how often does anyone online, on tv, etc. use the term/euphemism "social contract" as anything but a way to justify more government?  I've never heard it used as a way to calm people down or limit society itself.
IE., "I understand you folks don't like strip clubs, but they're not hurting anyone and part of the social contract requires that we tolerate people's objectionable behavior as long as they don't hurt people or harm society.  See, we're all in this together and the good of society requires that people be allowed to do their own thing sometimes."

Again, I'm not against what I'll say is the actual concept of the 'contract'.  I'm against the way the concept is used (misused) only to justify more encroachment.


Oh then we are in total agreement. I agree that the contract is used by both sides to push a political agenda and force others to their whims. I have always just equated that to there being assholes at the extreme ends of the spectrum that are willing to take advantage of society to feed themselves only.

Thank you for the responses. It is not common that you talk to someone on here and get to have a good conversation about the actual topic of the thread.
 
2013-04-07 06:00:24 PM

tirob: RanDomino: thiefofdreams
Perhaps you can take a step back for a minute and see it as we do. We care for our fellow man, we take care of him. We try to be good neighbors and feed the poor. We do believe in society as a whole. That each one of us is a part of this country and as such we all deserve the rights and respect due to each of us.

Only if it's voluntary.
.
You seem to imply that things like Social Security, EBT cards, etc., are funded by money that is taken from us by force.  I know that I don't like paying taxes, and I have been known to complain about paying them now and then, but I pay them every time--voluntarily--because I know that that everyone else here does, or I like to think so, anyway.


There are people out there that don't pay taxes. This thread is about those very people that use government services and then claim they don't owe taxes.

Taxes are not voluntary, call the IRS and let them know you are taking a year off paying taxes and see how that works out.
 
2013-04-07 06:03:40 PM

tirob: A Las Vegas "libertarian" according to your profile! Congratulations. Just like some of my best friends. They crack me up.

Want less government in your life? Stop using electrical power from the Hoover Dam, which was paid for and is still maintained (and protected from sabotage) by our federal tax dollars. And don't pay taxes to maintain and police I-15, likewise a federal government project, which provides access to and from Vegas from southern California, Vegas's biggest tourism market. You'll *really* be off the grid then, because your city will be out of business.

Look, it's all right with me if you want to go off into the hills someplace and live there with your guns and your fishing rods. But forgive me if I take with a grain of salt your complaints (and similar complaints from casino barons and their paid PR people) about the government while you sit there and reap the benefits of things that taxpayers paid for and continue to maintain.


Hey someone missing the point AND basically suggesting that anyone who benefits from government services that are paid for in part by their tax dollars can't discuss, complain, advocate, or otherwise dissent against anything the government does, did, will do, or might do.

In other words, the message to all of us is:
mikeduran.com
 
2013-04-07 07:16:19 PM

pedrop357: tirob: A Las Vegas "libertarian" according to your profile! Congratulations. Just like some of my best friends. They crack me up.

Want less government in your life? Stop using electrical power from the Hoover Dam, which was paid for and is still maintained (and protected from sabotage) by our federal tax dollars. And don't pay taxes to maintain and police I-15, likewise a federal government project, which provides access to and from Vegas from southern California, Vegas's biggest tourism market. You'll *really* be off the grid then, because your city will be out of business.

Look, it's all right with me if you want to go off into the hills someplace and live there with your guns and your fishing rods. But forgive me if I take with a grain of salt your complaints (and similar complaints from casino barons and their paid PR people) about the government while you sit there and reap the benefits of things that taxpayers paid for and continue to maintain.

Hey someone missing the point AND basically suggesting that anyone who benefits from government services that are paid for in part by their tax dollars can't discuss, complain, advocate, or otherwise dissent against anything the government does, did, will do, or might do.

In other words, the message to all of us is:
[mikeduran.com image 450x300]


Absolutely not.  I would even encourage you to do all of those things.  They're all protected by the 1st Amendment, after all.  But even the 1st Amendment doesn't give you the right to be taken seriously, and that same 1st Amendment allows me to point out the hypocrisy that I detect behind so many "libertarians."
 
2013-04-07 07:21:23 PM

thiefofdreams: tirob: RanDomino: thiefofdreams
Perhaps you can take a step back for a minute and see it as we do. We care for our fellow man, we take care of him. We try to be good neighbors and feed the poor. We do believe in society as a whole. That each one of us is a part of this country and as such we all deserve the rights and respect due to each of us.

Only if it's voluntary.
.
You seem to imply that things like Social Security, EBT cards, etc., are funded by money that is taken from us by force.  I know that I don't like paying taxes, and I have been known to complain about paying them now and then, but I pay them every time--voluntarily--because I know that that everyone else here does, or I like to think so, anyway.

There are people out there that don't pay taxes. This thread is about those very people that use government services and then claim they don't owe taxes.

Taxes are not voluntary, call the IRS and let them know you are taking a year off paying taxes and see how that works out.


I wrote that I pay *my* taxes voluntarily, not that tax payment is voluntary.  It isn't.  I think that a good many taxpayers pay up more or less voluntarily, though, not because they want to, but because they believe that it is an obligation and that they reckon that they had better do so because everyone else does.  At least that's the way I think, anyway.
 
2013-04-07 07:38:27 PM

tirob: thiefofdreams: tirob: RanDomino: thiefofdreams
Perhaps you can take a step back for a minute and see it as we do. We care for our fellow man, we take care of him. We try to be good neighbors and feed the poor. We do believe in society as a whole. That each one of us is a part of this country and as such we all deserve the rights and respect due to each of us.

Only if it's voluntary.
.
You seem to imply that things like Social Security, EBT cards, etc., are funded by money that is taken from us by force.  I know that I don't like paying taxes, and I have been known to complain about paying them now and then, but I pay them every time--voluntarily--because I know that that everyone else here does, or I like to think so, anyway.

There are people out there that don't pay taxes. This thread is about those very people that use government services and then claim they don't owe taxes.

Taxes are not voluntary, call the IRS and let them know you are taking a year off paying taxes and see how that works out.

I wrote that I pay *my* taxes voluntarily, not that tax payment is voluntary.  It isn't.  I think that a good many taxpayers pay up more or less voluntarily, though, not because they want to, but because they believe that it is an obligation and that they reckon that they had better do so because everyone else does.  At least that's the way I think, anyway.


I live in a DEEP RED state. We have multiple militias, tons of SCs, and a political party that held offices in government that was for secession and they generally only pay taxes under force of law. They do not do it out of some goodness of their hearts. They do it because they are afraid of jail and losing property.

I wish I could think like you, but I am a blue boy living in a red state and the evidence I see everyday in my home town shows me a completely different story.

Again, this article is about people that don't pay taxes because they feel they don't have to. The article itself is in disagreement with your view. I am not trying to be a dick, just point out that there are a group of people out there that don't pay taxes for the greater good, they simply want to stay out of jail.

I myself pay taxes because I feel that education, protection of the needy, and and civil projects benefit me even when I do not see a direct benefit. Much in the way that increased education spending can be correlated to decreases in crime.
 
2013-04-07 09:03:10 PM
thiefofdreams:  there are a group of people out there that don't pay taxes for the greater good, they simply want to stay out of jail.

We have 'em here in PA, too.  I've met some of them.  There are probably not as many, proportionally, as in AK, but their numbers are considerable.  And as I've suggested here before, they do a lot more complaining (and, I would surmise, a lot more tax avoidance, too) when a Democrat is in the White House.  We also have a few *pacifist* antitax people, who will pay local taxes, but not federal taxes (or at least not part of them) because they fund the military.  And who *will* go to jail, if it comes to that, before paying those taxes.

AK is a peculiar case because so much of its territory is still Federal property.  I sense that part of the antigovernment sentiment that exists there and in states in the lower 48 where Uncle Sam holds title to a lot of the land has its roots in a feeling held by some people that the Feds are unjustly preventing them from making their fortunes by exploiting this or that resource that exists on government land.
 
2013-04-07 09:59:30 PM

tirob: thiefofdreams:  there are a group of people out there that don't pay taxes for the greater good, they simply want to stay out of jail.

We have 'em here in PA, too.  I've met some of them.  There are probably not as many, proportionally, as in AK, but their numbers are considerable.  And as I've suggested here before, they do a lot more complaining (and, I would surmise, a lot more tax avoidance, too) when a Democrat is in the White House.  We also have a few *pacifist* antitax people, who will pay local taxes, but not federal taxes (or at least not part of them) because they fund the military.  And who *will* go to jail, if it comes to that, before paying those taxes.

AK is a peculiar case because so much of its territory is still Federal property.  I sense that part of the antigovernment sentiment that exists there and in states in the lower 48 where Uncle Sam holds title to a lot of the land has its roots in a feeling held by some people that the Feds are unjustly preventing them from making their fortunes by exploiting this or that resource that exists on government land.


Actually alot of the issues in Alaska stem from a few reasons.

1) During the 70s the pipeline drew people here and normal backgrounds were not questioned. We had a huge influx of not so socially acceptable people come up and take root.

2) Most Alaskans like Texans have a highly overdeveloped sense of self worth. They live in a cold ass and huge state and somehow that makes them better.

3) The one commonly overlooked. We have elderly here, like a huge amount. Most of the people I see that have the anti-tax sentiment are either elderly or are people like Schaeffer Cox who were raised in families that carried on a continuation of governmental hatred. Hell, some of the families that came up int he 40's, 50's and 60's are very anti-government. My own father calls me a socialist because I want to fund medical care and schools.

4) To a lesser degree, you are right about federal encroachment, but that is very small problem and the people that biatch about it are far to old or not willing to work to get at the lands to begin with. Most of those lands cannot even be traveled to without a plane and a 50+ mile hike, in relate you have to boat or snowmachine hundred of miles to the get to the land. They like to make it a persecution complex, but in the end it is simply them needing to biatch about stuff.

5) The other thing about Alaska is we are super red. We have religious nutters all over. They take kids out of school and leave them on street corners to protest abortion. Kids that are around the ages of 6-14. I see this as an extension of the Christian Persecution complex. Some of them simply cannot live without a persecutor.

I am very out of place in my state but I do love it. What I don't love is that we are seriously having a debate right now to openly fund religious private schools and they are trying to push Florida's Stand your Ground Law on us. In a state this armed and ready to fight, I see it passing by a landslide.

That is the issue the SCs lost major battles, and instead of knuckling up and trying to fix the system the just said fark it, it is a problem for everyone else, but they don't leave the system. Instead, the fark the system up far worse, and then point to how bad the system is. When they themselves are the monkeywrench in the machine.
 
2013-04-07 10:30:37 PM
tirob
I'll buy the dichotomy you propose between syndicalism and anarchism, and I'll take your word for it that you yourself have never personally witnessed an anarchist-to-fascist crossover, but it's happened, both in the Spanish example I cited earlier here and elsewhere.

I don't think I'll be able to agree with your claim about the Spanish Civil War; the evidence is just testimony, and, after all, the outright lies are what inspired Orwell to write "1984". Saying that the FAI was full of Fascist sympathizers would have been great propaganda for the Francoists.

I also just remembered the really just terribly pathetic case of the "National Anarchists" (especially "Bay Area National Anarchists") who number probably in the dozens between the US and England and are a neo-fascist front group. It's unclear if they've sucked in any legitimate Anarchists, or just young people who don't know any better. Overall, the response to them by Anarchists has been, "Wait, what? Oh, okay, you're fascists. Kill yourselves."

I go to bed less ignorant every day. Hadn't heard of them until now.

Kevin Carson is the guy to read. iirc "The Iron Fist Behind the Invisible Hand" is about how capitalism is still basically mercantilist. I haven't read enough Mutualist stuff to get a really solid concept of what they're on about, especially since they often seem to be trying to write for several different audiences simultaneously (anti-state capitalists, anti-capitalist anarchists, and people with more mainstream opinions).

I think that what you write about them is evidence that the anarchist-to-rightist crossover issue that I alluded to is alive and well today.

I only propose a possible corridor; I haven't seen evidence that people actually move in that direction. If anything, they move the other way once they start figuring out the absurdity of "Anarcho"-Capitalism. I personally know someone who started as a small-government Republican eight or nine years ago and is now one of the finest Anarchist organizers in Wisconsin. Two or so months ago on Reddit there was a thread about "Why Aren't You an Anarcho-Capitalist Anymore?" and maybe twenty people testified in it, which is a significant number considering the size of the milieus, and giving mostly similar reasons. Once the "Anarcho"-capitalists start talking about "Dispute Resolution Organizations" anyone with any sense heads for the door.

If you believe that Spencerism lives today only on the internet, I disagree; people like the Koch Brothers have funded think tanks and other institutions who hire PhDs, journalists, and such to crank out "information" in support of the cause, and they back candidates for public office, both locally and nationally, who they believe share their views.

I guess I distinguish between people who believe in it for philosophical/ideological reasons and those who propagate it because they're paid to. The Kochs push it because they want to have lower taxes for themselves and less environmental protection impeding their profit; but they have no problem accepting government subsidies for themselves. And there are whole armies of paid liars out there to think up bullshiat reasons justifying it. I will definitely agree that there is a causal relationship between the rise of the corporate-funded think tanks and the rise of the philosophical/ideological Spencerites, but the propagandists caused the ideologues, not the other way around.

There's some other theory behind their use.

Ugh, Georgists. The worst of both worlds.

However, property taxes were first introduced in ancient Egypt; the exact reasoning is lost to time, but probably boils down to "the Pharoh wants his army fed, and the Priests are going along with the gag".

Maybe, I don't know. It was at a talk by a Monetarist I went to a few years ago. He said that in the 1600s in America, there weren't property taxes, so people didn't have any particular need to use State-issued money and used other forms of currency like 'coupons' for X tons of tobacco or cotton; but when there was a bumper harvest the value of the money would crash. So property taxes were instituted to give guaranteed value to fiat currency. I don't know if it's true but it makes sense, especially since the reality of property taxes is the only thing standing in the way of a project that would simply buy property on which to build a non-capitalist economy. If said economy is forced to export commodities in order to acquire currency, then it will gradually become more and more unstable until it falls apart. Damn you, capitalism!

You seem to imply that things like Social Security, EBT cards, etc., are funded by money that is taken from us by force. I know that I don't like paying taxes, and I have been known to complain about paying them now and then, but I pay them every time--voluntarily--because I know that that everyone else here does, or I like to think so, anyway.

Regardless, as thiefofdreams said, if you don't pay then people with guns and jails are there to force compliance.

We also have a few *pacifist* antitax people, who will pay local taxes, but not federal taxes (or at least not part of them) because they fund the military. And who *will* go to jail, if it comes to that, before paying those taxes.

Quakers? Mad respect for them- possibly the last people in this country who really unequivocally practice what they preach. Wish they would be more inclined to organize...
 
2013-04-08 07:02:37 AM

RanDomino: tirob
I'll buy the dichotomy you propose between syndicalism and anarchism, and I'll take your word for it that you yourself have never personally witnessed an anarchist-to-fascist crossover, but it's happened, both in the Spanish example I cited earlier here and elsewhere.

I don't think I'll be able to agree with your claim about the Spanish Civil War; the evidence is just testimony, and, after all, the outright lies are what inspired Orwell to write "1984". Saying that the FAI was full of Fascist sympathizers would have been great propaganda for the Francoists.
.


That's your privilege.  I never put it quite that way about the FAI, but there were FAI people who became turncoats, this in the context of the aftermath of the Barcelona events of 1937.  I find Dionisio Ridruejo's story believable.  Bear in mind also that the FAI-Republican tension in Catalonia was also partly an ethnolinguistic and class thing; most Anarchists there were Castilian-speakers and working-class, migrants from other regions of Spain or their descendants, while the Republicans there were mainly Catalan speakers, and from all social classes including a good many bourgeois.  I can see where a good old nationalist appeal by the Franquistas would have attracted some of the former.

RanDomino: I personally know someone who started as a small-government Republican eight or nine years ago and is now one of the finest Anarchist organizers in Wisconsin


Now that's a new one on me, a Republican-turned-Anarchosyndicalist.

RanDomino: Quakers?


Yes, or people who have come under their influence.

thiefofdreams:  Alaska
.


Interesting exposition on an area that most of us in the lower 48 know very little about.  I know that in places like Montana and Wyoming--like Alaska, filling up fast with disgruntled citizens fleeing places like California and Washington because those states are too "blue" for their taste--there are a lot of people who are frustrated because one or another law or regulation is preventing them from trying to exploit resources they believe are on Federally-owned land.
 
2013-04-08 01:27:23 PM

brantgoose: Simpsons did it.

No. Seriously. They have a reference for regicide.


Bart: [watching Flanders] An ax. He's got an ax! I'll save you, Lisa! [tries to walk on his leg, falls back] Uh, I'll save you by calling the police. [dials 911] Voice: Hello, and welcome to the Springfield Police Department Resc-u- Fone[tm]. If you know the name of the felony being committed, press one. To choose from a list of felonies, press two. If you are being murdered or calling from a rotary phone, please stay on the line. Bart: [growls, punches some numbers] Voice: You have selected regicide. If you know the name of the king or queen being murdered, press one.-- Shockingly ineffective answering services, "Bart of Darkness"



Thank you good sir,
Came for that reference, leaving satisfied.

/It's good to know some farkers have great culture ;)
 
2013-04-08 07:41:28 PM
Hey, is the notion that children belong to everyone part of the "social contract"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=N3qtpdSQox0


/Pedobear is undoubtedly a supporter of that idea.
 
Displayed 28 of 378 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report