Old Dialog Boards and Old Threads > Old Threads

A Facebook Discussion part 2

(1/3) > >>

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---I do not like Voluntaryism and ANCAP ideology but D is trying to change that and doing a great job so far.
--- End quote ---

Okay, okay...
I'll take the bait of being tagged.

Full disclosure on my part means I must point out that I have only managed to get you to admit that “Might” does not make “Right.” As in “Might” does not make “Not Wrong.”

You said to DT:

--- Quote ---I talk about the way the world is now. You talk about the way you wish the world could be. Big difference.
--- End quote ---

Yes! (Unfortunately.)

Although I would change that “You talk about the way you wish the world could be” to “You talk about the way the world should be”

I have rejected my indoctrination... Mostly because applying critical thought exposes the errors of the indoctrination. A piece of that indoctrination was meant to get the little people to believe that Might make Right when those called government use it.

I'm not sure that I've made much of a difference in how you view “authority”. For me, this is the key starting point... And I am reiterating this so others can get on the same page...

I separate authority into two categories. (With thanks to you for forcing / helping me hone my thoughts on this.) Authority by consent is in the one category and authority by extortion is in the other.

Do what I tell you to do or I will hurt you, is not authority. It is extortion by threat, duress, and coercion to make you to obey me. Since Might makes Right is provably wrong, so is authority by Might; authority by extortion.

This truly is the way the world is now. You are correct with that observation. Authority by extortion is the way the world is now. Wrong is how the world is now.

This is attributed to  Martin Niemöller (1892–1984):
--- Quote ---First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
--- End quote ---

DT is speaking out. As are many others, myself included.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---DT Then why are you not initiating force against those who steal your $ via taxation?
--- End quote ---

I object to your wording. Defending one's self is not, nor will it ever be, “initiating” force.

Ponder this: If a cop behind you flips the switch to his red and/or blue disco lights turning them on, or in other words, lights you up, that cop has just initiated aggression and violence against you. This is authority by extortion.

--- Quote from: DT ---If I defend myself they'll put me in a cage or kill me.
--- End quote ---

If a cop lights you up, your life is in danger, even if you've done nothing wrong.

I double dog dare any of you statists to follow this page for a week:

Since DT's topic was taxation, look up Andrew Joseph Stack.
And along the same lines as AJS, look up Marvin Heemeyer.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---DT So you can't retaliate because they are more powerful than you -- that is exactly what I was trying to say -- when they took your tax money out of your check, that was an initiation of force against you and you can't retaliate on your own because they have an army and you don't
--- End quote ---

This is a correct observation, BUT DT does have a social media account to discuss the issues.

I have a Facebook account, a Facebook page, a user account on http://marcstevens.net/board/index.php and a hosted website.

--- Quote ---You take politics too seriously
--- End quote ---

And I take extortion by criminals calling themselves government very seriously.

--- Quote ---The evidence that tax cuts SNIP!
--- End quote ---

Taxation by what authority? Comply or die? That's called armed robbery.

It has taken me the better part of 3 hours to draft this post. I don't care for sound bite arguments.

And I will tell every body that the tax law does NOT say what you all have been indoctrinated to believe. Here's what my research has discovered: http://www.synapticsparks.info/tax/index.html

It's much simpler to just ask “What evidence do you have to prove that law applies to me?”

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---all the other anarchists who say taxation is theft have given up on me (not counting Mr. T who intends to argue about this forever until I worship Ayn Rand)
--- End quote ---

Socratic method...

What do you call it when a junkie waves a gun in a cashier's face and says “Gimme your money”?

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---Most people think they have legitimate authority so they can get away with it
--- End quote ---

And that my dear, is exactly the point of challenging the superstitious belief in authority.

And I am answering to both references, the people (those calling themselves government) who think they have valid authority and the people (those not called government) who think that those called government have valid authority.

--- Quote from: Ms.X --- -- also they do NOT put a gun in your face -- they send you a letter telling them you owe money and if they don't get it they audit you and if you have money they take it away and put you in jail.
--- End quote ---

What do you think happens when a person resists that arrest; resists that attempt to be forced into a cage?

Perhaps this will assist in your understanding of why I disagree with you about a gun in the face.

And by the way, I have personal first hand knowledge that the IRS fraudulently cons banks into coughing up money without a court order violating the constitution's rules.

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---Very impressive that website on police. You have clearly thought this out well. Yes if you resist arrest you likely are killed. That is why disobeying authority, even if not legitimate, is not wise.
--- End quote ---

That is exactly correct.

This is why Marc Stevens http://marcstevens.net/ writes things like this:

--- Quote ---So when you’re preparing to defend against an attack in court, know they have no evidence, that the applicability of their rules (jurisdiction) is their Achilles’ Heel. So much so that prosecutors will impeach their own witness.

But always remember: cops are armed and extremely dangerous, do not speak to them unless they are on the witness stand. They do not like being challenged, we’re considered “a threat to officer safety” for asking questions. Don’t make the mistake I made and ask them questions on the street or their department. It’s not worth the risk. We can easily discredit them from a safe distance.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---My experience with many policemen has been very different. Nobody ever showed any violence and a few were very helpful, especially the one who talked my mother with Alzheimers into staying home or he'd have to take her to the psych ward.
--- End quote ---

Yeah, sometimes you get some that act human. Nevertheless and hat tip to Dr. Robert Higgs...

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---not all cops enforce all the laws....
--- End quote ---

Especially if you are in their club. I was pulled over for speeding, driving my wife to work. Wife and cop knew each other... Because their jobs had them interacting. No ticket.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---trust me....
--- End quote ---
  :) Hey, Hey! What's with the hostility? What did I do to offend you?
I know “trust me” is Yiddish for “fuck you.” :)

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---my parents had dementia and they gave me more help than trouble - they felt sorry for me -- they were very human
--- End quote ---

The cops did NOT help my step-dad with my mother's dementia. The cops said it was a psych issue, the health people said it was a cop issue. This was in your corner of the continent - Port Charlotte, Fl.

I don't really want to air the family's dirty laundry in public... But, They're both dead now... She hit him in the carotid artery the day after he was released from the hospital for surgery to clear his carotid artery. He was a ww2 vet who minimized everything. She was up here visiting while he was hanging out in the bathroom as the eye of Charlie went right over Port Charlotte; The shingles were all stripped off the roof, but the damage was “not that bad.” The rest of the family had no idea what kind of hell she was putting him through. It wasn't until they moved back up here that the medical field pulled the trigger on “diminished capacity.”
/end digression

--- Quote from: Ms.X ----- and not once was I ever asked to get out of my car if stopped for speeding
--- End quote ---

It's much easier to identify an African American than an older female Jewish American. Can you validate that the cop(s) that stopped you are or are not members of the KKK? You are in “that” part of the country you know.

Stopped for speeding under what authority? And on this, you can ignore my proven point of: There is no authority.
Using 'government's own rules I will still make the case that the cop pulled you over without authority.

The CONstitution (organic law) is to be read in the light of the Declaration of Independence (also organic law). But the bogus powers that be do not want the peons to connect the D of I to the CON. (sic)

In the D of I are these words:

--- Quote ---certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
--- End quote ---

That among these clearly implies that the three listed rights are not the only rights. The rights listed are clearly INDIVIDUAL rights. Therefore the purpose of 'government' is to protect INDIVIDUAL rights.

Using Marc Steven's words as a starting point:
It’s simple logic and common sense, juris doctorate not required:
(1) the government was established/instituted for one purpose i.e., to secure/protect rights;
(2) the courts [and the cops] being a part of the government have the same singular purpose i.e., to secure/protect rights;
(3) the courts’ jurisdiction has one purpose i.e., to secure/protect rights;
(4) Standing to invoke, or invoking a court’s jurisdiction requires the allegation a right has been, or is being violated.

For those without the knowledge you and I have, Marc writes:

--- Quote ---Standing is the same wherever you go, the important elements are (1) the violation of a right, a legal injury; and (2) damage.
--- End quote ---

Who is/was injured by anybody traveling faster than the politician's posted opinion? How much did those stops for speeding end up sucking out of your wallet? How much money has been stolen by the cops for those called government to spend as they see fit?

Merriam-Webster defines a racketeer as one who obtains money by an illegal enterprise usually involving intimidation.

Stumbled across this blurb researching for this post:

--- Quote ---Protection racketeering is when a criminal organization coerces someone to pay money for protection. Often the organization's members provide the protection from harm coming from not paying the protection fee. Extortion is unlawfully obtaining money by coercion.
--- End quote ---

Pay your speeding fine or we won't protect you from us.
Pay your taxes or we won't protect you from us.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---I am following your Counter Current News.
--- End quote ---

I actually watch very few of their videos. I get very pissed off. The wrongdoing by cops is a daily occurrence. That they are doing these wrongs to innocent people and have BOGUS authority... 'Scuse me while I regain my composure.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---When I said that Dan takes politics too seriously, I meant that out of all the people I argue with, he is the only one who gets furious when someone disagrees.
--- End quote ---

DT, may I suggest that you review this Larken Rose video?

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---Since I understand rage, and it often leads to me losing control (panic attacks) I think this is a problem.
--- End quote ---

Yeah, I can understand that. Especially with what you told me in (I assume) confidence. May I suggest you incorporate one of my methods. Unless you have personal physical interaction with someone, keep in your mind, he is just words on a computer screen, not much different than playing a computer game.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---You can't convince every human being that capitalism is wonderful and that taxation is extortion.
--- End quote ---

I am not presently qualified to address your points about capitalism. We have not agreed on what capitalism and its related terms mean.

That taxation is theft by extortion is provable.

And yes, proving does not convince. There are even psych studies that show the stronger the evidence that refutes a belief, the harder the believer grasps the belief.

One method is to remove the statist framing to allow for a different view.

I'm going to request you re-read our interchange where I asked you what's the difference between a junkie or an IRS agent sticking a gun in your face. The result is the same, If you do not comply you will be hurt.

You correctly observed that for most, the difference is the (Larken would say superstitious, I say delusional) belief in authority. Remove that belief and the agent and the junkie are exactly the same.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---That makes all governments illegitimate authorities....
--- End quote ---

Yes it does.

Though I prefer “bogus” instead of “illegitimate.”

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---but if the other countries have armies, does not our country have to have the mightiest army since might may not make right but only the strongest survive?
--- End quote ---

That is an excellent observation/ question. My answer is MAYBE. Your question itself raises other questions.

Without criminals calling themselves Central North America's government using their monopoly on force to keep guns out of the hands of the peons using laws (politician's opinions)to restrict the peon's access, what's to keep the peons from having the tools necessary to protect themselves?

According to various net sources, there is over 300,000,000 guns in Central North America. Wikipedia claims 1.12 per resident. Without gun grabbers the numbers could easily become greater. Especially when the gun grabbers start to understand that self defense and self protection both start with self.

Side note:
It is my understanding that privately owned cannon were used in the war against Britain.

One of those questions your question raises, is: What other countries, that have armies, could possibly invade Middle North America? What would be their goal? How would they attack in keeping with that goal?

The Roman army invaded the world. Why? A larger tax base. More victims to rob.

There is a quote with a false attribution to Japanese Fleet Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. The false attribution does not change the truth of the quote: You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass. Or at least there would be if the mentally ill gun grabbers don't get their way.

According to the US Census Bureau my county's 2005 population was 160,544. According to my County Sheriff’s website there are 49 uniformed supervisors and deputies that respond to 911 calls. That means the Citizen to sheriff ratio is 3,276:1. Divide by 3 shifts for 24 hour coverage and the ratio is 9,829:1. I know for a fact from good sources the the west side of the county only has 2 deputies on patrol. There's a reason for the book titled DIAL 911 AND DIE.

In order for another country to invade, that country's criminals called government must coerce and lie to their populace to get backing to invade... You know... Like Shrub's Weapons of Mass Destruction.

You want to see evidence of WMD's? So did I. Until I found it.

{The U.S. military uses tank armor and some bullets made with depleted uranium (DU) to penetrate enemy armored vehicles, and began using DU on a large scale during the Gulf War.

The process of manufacturing enriched uranium from natural uranium used in nuclear reactors or weapons leaves "depleted" uranium. DU has 40 percent less radioactivity, but the same chemical toxicity as natural uranium.}
Please take note of the 'government' source: https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/depleted_uranium/index.asp

Just search for → depleted uranium ammunition

As a meme states: War is when your government tells you who the enemy is. Revolution is when you figure it out for yourself.

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---It is time for revolution but if the government has so many weapons, depleted uraniam, nukes, chemical warfare -- such a war can have only many losers and no winners.
--- End quote ---

Non-violently is the only way to win. I am fighting that war right now by trying to get you to understand my position.

As Larken Rose has observed, nobody goes back to being a statist once they have quit being a statist. It's a one way street.

There is a concept and a book called The Tipping Point.

When enough people realize that belief in authority is a delusion, things will change. I'm putting a link to a partial story at the bottom. I found it entertaining and it presents a political ideology to think about... F – IW.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---Why do soldiers voluntarily sign up given what the government does to its marines?
--- End quote ---
I'm going to parse your question like this:
Why do people voluntarily sign up given what 'government' does to its military personnel?

They do not know about Nuremberg Principal #4 which states:

--- Quote ---The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
--- End quote ---

So when the Cheeto-in-chief... Er, the Commander-in-chief says, Go to that foreign place and kill those people who are different, the cannon fodder who have a delusional belief in authority believe it is their duty to go kill people who are different. With predator drones, they don't even have to go to that foreign place to kill people who are different. Ain't technology grand?

It's what a true patriot would do.  Yep. Mindless patriots will obey their Commander-in-chief's every edict. Whether his name is Trump or Hitler.

Soon to be military personnel do not know that From 1963 to 1969 as part of Project Shipboard Hazard and Defense (SHAD), the U.S. Army performed tests which involved spraying several U.S. ships with various biological and chemical warfare agents, while thousands of U.S. military personnel were aboard the ships. The personnel were not notified of the tests, and were not given any protective clothing. Chemicals tested on the U.S. military personnel included the nerve gases VX and Sarin, toxic chemicals such as zinc cadmium sulfide and sulfur dioxide, and a variety of biological agents. Source: Wikipedia.

--- Quote from: Ms.X ---Do they really not know?
--- End quote ---


Who does the military want and why?
Young, dumb, and full of cum males. If they are young, it is easier to bullshit them about authority. also called the chain of command.

Who joins the military and for what reasons?
Young dumb and full of cum males. For training or for jobs. You've seen the ads.

Or do they have no other employment opportunities at all?

I joined and spent 4 years as a welfare whore wearing the team's color of green. I did question joining that team because I knew I was promising to put my ass in harm's way. I also considered that in 1975, after years of watching the Viet Nam body counts with my evening meals and Nixon's 1973 “Peace with Honor” I'd be safe for awhile.

It should be noted that the last time a military action was taken under declaration of war was WWII. The Korean War was not a declared war. The Viet Nam War was not a declared war. No military action since WWII was recognized as a congressionally sanctioned war.

F – IW:


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page


Go to full version