A Peaceful non-violent society is inevitable

I understand your hope :mickey: After all, that question about who's the one who thinks his views would fix society can only be answered with you.

Yet you answer it with:

Acknowledging no government means more chaos and violence does not mean I want peace through tyranny.

Who are you talking to here? Oh right everyone who tells you no government means more chaos and violence. That doesn't mean people who tell you so want peace through force, buddy. That's your simplified thinking. Ideally, a government is a representation of the people of its country. Well perhaps that is exactly what you guys got and why certain other countries have social government AND peace.

You see what you're basicly doing here? That's why making insults is stepping down to your level. You love it.

Same to you Keep generalizing and simplifying the concept of gubberment. And keep generalizing and simplifying everyone who criticizes your views. It makes you look totally right and helps to bring your point across superbly

 

I have thought about it, longer than you have been alive... Sorry man, YOU are wrong!

 

I've never once suggested anything like that.

I suggested you do some research on socialist countries to understand they're not anything remotely like an tyrannical oligarch. I dont care if you don't agree with the economic model but you at least need to be able to see the distinction between a communist nation like the USSR, North Korea, etc, and modern socialist nations.

Businesses are relocating overseas for a variety of reasons, but it all comes down to profit. Yes, taxes may have something to do with it but businesses also don't want to provide living wages to their employees or pay for healthcare or give back to their community in any way. Or follow environmental regulations, child labor laws, etc.

That's why it blows my mind you think corporations will behave in a society with no government regulation in place to protect employees and ensure they're paid a living wage. Corporations move out of America to be free to pollute the environment and exploit workers in countries with little government regulations.

Duh.

Its actually quite hard, I've looked into it. You have to be in a highly skilled, high demand profession

By the way, Thomas Jefferson was quite liberal for his day

 

Ah, yes, Thomas Jefferson....what a guy....

 

And where was Portugal's financial situation? Oh right they along win Spain, Italy, and Greece had to take a bailout from the EU and IMF systems because they're GDP wasn't rising fast enough.

No I meant "macro", and I'll specify more to say that our immigration-humanitarian concerns as of late are in part due to the money the USA puts behind the demand for illegal drugs.

---

Speaking as someone whose former friend got out of the business of dealing drugs and also was a user, I know how those drugs like crack endanger and change the priority of parents from their kids to chasing a high.

That's not good for society, when you have children they need to come first, and if you argue that people have the freedom to pursue drug highs over their children, that's be a flaw in your system of the utopia you want.

Are these people because they are drug users gonna be violent? Maybe but maybe not, I can't say that as there is a disconnect in those concepts.

---

What you call variations and very small differences among both broad labels of right and left politics, I say is a strawman argument on your part.


The big core issues of politics that I place on tier 1 of importance are:

1. Protecting the democratic-republic's popular sovereignty, political liberty, and political equality.


2. Gross Domestic Policy / economic concerns (bank and monetary policy, tax codes)

3. Infrastructure concerns (and I include healthcare in the concept of infrastructure, roads, bridges, water resources, food sources and farm policy, and education of citizens in math, science, literacy, and critical thinking skills).

---

Tier 2

4. Civil Rights (racial issues, sexist issues, discrimination)

 

Asmodean
First of all, you don't even grasp what no Government would be or, look like.

People would still inspect our food, people would not put up with violent criminals , and, even airplanes would still have security.

You Liberals are given into the biggest lies of history: 1-if the Government doesn't do something it wont get done. This is clearly false, corporations have built roads, they have helped people and, competition keeps prices stable, and supply and demand, which creates jobs.



2- Liberals don't support force. as I said, the healthcare law itself is an example of FORCING people to pay for something, they might be morally opposed to. I find it absolutely sickening that people actually think it's a "fairer" system to force people to comply, then turn around and say they don't believe that...

 

On a sidenote I should also add that a lot of American businesses are not doing well because of China's policy actually.

Because Chinese keeping their currency artificially low instead of letting it float on the global free-market it's having ripple effects into the American business sectors that can't compete with the low costs that China's manufacturing sector can provide.

that's part of the reason why the company of Solyndra went under > because of China.

 

Also the laws of supply and demand don't work the same way when it comes to commodities that it does when it comes to other products that aren't commodities.

I should also add that corporations also have the ability to artificially manipulate supply so the ratio between supply and demand can always be in their favor that is one issue that I don't see addressed a lot when economic policies about classical economics comes up just thought I mention that.

 

Indeed he was. He would also be detained and imprisoned as a terrorist for his extremist anti-american tea-baggy views if he were alive in today's society.

 

Not really, that's what you always make of it. I have not seen anybody say that in those or other words. It's what you seem to attribute to everybody who acknowledge no government at all means more chaos (and violence).
'We' (we're all different people after all, not all 'liberals' who attack you) say one critical thing about your theories and you interprete it must come from the most negative and extreme love for government. Saying it repeatedly still does not make it so.

Yes, we don't need the government for EVERYTHING. Stating it is so might be false but it does not matter since nobody stated that is the fucking case! Only you, to stigmatize every discussion partner that opposes your theories as a dumb liberal.

 

I noticed someone is thumbing down my posts....even posts of mine that state a concept that comes from classical economic theory.


Instead of remaining anonymous I challenge whomever is thumbing down my posts to reveal themselves and provide a logical argument as to why the claim in the post is:

1. Either equal to a personal attack

2. Or is factually wrong.


Specifically the one about the Chinese government keeping their currency artificially low, causing the ripple effects on the American and other foreign economies that we've seen.



As much as an isolationist policy is favorable for the USA, the fact of the matter is the American people have come to expect certain prices for certain goods, and to withdraw from world trade as part of an isolationist initiative would have negative impact effect in the form of rising gas prices, higher food costs (cause apparently we do import a lot of food from China).


And since we are adopting the concept of government staying out of the business of telling what and how much their citizens can eat, there is bound to be a shortage of food as long as Giant food corporations own vast amounts of land, and have enslaved local farmers.


I actually support the creation of a more cellular localized agricultural system, that I think STP would agree with.

What I mean by cellular, is that each region has it's own local farmers growing and raising food for a local area, and farms can swap and barter with other farmers from other areas where crop A won't grow in region B.

 

This forum should be called "TheYuppieForum."

Or
maybe "TheHammerForum" for all you hard-headed tools.

"TheChessPieceForum" For all you pawns.

There is anything but peaceful hippies here

 

actually, you do. and you're doing the same thing. In this very post you're saying no Government means more violence, as if no one could/would do, what the Government does. The Hypocrisy of you band wagon Liberals is unbelievable...


We're 3 pages away from where I asked a question, and NONE of you Liberals have answered it, you're just lying to yourselves, by saying I'm wrong about what you believe...

anyone who thinks that, is obviously not looking at the crimes the Government Commits.

Government kills and harasses people everyday of the week. They kill, steal and maim. Criminals are reluctant to commit crimes, with an armed populace. It wouldn't be some chaotic, violent state, you Liberals are just too dependent on the idea of Government (and not the reality of it.)

War,forcing people into compliance, killing people, and busting into people's home, is just a few examples of the Government's Violence. You Liberals are being illogical and assuming if there is no Government, some other type of power structure would form. But, you're not looking at the Big picture.


Our Rights have been taken from us one by one. We have no free speech, no fair trial, no Rights against unreasonable searches, and, if it were up to Liberals, and their hero Obama, we wouldn't have the Second amendment either.


Liberals are close to socialist/communists, who believe in total Government Control. as I asked "Other than instituting more forceful programs, what would you Liberals actually change?"

The thing is, everyone of you Liberals ignore the Governments force and violence, and, the fact that that is the only option you're providing for people. There is no freedom under total Government Control, and their never will be.

Government acts like it is in control of every individual. You Liberals will say anything to excuse this system of force, because you NEED force, to: steal, take away the Second amendment, push people into buying things they don't need and, forcing compliance to Government


The other thing is, as I said on another post, you Liberals refused to answer: Epa, Fda, Fbi, Cia and, every other Government program, is corrupt to the core, yet, Liberals believe they are our ONLY option.

But, being that you have nothing to FIX the current situation, you Liberals might as well support the whole thing, because voting for people like Obama, isn't changing anything for the better. You just refuse to believe the truth, that you policies, are no better than those Republicans, who believe we need to keep troops in over 120 countries, to ma

Oh, yeah. I've not been here two years, I'm just assuming you're all Liberal. You're not self-proclamed Liberals, leftists and, Obama supporters

as for "you interprete it must come from the most negative and extreme love for government." I wouldn't say "love" but, "blind faith." and, none of you liberals have even attempted to disprove this. You want Government to take care of people from cradle to grave, and, you don't fight anything they do, that's illegal or immoral. I haven't seen Liberals say a damn thing about all of Obamas unconstitutional laws. That is because, in the ideal Liberal world, Government is above the "law"

That's the other thing I find extremely hypocritical about you leftists; You're so afraid of your fellow man, that your answer is to put all the power over everyone, in the hands of one group of men. It doesn't even make sense logically. You think a group of people, who are not bound by any laws, are less likely to be corrupt than your average Joe down the street.


You think it's acceptable for Government to commit crimes daily, kill people, lie to people and, force people to buy into things they may be morally opposed to, in order to "protect us," from these very crimes they commit daily.

You can say you don't support everything they do, but, yet, it is the Liberal agenda to expand this violent entity in every way possible.

Now, just because you don't accept all the bad Government does, doesn't mean you're not endorsing it, and pushing it, by pushing Government. Because you are.

Obamacare was pushed by the biggest insurance companies in the country. Of course having a monopoly is profitable. Moreover, I cant help but to laugh at the utter hypocrisy of hating corporations for giving people a choice to purchase something, and your solution is a business that is above the law, and a monopoly in essence. as I said, Liberalism is based on blind faith the Government will do good, with absolutely nothing to change the problems we already have.

PS Communism is having Government in everything, and Liberalism goes in that same direction. You Liberals just trust them, despite the fact that they're based around violence.

You're just supporting a violent criminal racket, to stop all crimes and violence.

No Government wouldn't mean mob rule, it would mean being free to make your own choices, without force or coersion, and, the authority to protect yourself, and own your own body and work ethic. Just because you don't understand how it would work, doesn't mean it wouldn't work, it just means you Liberals have fallen for the BS that Government has everything taken care of...

 

Asmodean isn't an American so it makes you sound ridiculous when you call him an Obama supporter. I doubt he cares very much about Obama.

 

OK, where did I call him an Obama supporter??

I just reread the whole thing, and, I NEVER said that. I said "Self proclaimed Liberals, leftists and, Obama supporters, talking about seperate people.

and, the reason I brought up Obamacare, is because these are the type of forceful policies you Liberals endorse. Do me a favor please; If you have something of relevance to say, than answer my criticisms.


It's so ridiculous that I even attempt to explain these things to you Liberals, all you do is try to discredit me, say "I don't believe in force," or, "you got Nothing"


Which proves (to me at least) that it's you Leftists who have Nothing. You don't even understand your own views, how could you possibly understand mine?? You can't and don't...

 

Yeah we do, you're pretty clear.


Last year you were advocating very little federal government, only a strict literal interpretation of the US Constitution is what you would allow, and you were highly referencing the 10th Amendment for all other topics/issues not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.


Now your position has changed, and you want no government, and since you weren't clear and stayed in broad terms , I have to assume you mean no local, state, and federal government.

You want the fire department privatized, you want the police abolished, drugs legalized and decriminalized.

You don't necessarily agree or disagree with a wealth reset, you did dodge that question I asked you.

You think corporation's bad policies and mistakes and leveraging is mainly government's fault from lobbying with them.

---

The only crimes you recognize are crimes that are physically violent, and would feel comfortable jailing people for it seems.

And you seem to assume that robbers are gonna be dumb enough to steal things when people are home so they can be shot by home owners, which sometimes happens now.

But go google some youtube home invasion videos, some robbers are just bold and I found one video where this woman is on the phone with cops, SHE has a gun, but there are multiple robbers and her daughter and husband are shot.


Robbers don't always retreat, some of them are sadistic and just go risk it all when they come for you.

 

Also my other posts regarding logistical questions about how your idea of society would function are still not answered.


Why do you expect us to magically understand your broad concept, and then see how it'll work at the detailed level?



Also for the record, all those thumbs down on your posts STP, were never done by me because I believe in the 1st Amendment.

---

And for the record it was the FBI, and campaign ethics committee that forced Governor Bob McDonald to pay back bribes he got during the campaign.

All those agencies do both good and bad, and they have corruption in them because humans are easily corruptible, when and easy way out is offered and they don't think they'll get caught they cheat.


It's the same psychological dynamics you see in EVERY day people on the road, who think about themselves and are prone to road rage which originates from a selfish perspective.

1. Your preventing me from where I want to go

2. Your making me late

3. How dare you cut me off, the nerve!

When they should be saying:

1. Am I safe?

2. Am I delayed by a few seconds or a significant amount of time that merits getting upset?

Cool I should chill because it's out of my control, maybe I should manage my time better and leave earlier to get to my destinations.


Instead I see way to much ego in society, in almost every age group, to the point where I know that people nowadays are not always civil.

When you have 1000's of people who riot in a city because their favorite sports team won or lost...that's says something about the human race and specifically American culture.

 

Ok?? Why do you think their economics have anything to do with me and my views??

Cutting spending is the only way we're going to get out of this economic slump, and, that's something Liberals are totally unwilling to do...

I hope you're smart enough to understand, that the criminality causes these rackets to form, and Drug Cartels actually bribe our Government to keep the drug laws in place.

First of all, legalization would abolish the violence attributed to drugs. I'm not saying these drugs aren't bad, but, laws do not change behavior. We've spent billions and billions of dollars on the Drug War, and we're locking people up, for what they do with their own body.

Besides, if it were legal, prices would drop dramatically, and, people would be able to afford things other than just drugs.

No. Because if you're hurting your children, you're damaging their property, and thus, imposing on their freedom.

The current situation, takes kids away from anybody who fails for anything (including marijuana) and, throwing the kids into abusive and uncaring households a lot of the time.

Are these people because they are drug users gonna be violent? Maybe but maybe not, I can't say that as there is a disconnect in those concepts.

Btw, the Government cnnot protect everyone.


When alcohol was illegal it turned into a violent racket too. Prohibition causes the violence. The Connection is the illegality.

Which? how?

Imo, the small differences are nothing. I see liberals, as I do Republicans; I think they're both too willing to give up freedom, for a false sense of Government "security."

You leftists are quick to say "that's a strawman argument," while you know I'm directly talking about you guys, and the violent entity you support.

What do you mean popular? You think the Majority vote should be the law of the land?

 

I appreciate you not thumbs downing my post, but, imo, that is free speech too. I don't like getting thumbs down (i'm sure no one does,) but, I do respect their Right to do it. although, I have more Respect for people like you, who actually converse rather than yelling.

I'll get back to your post in a bit. I have work soon.

PS I don't expect anyone to understand "magically," but, there's a lot to society. The thing I expect people to know, is that the current system is based on bribery, fraud, lies and, force. However, it seems like leftists don't want to admit that, because it goes against their agenda of giving Government absolute power.


There is no easy answer. Liberals think Government is the easy answer, but, imo, it's obvious the corruption is imbedded in the system.

 

I understand my own views perfectly, thanks.

I'm not going to address anything else with you anymore (unless I get really bored) because its annoying to be called "you liberal" or "you leftist"