Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. They are not commands. They are laws determined by the deliberation of our democratically elected representatives.
"The people flatter themselves that they have the sovereign power. These are, in fact, words without meaning. It is true they elected governors; but how are these elections brought about? In every instance of election by the mass of a people—through the influence of those governors themselves, and by means the most opposite to a free and disinterested choice, by the basest corruption and bribery. But those governors once selected, where is the boasted freedom of the people? They must submit to their rule and control, with the same abandonment of their natural liberty, the freedom of their will, and the command of their actions, as if they were under the rule of a monarch." - Alexander Fraser Tytler
I hate to break it to you, but our Democracy is a farce that exists to give the appearance of legitimacy. An appearance of being by the consent of the governed. In no sense is our government based on our consent. And when people vote, they are voting for the lesser of two evils. The actual function of their vote is to protect themselves from the rest of society.
"It is to be considered that, without his consent having even been asked a man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men practice this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these two.
In self-defense, he attempts the former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, to save his own life in battle, a man takes the lives of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is one of his own choosing. Neither in contests with the ballot – which is a mere substitute for a bullet – because, as his only chance of self-preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to be inferred that the contest is one into which he voluntarily entered; that he voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, as a stake against those of others, to be lost or won by the mere power of numbers. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, in an exigency into which he had been forced by others, and in which no other means of self-defense offered, he, as a matter of necessity, used the only one that was left to him. - Lysander Spooner, 1867
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shankapotomus
2. If you hold the U.S government in such contempt then it further buttresses my point that it is indeed you who should leave. No doubt there is no government on Earth that could satisfy you.
The people who hold the US government in contempt, hold the entire world in contempt.
"The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naïve and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes his country more than the rest of us, and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair." - H.L. Mencken
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shankapotomus
3. It gets it from our voluntary acceptance to identify ourselves under a single banner as United States citizens. If you no longer identify as a United States citizen and no longer wish to engage in the mass cooperative survival activities of this society, you need to make arrangements for the renunciation of your citizenship. And the beauty of this country and government--- for both Left and Right--- is you are perfectly free to do that.
By no sense is our affiliation with the United States voluntary. A quarter of all Americans want their state to secede from the union. In many states it is a third or more. That is 80 million Americans, which is equivalent to the entire population of Germany. And which is about 15 million more people than who live in all of the UK. Which is itself flirting with a kind of secession.
The reason we obey the government, is because it compels us with threats of violence. And thus we are left with only two options, slavery or death.
For that matter, it isn't as if this government by any real sense has the right to the land which it claims to own. Where did this land come from? Was it not from theft? And on what basis do you, or your government, have the right to absolutely anything? Except insofar as you have the power and will to compel it.
"The government does do indeed pretend to own large tracts of wild lands, lying between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, and between the Gulf of Mexico and the North Pole. But, on general principles of law and reason, they might as well pretend to own the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans themselves; or the atmosphere and the sunlight; and to hold them, and dispose of them." - Lysander Spooner
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shankapotomus
Furthermore, the claim seems to be that this government is so corrupt it doesn't allow change without a revolution. But how did the people who changed this government to your dissatisfaction do it? Did they do it with violent revolution?
No, they started at the bottom and crawled and clawed their way to changing this country to their liking. They participated in politics starting in college and kept going. Tell them it's a "tyrannical government" that can't be changed but by force."
Wow, so naive.
Look, it isn't as if the government never changes, it is that it always follows a singular course, the expansion of its power(especially economic growth). And it will pursue all means necessary, constitutional or not, to achieve those ends.
In simplest terms, big-business requires big-government, and capitalism is internationalism(capitalists want to control the entire world). The country changed, as power began centralizing in Washington D.C., and as the country became more-and-more dependent on international trade, especially in regards to energy, finance, and tourism.
In short, the changes that have occurred, are only those things which have benefited corporations and bankers. And that Hillary Clinton of which you worship, is nothing but a banker and corporate stooge.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 06-20-2016 at 10:57 PM..
The world has long agreed routine international travel requires a passport.
Each country determines their own visa requirements / reciprocal exemptions.
Never had a problem leaving or returning.
Who issues the passport and can deny the passport to leave?
I believe it was correct to say, this administration made it so the government has to grant a person permission to leave.
I love how in the same post you claim it's tyranny here but admit people are lined up to get in to that tyranny.
Me move out and not you? It seems to me those more suited to stay are the ones not plotting their own government's overthrow.
Get serious.
Do you even read what you post? I was replying to you, to your characterization of the US.
You said if the US became and oppressive tyranny, then the solution is for people to just leave. My point is that the world is ruled by oppressive tyrants, and people are fleeing to the US by the millions each year.
So if you think the solution to combat tyranny and oppression in the US, is to flee, where will you run to? And if all you do is run whenever you come up against bullies and tyrants, and never fight for your rights and freedom, you and all the other sheep will very quickly run out of places to run to.
No government can victimize or be tyrannical to a population that is free to leave at any time.
So stop your whining and lugubrious cries of tyranny and victimhood.
You're not forced to do anything. You can still vote and, if the result doesn't make you happy, you can leave. Nobody's stopping you. Nobody has chains on your feet. Nothing is forced on anyone-- including taxes--- in a country where one is free to leave.
And I am not just saying that to anti-big government conservatives, I say that to myself as a liberal.
If it ever gets too much to my dislike here, I'm free to leave. I don't have to pick up arms and try to forcibly overthrow a democratically elected government.
Grow up. Stop trying to be Paul Revere. You're not Nathan Hale. You eat Doritos and watch TV. You're not going to "Save 'Merica!" from its own government. You're ridiculous.
This post is what is ridiculous ....
Tyranny is a slow developing process that incrementally imposes itself over time, and is an inevitable result of the human condition that has played out over and over again throughout history. You don't just go to bed one night free, and wake up enslaved.
Revolution, by contrast is the inevitable response to tyranny, when the level of despotism becomes intolerable to enough that they are compelled to confront the tyrants. And revolution has its stages too, beginning with political revolution, and moving toward violent revolution should the non-violent efforts fail.
People such as yourself who remain in willful ignorance and denial regarding the clear signs of developing tyranny are perhaps the greatest enemies of freedom, and the reason why non-violent revolutions so often fail.
No government can victimize or be tyrannical to a population that is free to leave at any time.
So stop your whining and lugubrious cries of tyranny and victimhood.
You're not forced to do anything. You can still vote and, if the result doesn't make you happy, you can leave. Nobody's stopping you. Nobody has chains on your feet. Nothing is forced on anyone-- including taxes--- in a country where one is free to leave.
And I am not just saying that to anti-big government conservatives, I say that to myself as a liberal.
If it ever gets too much to my dislike here, I'm free to leave. I don't have to pick up arms and try to forcibly overthrow a democratically elected government.
Grow up. Stop trying to be Paul Revere. You're not Nathan Hale. You eat Doritos and watch TV. You're not going to "Save 'Merica!" from its own government. You're ridiculous.
I would like to know why a government who works for the people and elected by the people want to serve other cultures before American culture?
Why is a government now scrubbing terrorist off the terror watch list and calling them American when the commit a crime?
It's a good idea to question government, otherwise you see them trying to blame the citizens who own guns. When a person interviewed by the FBI 3 times and commits a mass shooting, the person should have still been on the terror watch list.
Yet, this administration has even wanted to put our military people on the watch list, along with gun owners, how free is this?
Do you even read what you post? I was replying to you, to your characterization of the US.
You said if the US became and oppressive tyranny, then the solution is for people to just leave. My point is that the world is ruled by oppressive tyrants, and people are fleeing to the US by the millions each year.
So if you think the solution to combat tyranny and oppression in the US, is to flee, where will you run to? And if all you do is run whenever you come up against bullies and tyrants, and never fight for your rights and freedom, you and all the other sheep will very quickly run out of places to run to.
That's NOT what I said. I said an oppressive tyranny, as some right wingers are calling America now, doesn't allow its citizens to renounce their citizenship (unless that tyranny wants a specific group out)..
My point was, don't say you're being forced by the government when you are perfectly free to dissolve the ties that require you to follow the laws as a United States citizen.
I would like to know why a government who works for the people and elected by the people want to serve other cultures before American culture?
Why is a government now scrubbing terrorist off the terror watch list and calling them American when the commit a crime?
It's a good idea to question government, otherwise you see them trying to blame the citizens who own guns. When a person interviewed by the FBI 3 times and commits a mass shooting, the person should have still been on the terror watch list.
Yet, this administration has even wanted to put our military people on the watch list, along with gun owners, how free is this?
Fine. Question the government. But don't whine you're being forced. You're not!
Tyranny is a slow developing process that incrementally imposes itself over time, and is an inevitable result of the human condition that has played out over and over again throughout history. You don't just go to bed one night free, and wake up enslaved.
Revolution, by contrast is the inevitable response to tyranny, when the level of despotism becomes intolerable ....
And we are no where near that level with our democratically elected representatives, our ability to vote, our freedom of movement about the country and world, our freedom to choose our occupation, our freedom of speech and our freedom to even peacefully renounce our citizenship.
We are no where near despotism so stop telling people we are. The U.S. government is the best thing that ever happened to you and you and other right wingers are spitting in its face like a spoiled child because you can't play with guns.
Look, it isn't as if the government never changes, it is that it always follows a singular course, the expansion of its power(especially economic growth). And it will pursue all means necessary, constitutional or not, to achieve those ends.
In simplest terms, big-business requires big-government, and capitalism is internationalism(capitalists want to control the entire world). The country changed, as power began centralizing in Washington D.C., and as the country became more-and-more dependent on international trade, especially in regards to energy, finance, and tourism.
In short, the changes that have occurred, are only those things which have benefited corporations and bankers. And that Hillary Clinton of which you worship, is nothing but a banker and corporate stooge.
I think it's a mistake to indict "Capitalism" as the evil culprit here, rather than the true culprit, "corruption". Better that we make the distinction between "free market capitalism" and "Crony Capitalism" masquerading as free markets, now firmly in the grips of criminals.
Unfortunately, corruption can destroy any economic or governmental system, because laws governing the integrity of such systems that are necessary to restrain the criminally corrupt are the first casualties.
Some systems are more easily corruptible, such as communism and socialism, because they embody at the very core, the primary facilitator of corruption ... centralized power. They begin life with centralized power as it's foundation, consequently, such systems make it easy for the criminal despots, because there are no checks and balances to overcome.
Our Constitution was crafted with the express purpose of limiting governmental powers, and restricting it's behavior to only those tasks for which we the people granted the government authority to do. And every example of tyrannical behavior by government is a result of a violation of that Constitution, without exception.
Any despotic act you can cite, can be directly tied to a violation of the laws established to prevent it.
I think it's a mistake to indict "Capitalism" as the evil culprit here, rather than the true culprit, "corruption". Better that we make the distinction between "free market capitalism" and "Crony Capitalism" masquerading as free markets, now firmly in the grips of criminals.
Unfortunately, corruption can destroy any economic or governmental system, because laws governing the integrity of such systems that are necessary to restrain the criminally corrupt are the first casualties.
Some systems are more easily corruptible, such as communism and socialism, because they embody at the very core, the primary facilitator of corruption ... centralized power. They begin life with centralized power as it's foundation, consequently, such systems make it easy for the criminal despots, because there are no checks and balances to overcome.
Our Constitution was crafted with the express purpose of limiting governmental powers, and restricting it's behavior to only those tasks for which we the people granted the government authority to do. And every example of tyrannical behavior by government is a result of a violation of that Constitution, without exception.
Any despotic act you can cite, can be directly tied to a violation of the laws established to prevent it.
The problem here, is that it is impossible to separate cronyism from capitalism. Why do you think capitalism exists? I mean, what we think of as capitalism, came about to a large extent with the "English enclosure acts", which were themselves just cronyism at its worst. Where the government effectively seized the "common lands" and sold them off to wealthy private interests, who then threw the people off the land.
The actual purpose of capitalism, was for the King to extract more profits out of his land. Thus giving him more money to build a larger Army/Navy, and become more powerful. In short, capitalism exists to serve the interests of the state. It was never about freedom.
To the extent that there is apparent freedom in capitalism, it is actually because capitalism requires the emancipation of workers, so that they can go where labor is needed. In serfdom, the peasants were bound to the land, because farming required so much labor. But with improvements in agriculture, they needed fewer and fewer people working in the fields, and so they had to be allowed to move into the cities to work in the shops and factories.
The czar of Russia emancipated all the serfs in 1861, as part of his "modernization" program. Basically, Russia needed to industrialize to catch up to other European powers. And needed to move the peasants into the cities to provide labor for the capitalists. This didn't work that well, because the peasants largely refused to leave their villages.
Which is where Stalin stepped in. He nationalized and collectivized the farms, and began forcefully relocating workers into cities, and directed the resources of the state into building large-scale industry.
In the case of America, let us remember that America isn't actually free. And the degree to which people are free, is merely to the degree that it is useful for economic growth, because with economic size comes money and power.
Obviously we could be more free than we are, but there is no power in anarchy. And that it why it doesn't exist, and for no other reason.
Here is the truth, most of what you know about the founding of America is a complete myth, a farce. George Washington was one of the richest people in this country at the time. Did George Washington honestly want to risk his life merely so that you could be free? Was his life terrible under the British? Not at all.
George Washington started the Seven-Years War, and the result of that war, was Britain got what would later be called the "Northwest territories" from France. George Washington began investing in those territories, but as a result of the "Quebec Act", they were to be handed over to those French Catholic scumbags, and George Washington couldn't allow that to happen.
The people who actually steered America into war, were mostly doing it for the sake of their own profits and power, not because they cared about future generations. The Boston tea-party, was all about a tea-smuggler whose business was threatened by cheap British tea.
For that matter, the reason they limited voting to only men of property, was because they didn't trust the people.
Go read about Alexander Hamilton for five minutes, and you'll realize that almost everything you believe about the founders is a load of hogwash.
The only exception is Thomas Jefferson, and maybe Benjamin Franklin.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
