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.
[WARNING - the following will annoy you and trigger defensive mechanisms. DO NOT READ if you wish to remain "super-intelligent."]
“The Super-Intelligent are Libertarian/Anarchists” ... Only in reference to themselves.
In a different frame of reference, they are functionally illiterate and imbecilic.
...
Take the issue of being in favor of “Anarchy.”
That’s an example of reading comprehension, or lack thereof.
Why?
“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.”
[Yick Wo vs Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886)]
...
If they think that NOT having a government serve them (as in “securing rights”) is a “good thing,” then they are quite foolish.
Let us now move to Abraham Lincoln and a quote that is not widely known.
...
"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)
(Job #1 : secure rights, Job #2 : govern those who consent. If one has not given consent, government is limited to “securing rights.” GREAT!)
So it would appear Libertarians don’t know how nor when they gave consent to be governed. Nor do they have a clue as to the innate status of Americans who did not consent to be governed.
Oh, and the part about being functionally illiterate comes from the fact that few Americans, super-geniuses or not, are familiar with the “republican form” of government that Lincoln referred to as “republicanism.” It’s promised in Article 4, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution.
(No, it is not synonymous with "republic.")
GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people ... directly ...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695
Rephrasing : in the promised republican form, the people are sovereigns and directly exercise that sovereignty.
REALLY?
The people of the state, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the king by his own prerogative.
Lansing v. Smith, (1829) 4 Wendell 9, (NY)
At the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people and they are truly the sovereigns of the country.
Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 440, 463
It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states.
Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997
In America, however, the case is widely different. Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people.
[ Glass vs The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dall 6 (1794)]
Just to be SURE we know what a "Sovereign" is, here are two definitions:
SOVEREIGN - "...Having undisputed right to make decisions and act accordingly".
- - - New Webster's Dictionary And Thesaurus, p. 950.
SOVEREIGN - A person, body or state in which independent and supreme authority is vested...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1395.
Wow, if you’re the king and your will is the law (in your domain) why would you NOT want to be the monarch of your domain? Why would you surrender your sovereignty for anarchy? Are you daft, man?
By the way, the U.S. Constitution did NOT create the republican form. It existed before the creation of government in these united States. Can you guess where its source is?
(spoiler space)
....
.
.
.
.
.....
Did you guess "The Declaration of Independence"?
Declaration of Independence (1776), wherein:
=> Job #1 = secure rights (endowed by our Creator)
=> Job #2 = govern those who consent; AND
=> All Americans are created equal before the law - no one has higher status. Americans are thus presumed to have the highest status at law - sovereign.
This is also the source of the Republican form of government and the sovereignty of the Americans who have not consented to be governed. And this also explains why Americans are not obligated under international law to kneel nor bow to any foreign monarch. We're their social equals. Which also explains why Americans can marry foreign nobility without violating their local laws barring commoners from marrying nobility. And the vulgar taunt : "Kiss my royal American @ss!" is technically correct and legally accurate.
That is why no other nation with a constitution has a “republican form.” No other government recognizes that its people are SOVEREIGN and thus SUPERIOR to it.
SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425
.....................
In all other countries that do NOT have a republican form, men are SUBJECTS (of a sovereign) as well as CITIZENS. They are bound to obedience.
In countries like the USA, that ENJOY a republican form, men are not presumed to be subjects nor citizens. Nor are they bound to obedience. They are sovereigns... until they consent otherwise.
This sums up why Libertarians / Anarchists in America are functionally illiterate victims of the world’s greatest propaganda ministry, bar none.
P.S. - only a century before, the concept of "American sovereign" was well known.
An example of the lost knowledge of our forefathers comes from “The Devil’s Dictionary”, by Ambrose Bierce, a collection of humorous definitions, originally published in a weekly paper starting in 1881.
Apparently his audience knew what he was writing about, though today’s reader would not.
.................................................. ...............
ALIEN, n. An American sovereign in his probationary state.
- - - - “The Devil’s Dictionary” (1906), by Ambrose Bierce
(download available from gutenberg.org)
.................................................. ...............
His audience knew what an “American sovereign” was, to understand the joke.
Today's "well educated" super geniuses are the joke.
Thank you for your attention.
Instead of getting letting your aggravation drive you to vent and get defensive, GO READ YOUR OWN LAWS.
Go to your local county courthouse law library and READ LAW.
The more eyes on the law, the better.
LEARN about the republican form of government, and why only AMERICA has it.
(No, it's not a constitutionally limited democracy or even an indirect democracy.)
READ YOUR STATE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS.
Look up the legal definitions of all terms. Do not assume. Double check that terms are not redefined within the statute itself.
Verify that the laws in harmony with the republican form are still on the books.
(Note the Laws that explicitly protect PRIVATE PROPERTY, NATURAL LIBERTY, PERSONAL LIBERTY, of the free inhabitants domiciled within your state in union with 49 other states. Ignore the laws that only relate to the impaired residents / citizens / socialists, who only "reside" at "residences" and must get permission - a license - to live, work, travel, buy, sell, or marry.)
You cannot remain an illiterate ignorant "super genius" Libertarian Anarchist unless you are in favor of the Powers that dominate you and yours. Defeat the propaganda ministry before it is too late.
READ LAW.
RESTORE YOUR STATUS AT LAW.
And someday you will comprehend why America's republican form of government must be preserved at all costs, lest her enemies destroy it utterly and wipe it from the face of the earth.
Libertarians are EXACTLY what Republicans used to be. Both parties have become nothing but corporate and multi-national shills. YES, Republican law must be preserved, but it won't be preserved by the status quo cronies running the show these days. They have no intention of preserving the Republic as described by our forefathers. Libertarians seek to preserve a constitutionally based government.
The founding fathers had a range of ideas. Some were for more government intervention, some were for less.
So how are you going to "prove" that the stench and noise from your neighbor's pig farm has harmed you? By lowered property values? If that's the case, how is that any different than your neighbor lowering your property values by painting their house an obnoxious color or letting junk cars sit in the front yard? I see from your posting history you support the rancher letting his cows tromp all over Nevada. So what happens when the court orders your neighbor to clean up his property or keep his cows contained and he refuses? Guess you're just stuck if you don't pick up and move, huh?
No, the libertarian ideal depends on a perfect world where everyone gets along and no conflict between community members is unresolvable. It's like a version of communism where cohesion is driven by self-interest instead of the common good.
Ahh the common good... Liberals are experts at determining what the common good is for the rest of us.
The ranchers you are speaking of have been grazing their cattle on that ground for longer than the BLS has been in existence. In their infinite wisdom the liberals in the BLS decided the tortoises who have seemed to cope just fine with grazing cattle, are now suddenly in danger of extinction from the cattle. Of course liberals believe in many stupid unproven theories. As liberals tend to do they decided that after hundreds of years that somehow grazing cattle on this land now was going to be contrary to the "common good" that is how this whole thing began.
Luckily, a few libertarian minded ranchers backed the BLS down and they have now run away in true liberal fashion.
The libertarian ideal depends on idiot liberals not being able to determine the "common good" arbitrarily for everyone else.
[WARNING - the following will annoy you and trigger defensive mechanisms. DO NOT READ if you wish to remain "super-intelligent."]
“The Super-Intelligent are Libertarian/Anarchists” ... Only in reference to themselves.
In a different frame of reference, they are functionally illiterate and imbecilic.
...
Take the issue of being in favor of “Anarchy.”
That’s an example of reading comprehension, or lack thereof.
Why?
“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.”
[Yick Wo vs Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886)]
...
If they think that NOT having a government serve them (as in “securing rights”) is a “good thing,” then they are quite foolish.
Let us now move to Abraham Lincoln and a quote that is not widely known.
...
"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)
(Job #1 : secure rights, Job #2 : govern those who consent. If one has not given consent, government is limited to “securing rights.” GREAT!)
So it would appear Libertarians don’t know how nor when they gave consent to be governed. Nor do they have a clue as to the innate status of Americans who did not consent to be governed.
Oh, and the part about being functionally illiterate comes from the fact that few Americans, super-geniuses or not, are familiar with the “republican form” of government that Lincoln referred to as “republicanism.” It’s promised in Article 4, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution.
(No, it is not synonymous with "republic.")
GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people ... directly ...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695
Rephrasing : in the promised republican form, the people are sovereigns and directly exercise that sovereignty.
REALLY?
The people of the state, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the king by his own prerogative.
Lansing v. Smith, (1829) 4 Wendell 9, (NY)
At the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people and they are truly the sovereigns of the country.
Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 440, 463
It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states.
Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997
In America, however, the case is widely different. Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people.
[ Glass vs The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dall 6 (1794)]
Just to be SURE we know what a "Sovereign" is, here are two definitions:
SOVEREIGN - "...Having undisputed right to make decisions and act accordingly".
- - - New Webster's Dictionary And Thesaurus, p. 950.
SOVEREIGN - A person, body or state in which independent and supreme authority is vested...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1395.
Wow, if you’re the king and your will is the law (in your domain) why would you NOT want to be the monarch of your domain? Why would you surrender your sovereignty for anarchy? Are you daft, man?
By the way, the U.S. Constitution did NOT create the republican form. It existed before the creation of government in these united States. Can you guess where its source is?
(spoiler space)
....
.
.
.
.
.....
Did you guess "The Declaration of Independence"?
Declaration of Independence (1776), wherein:
=> Job #1 = secure rights (endowed by our Creator)
=> Job #2 = govern those who consent; AND
=> All Americans are created equal before the law - no one has higher status. Americans are thus presumed to have the highest status at law - sovereign.
This is also the source of the Republican form of government and the sovereignty of the Americans who have not consented to be governed. And this also explains why Americans are not obligated under international law to kneel nor bow to any foreign monarch. We're their social equals. Which also explains why Americans can marry foreign nobility without violating their local laws barring commoners from marrying nobility. And the vulgar taunt : "Kiss my royal American @ss!" is technically correct and legally accurate.
That is why no other nation with a constitution has a “republican form.” No other government recognizes that its people are SOVEREIGN and thus SUPERIOR to it.
SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425
.....................
In all other countries that do NOT have a republican form, men are SUBJECTS (of a sovereign) as well as CITIZENS. They are bound to obedience.
In countries like the USA, that ENJOY a republican form, men are not presumed to be subjects nor citizens. Nor are they bound to obedience. They are sovereigns... until they consent otherwise.
This sums up why Libertarians / Anarchists in America are functionally illiterate victims of the world’s greatest propaganda ministry, bar none.
P.S. - only a century before, the concept of "American sovereign" was well known.
An example of the lost knowledge of our forefathers comes from “The Devil’s Dictionary”, by Ambrose Bierce, a collection of humorous definitions, originally published in a weekly paper starting in 1881.
Apparently his audience knew what he was writing about, though today’s reader would not.
.................................................. ...............
ALIEN, n. An American sovereign in his probationary state.
- - - - “The Devil’s Dictionary” (1906), by Ambrose Bierce
(download available from gutenberg.org)
.................................................. ...............
His audience knew what an “American sovereign” was, to understand the joke.
Today's "well educated" super geniuses are the joke.
Thank you for your attention.
Instead of getting letting your aggravation drive you to vent and get defensive, GO READ YOUR OWN LAWS.
Go to your local county courthouse law library and READ LAW.
The more eyes on the law, the better.
LEARN about the republican form of government, and why only AMERICA has it.
(No, it's not a constitutionally limited democracy or even an indirect democracy.)
READ YOUR STATE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS.
Look up the legal definitions of all terms. Do not assume. Double check that terms are not redefined within the statute itself.
Verify that the laws in harmony with the republican form are still on the books.
(Note the Laws that explicitly protect PRIVATE PROPERTY, NATURAL LIBERTY, PERSONAL LIBERTY, of the free inhabitants domiciled within your state in union with 49 other states. Ignore the laws that only relate to the impaired residents / citizens / socialists, who only "reside" at "residences" and must get permission - a license - to live, work, travel, buy, sell, or marry.)
You cannot remain an illiterate ignorant "super genius" Libertarian Anarchist unless you are in favor of the Powers that dominate you and yours. Defeat the propaganda ministry before it is too late.
READ LAW.
RESTORE YOUR STATUS AT LAW.
And someday you will comprehend why America's republican form of government must be preserved at all costs, lest her enemies destroy it utterly and wipe it from the face of the earth.
Clearly educated and intelligent people are (not) on the political right.
Here you are being intellectually lazy. If you research you can see that asians in other countries are on the political right and that countries in asia have very low tax rates.
That is because Asians tend to be socially liberal, but fiscal conservatives. That means they are moderate liberterians which confirms the OP theory.
They vote for Democrats, because the Republican party is terrible at being fiscal conservative and is way too social conservative.
Ahh the common good... Liberals are experts at determining what the common good is for the rest of us.
The ranchers you are speaking of have been grazing their cattle on that ground for longer than the BLS has been in existence. In their infinite wisdom the liberals in the BLS decided the tortoises who have seemed to cope just fine with grazing cattle, are now suddenly in danger of extinction from the cattle. Of course liberals believe in many stupid unproven theories. As liberals tend to do they decided that after hundreds of years that somehow grazing cattle on this land now was going to be contrary to the "common good" that is how this whole thing began.
Luckily, a few libertarian minded ranchers backed the BLS down and they have now run away in true liberal fashion.
The libertarian ideal depends on idiot liberals not being able to determine the "common good" arbitrarily for everyone else.
Like a lot of the people backing that idiot, you want to boil it down to one single issue and ignore the other reasons the feds got involved, but that's not the point.
I notice you avoided answering my question. In your libertarian utopia, what happens when someone like Mr. Bundy is your neighbor and doesn't comply with the civil court decision to stop hurting your property values by painting his house an obnoxious color, letting junk cars sit in his yard or allowing his cows to destroy your property?
Libertarian communities (like communist communities) are probably workable on a small scale, but would never succeed on a large scale in the real world because they depend on traits that are not common in human nature. There will always be jerks who don't give a damn about anyone else and don't want to play along.
Originally Posted by surfman Complete garbage! Libertarians, are not anarchists for one. Two, we believe in power of the states to make their laws, delegated down to counties and cities. That is how the Constitution and states rights work (see Amendment X). The biggest fallacy pushed by both Republicans and Democrats is that Libertarians don't want any laws. Again, hogwash!
THAT is exactly what you insinuated!
To say the Libertarian philosophy is good on paper until put into practice is like saying the Constitution is good in theory!
Please. I meant exactly what I said. The libertarian philosophy is good on paper until put into practice. We've already tried it, in fact. You do know the US floundered around under a system that's more or less the Libertarians ideal (weak federal government and all the power held by the states) for about 10 years, right? It didn't work. All we got was a country made up of 13 different countries that could barely get along. That's why we have a Constitution.
We absolutely can't allow a very limited government. That would require much more freedom and liberty. Many people greatly fear liberty, or too much of it.
So? And this is a problem why? So much for the pipe dream that we were sold all of our lives that this is the "Land of the Free."
Tell me, what is conservative about laws that keep us safe from ourselves. What is conservative about telling someone, they do not have individual liberty?
When you start telling others how to live, with the threat of punishment, you at that point are no longer a constitutionalists. What is conservative about that?
The primary function of government is to provide a means for individuals and businesses to settle disputes without resorting the stones, clubs and guns. The other reason is to provide a means of organizing people to defend themselves against other people with stones, clubs and guns. The rest is just an attempt to create a society where the weak are not enslaved by the strong, powerful or wealthy. So far we have managed two out of three.
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.
