Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Miencraft wrote:As an atheist, I've actually read through parts of the Bible and other scriptures (because why not, right), and even according to them, the primal humans were without law.

The Israelites. The book of Judges.

Pevvania wrote:I don't recall a passage in the Bible reading "And then, on the Last Day, Government created Man."

And on the seventh day, Government said, "let there be roads!" And so there were roads. And the government saw that it was good.

It's literally impossible to conceive of a primal humanity that was governed. If that were true, then apes must have formed a government prior to the evolution of homo sapiens.

Liberosia wrote:And on the seventh day, Government said, "let there be roads!" And so there were roads. And the government saw that it was good.

^

Liberosia wrote:And on the seventh day, Government said, "let there be roads!" And so there were roads. And the government saw that it was good.

You rang?

Muh Roads wrote:You rang?

Yes, your Holiness, the glorious creation of Government.

Maybe I'm sounding a little eccentric here, but maybe the roads are a way to enslave us? Think about it. Roads are an interconnected series of transportation routes that are constantly monitored by the state. It's very easy to track a car travelling down a road. The government know every route, every highway, and every possibility. But it'd be a lot harder to control people if the most popular means of transport was aeromobiles (flying cars). See what I'm getting at?

Pevvania wrote:Maybe I'm sounding a little eccentric here, but maybe the roads are a way to enslave us? Think about it. Roads are an interconnected series of transportation routes that are constantly monitored by the state. It's very easy to track a car travelling down a road. The government know every route, every highway, and every possibility. But it'd be a lot harder to control people if the most popular means of transport was aeromobiles (flying cars). See what I'm getting at?

^

Liberosia wrote:Yes, your Holiness, the glorious creation of Government.

Bless you. We're gonna need a tax increase to maintain me. But don't worry it's for your own good.

Pevvania wrote:Maybe I'm sounding a little eccentric here, but maybe the roads are a way to enslave us? Think about it. Roads are an interconnected series of transportation routes that are constantly monitored by the state. It's very easy to track a car travelling down a road. The government know every route, every highway, and every possibility. But it'd be a lot harder to control people if the most popular means of transport was aeromobiles (flying cars). See what I'm getting at?

Buy a jeep, Reagan had one. No roads needed. xD

I see your point though.

Speaking of tax increases, I have a question for you all: would it be acceptable to increase taxes in order to balance the budget?

Liberosia wrote:The Israelites. The book of Judges.

Well, hey, "parts".

Muh Roads wrote:Bless you. We're gonna need a tax increase to maintain me. But don't worry it's for your own good.

If it is the will of The Lord Government, let it be.

Government is government. There is no government but Government and Roads is His prophet.

Pevvania wrote:Speaking of tax increases, I have a question for you all: would it be acceptable to increase taxes in order to balance the budget?

Nope, it just encourages more tax increases instead of spending cuts.

Now, if you have a bunch of regulations in place to manage taxation and spending like a balanced budget + tax cap amendment or something, it could work, but other than that, nope.

Pevvania wrote:Speaking of tax increases, I have a question for you all: would it be acceptable to increase taxes in order to balance the budget?

No. Taxation is theft.

Stealing from your neighbor to pay your rent isn't right, why should the government get too?

Pevvania wrote:Speaking of tax increases, I have a question for you all: would it be acceptable to increase taxes in order to balance the budget?

No, it's all unacceptable. However we might be able to tear down the state quicker if it becomes insolvent via debt faster.

Miencraft wrote:Nope, it just encourages more tax increases instead of spending cuts.

Now, if you have a bunch of regulations in place to manage taxation and spending like a balanced budget + tax cap amendment or something, it could work, but other than that, nope.

Regulating the government instead of the people is a great idea. Too bad it's so increasingly unpopular.

Liberosia wrote:1) what the hell? It's not truly slavery if it's consensual? Furthermore I don't consent to the State, and I am compelled by force to do certain things: slavery. Yes I do, thanks.

2) Anarchy is great, and the term does not equate to chaos. It can indeed if we embrace reason, logic, and science over faith, culture, and mysticism.

1) It could be.....

2) NO! NO NO NO! NO!

Anarchy= Bad

Pevvania wrote:I don't recall a passage in the Bible reading "And then, on the Last Day, Government created Man."

God brought Order.....BY being a head. Thus by Government slavery logic. We have Religious Slavery....

Albenia wrote:1) It could be.....

2) NO! NO NO NO! NO!

Anarchy= BadGod brought Order.....BY being a head. Thus by Government slavery logic. We have Religious Slavery....

God does not dictate what we do. He gave us free will. And we used it to enslave our fellow men.

All of you sicken me. I swear an oath to defend my country, and all you guys care is to tear it down. I see no respect from you guys towards those that gave all.

Northern Prussia wrote:All of you sicken me. I swear an oath to defend my country, and all you guys care is to tear it down. I see no respect from you guys towards those that gave all.

What you wish to defend is a corrupt, parasitic organisation that feeds off the misery of others.

Northern Prussia wrote:All of you sicken me. I swear an oath to defend my country, and all you guys care is to tear it down. I see no respect from you guys towards those that gave all.

Most troops are very good men who wish to do better for the world, but unfortunately they are also what stands between us and the state.

Northern Prussia wrote:Go to hell

That was uncalled for.

Northern Prussia wrote:All of you sicken me. I swear an oath to defend my country, and all you guys care is to tear it down. I see no respect from you guys towards those that gave all.

What you wish....

Actually

Pevvania wrote:What you wish to defend is a corrupt, parasitic organization that feeds off the misery of others.

Pevvania wrote:God does not dictate what we do. He gave us free will. And we used it to enslave our fellow men.

Oh yeah he gave us free will.....Or we would be sent to hell for the rest of eternity.

We did not use it to enslave fellow men....Well we do but that's not the gov- well in a way it was because they didn't ban the trade....

Government brings Order, Justice, and Cooperation.

Your statements are full of crap.

I'll also say that what many of us have a problem with isn't necessarily the troops, or even necessarily the government. It's the use of force by a monopolistic institution that supports itself using theft and coercion. It's had a horrendous track record in nearly everything that it's involved itself in, and has no incentive whatsoever to limit itself. As Milton Friedman once said, "If you put the government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in three years you'd have a shortage of sand."

Northern Prussia wrote:Go to hell

I don't know where you are a soldier. But I can guarantee you that in America, the soldiers do not fight for the White House, Congress, or any other form of government. They fight for their family and the one sitting next to them. They do not fight for any president, they fight for their nation. You are confusing a nation and a government.

However, I do not appreciate the soldier hating coming from Pev. It doesn't matter how much of a fit you want to throw about the government. Do not attack those who are just doing their duty. It's disrespectful and childish.

Albenia wrote:What you wish....

ActuallyOh yeah he gave us free will.....Or we would be sent to hell for the rest of eternity.

We did not use it to enslave fellow men....Well we do but that's not the gov- well in a way it was because they didn't ban the trade....

Government brings Order, Justice, and Cooperation.

I do not believe in the existence of hell. It's a fairly new concept, historically, in the history of Christianity. Before it, purgatory was the accepted gateway to the afterlife. I don't understand the logic behind, "God is an all-loving, all-forgiving being, but if you have a drinking problem you will be sent to pain and agony for the rest of eternity."

Order? Maybe so, when it's not sending its people to die for its own goals. Justice? No. Government protects itself at the expense of individuals. It's never played by its own rules. Even the first President, George Washington, violated the Constitution by creating a central bank. Cooperation? Free and peaceful people will cooperate with or without a state. The government came into existence not by cooperation, but by conspiracy - a bunch of power-hungry men wanted to exert control over other people's land.

Northern Prussia wrote:Your statements are full of crap.

Please, tell me why. I'd like to have a debate about this. I don't consider myself an anarchist, but I recognise, philosophically, that the State is a morally evil institution.

Northern Prussia wrote:Your statements are full of crap.

What is your argument, then?

Northern Prussia wrote:Your statements are full of crap.

Please tell me how? I am interested in why you say that?

Pevvania wrote:I do not believe in the existence of hell. It's a fairly new concept, historically, in the history of Christianity. Before it, purgatory was the accepted gateway to the afterlife. I don't understand the logic behind, "God is an all-loving, all-forgiving being, but if you have a drinking problem you will be sent to pain and agony for the rest of eternity."

well obviously he wouldn't do that....Then again I am a Mormon....We have Three Heavenly Kingdoms and Outer Darkness(Hell)

Pevvania wrote:I

Order? Maybe so, when it's not sending its people to die for its own goals. Justice? No. Government protects itself at the expense of individuals. It's never played by its own rules. Even the first President, George Washington, violated the Constitution by creating a central bank. Cooperation? Free and peaceful people will cooperate with or without a state. The government came into existence not by cooperation, but by conspiracy - a bunch of power-hungry men wanted to exert control over other people's land.

Well look I like Minarchism I really do....I just believe there is need for a government. Anarchy in no way cn turn out good. BECAUSE AS IME PROGRESSES THE WORLD WILL ONLY BECOME MORE CORRUPT

Humpheria wrote:I don't know where you are a soldier. But I can guarantee you that in America, the soldiers do not fight for the White House, Congress, or any other form of government. They fight for their family and the one sitting next to them. They do not fight for any president, they fight for their nation. You are confusing a nation and a government.

However, I do not appreciate the soldier hating coming from Pev. It doesn't matter how much of a fit you want to throw about the government. Do not attack those who are just doing their duty. It's disrespectful and childish.

I think you misunderstand what I wrote. I have a lot of respect for those who put their life on the line to serve the country and to keep people free (or freer than those in other countries). But I do not have respect for the domestic tyrants who enforce the government's will. Not necessarily soldiers, not necessarily policemen, not necessarily bureaucrats. But there's a certain type of person who'll kill a child for no reason and then dodge the consequences because he works for the state.

I would never be so insensitive as to disrespect soldiers. I realise that you come from a military family. My grandfather served and died in the line of duty, if that counts for anything. But what I meant is that it is those who voluntarily go on the government's payroll to make life a misery for others, enforcing corrupt statutes, and sometimes not enforcing any law at all, who I hold contempt for. Many European countries have domestic armies with different names.

Post self-deleted by Liberosia.

Post self-deleted by Liberosia.

Liberosia Ipianed

Albenia wrote:Liberosia Ipianed

I wrote something good, but had a bunch of spelling errors and I was just like to hell with it

Liberosia wrote:I wrote something good, but had a bunch of spelling errors and I was just like to hell with it

Twice?

No the second was to correct the errors but I made errors in that.........

Albenia wrote: Oh yeah he gave us free will.....Or we would be sent to hell for the rest of eternity.

We did not use it to enslave fellow men....Well we do but that's not the gov- well in a way it was because they didn't ban the trade....

Government brings Order, Justice, and Cooperation.

If you haven't noticed you do have the free will to do right and wrong. God though he hates sin (up to the point where he can't even be around it because it is disgusting to him) knows that taking away our free will, takes the thing that he desperately and asks of us ultimately to give him, our love. Love is a choice and if we have no free will, then we have no freedom of choice neither making it impossible for use to love him. Though to you it may seem like God wants use to be his slaves it is quite the opposite, he lets use choose wether to be with him forever or not.

...and I found something that has made me once again lose faith that mankind could ever be good....

I'm done....

Sorry. But i wanna say:... UKRAINSKYIV, DEUTSCHLAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!¡!¡!¡!¡!

Interesting articles here - the Bush Administration had several opportunities to get Bin Laden on a silver platter directly from the Taliban. But they were never interested. This goes beyond criminal negligence - this is an impeachable offense.

http://reason.com/archives/2014/06/05/bowe-bergdahl-the-taliban-and-the-fog-of

http://www.ipsnews.net/2011/05/us-refusal-of-2001-taliban-offer-gave-bin-laden-a-free-pass/

http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/11/01/how-bush-was-offered-bin-laden-and-blew-it/

Pevvania wrote:Interesting articles here - the Bush Administration had several opportunities to get Bin Laden on a silver platter directly from the Taliban. But they were never interested. This goes beyond criminal negligence - this is an impeachable offense.

http://reason.com/archives/2014/06/05/bowe-bergdahl-the-taliban-and-the-fog-of

http://www.ipsnews.net/2011/05/us-refusal-of-2001-taliban-offer-gave-bin-laden-a-free-pass/

http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/11/01/how-bush-was-offered-bin-laden-and-blew-it/

At the risk of sounding cynical, this might have caused public support to go against the war in Iraq and possibly Afghanistan. That would defeat the whole purpose of the neoconservative military program and spending, wouldn't it?

http://photos.sacurrent.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/tumblr_l73v1qgk0K1qateyw.gif

You guys are pretty sickening. I didn't read into the entire argument, but what I've gathered so far is disturbing. You're bashing someone for wanting to serve his country. He is enlisting in the military with only good intentions and you lot wish nothing more than to convince him that his beliefs aren't worth fighting for. He isn't going on a crusade for the bad that plagues some areas of our government. Northern Prussia is joining the military to fight for the good that is in our United States of America. He is a United States Marine, and honestly, trying to tell him that his country isn't worth the fight is extremely unpatriotic. Shouldn't libertarians be accepting of one another's beliefs?

Rotgeheim wrote:You guys are pretty sickening.

I apologize for the insult. It just angered me a bit to someone hate on an American soldier. It's the most un-patriotic and un-American thing you could possibly do, so you all must understand my frustration.

Sorry, this current war is sickening, and anyone who is willing to fight it is equally sickening.

Hallo Island wrote:Sorry, this current war is sickening, and anyone who is willing to fight it is equally sickening.

It's their duty.

The fault lies with the government not the soldiers.

Albenia wrote:It's their duty.

The fault lies with the government not the soldiers.

If you enlist in the military, whose fault is it?

Hallo Island wrote:If you enlist in the military, whose fault is it?

So?

They serve their country. Not their government.

Albenia wrote:So?

They serve their country. Not their government.

How is killing innocent people serving your country?

Soldiers fight for our freedom abroad. But the freedom we thought we had is gone and the Republic is lost. All along the real enemy has been here, at home, and it is what truly destroys our freedom. I'm holding out hope that those in the armed forces will be the ones to lead a second revolution.

And soldiers ARE civil servants, whose commander in chief is head of the government. They are agents of the STATE! Paid with tax dollars (stolen property) to ensure the interests of those in power!!

Y'all are awful. These people die for their country for your freedom and y'all insult them? Look that's why they sign up. NOTHING ELSE IS THEIR FAULT. Illegal wars are the Government's.

I don't blame them. It's not their fault. I blame the state and irrational patriotism.

Liberosia wrote:I don't blame them. It's not their fault. I blame the state and irrational patriotism.

Sorry it's just how you worded this.

Liberosia wrote:And soldiers ARE civil servants, whose commander in chief is head of the government. They are agents of the STATE! Paid with tax dollars (stolen property) to ensure the interests of those in power!!

And I mostly meant Hallo

Albenia wrote:Sorry it's just how you worded this.And I mostly meant Hallo

Well, since all war is inherently bad, I do not apologize.

Hallo Island wrote:Well, since all war is inherently bad, I do not apologize.

People have died to serve this country including my uncle.

You have no right to say it'd the soldiers fault when you probably do nothing for your community itself.

Albenia wrote:People have died to serve this country including my uncle.

You have no right to say it'd the soldiers fault when you probably do nothing for your community itself.

Great, they wasted their lives killing innocent people and oppressing other humans.

Finally in Montreal after being chased by Jewish motorcyclists through the Catskills.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Finally in Montreal after being chased by Jewish motorcyclists through the Catskills.

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal05/2012/9/4/12/anigif_enhanced-buzz-26744-1346777603-2.gif

Hallo Island wrote:Great, they wasted their lives killing innocent people and oppressing other humans.

........ Your a douche?

You know that?

Albenia wrote:........ Your a douche?

You know that?

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal05/2012/9/4/13/anigif_enhanced-buzz-26744-1346778544-7.gif

Some wars are just and some are not, depending on what side you're on. Regardless, it is not just to use tax dollars to fight an offensive war or use conscription.

Forget you.

You get none of this.

Liberosia wrote:Some wars are just and some are not, depending on what side you're on. Regardless, it is not just to use tax dollars to fight an offensive war or use conscription.

Unless they are communist, right?

Sorry, My philosophy is that there is nothing that you can't respond to with a Beyonce gif.

Albenia wrote:........ Your a douche?

You know that?

What would you know about a soldier? Soldiers do not oppress people, they fight for others who can't fight, they protect your right to spread you ignorant hippy talk like you are now, they protect our freedoms and save lives, if you can't see that you need help.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Unless they are communist, right?

Correct!

Kidding, my actions on NS have not violated the NAP.

...did I just get called a hippy by someone with the dark side of the moon as a flag?

Right-Winged Nation wrote:What would you know about a soldier? Soldiers do not oppress people, they fight for others who can't fight, they protect your right to spread you ignorant hippy talk like you are now, they protect our freedoms and save lives, if you can't see that you need help.

Let's see.

It's not soldiers that do that. They joined to fight for their country. Not to oppress others or fight unjust wars. That's the government.

Liberosia wrote:Correct!

Kidding, my actions on NS have not violated the NAP.

Of course....

Hallo Island wrote:...did I just get called a hippy by someone with the dark side of the moon as a flag?

Yes you did, while I like Floyd, that doesn't make me one I just happened to like the album and the cover. How could you be against the soldiers like that? They protect us and die for us, and you say that they waste their lives shedding innocent blood? How can you say that?

I have a question for our resident American nationalists/patriots (of which I was once). Drone policy. Is the guy sitting behind the controller a soldier and what do you have to say about the immense civilian collateral ratio?

Albenia wrote:Let's see.

It's not soldiers that do that. They joined to fight for their country. Not to oppress others or fight unjust wars. That's the government. Of course....

Albenia wrote:Let's see.

It's not soldiers that do that. They joined to fight for their country. Not to oppress others or fight unjust wars. That's the government. Of course....

Exactly you can't blame the soldiers

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Yes you did, while I like Floyd, that doesn't make me one I just happened to like the album and the cover. How could you be against the soldiers like that? They protect us and die for us, and you say that they waste their lives shedding innocent blood? How can you say that?

We kill people at random and say that it protects us. I do not understand it. Nobody has the right to kill another being.

Albenia wrote:Let's see.

It's not soldiers that do that. They joined to fight for their country. Not to oppress others or fight unjust wars. That's the government. Of course....

Albenia wrote:Let's see.

It's not soldiers that do that. They joined to fight for their country. Not to oppress others or fight unjust wars. That's the government. Of course....

Exactly you can't blame the soldiers

Hallo Island wrote:We kill people at random and say that it protects us. I do not understand it. Nobody has the right to kill another being.

A soldier does not kill At random, a soldier follows orders. Now if you want to critizice government military action, then maybe you have a point. Understand however, that soldiers do not kill for the fun of it, that's an outrageous claim

Liberosia wrote:I have a question for our resident American nationalists/patriots (of which I was once). Drone policy. Is the guy sitting behind the controller a soldier and what do you have to say about the immense civilian collateral ratio?

He would be. Government policy. Not his fault.

Keep drones away though.

Hallo Island wrote:We kill people at random and say that it protects us. I do not understand it. Nobody has the right to kill another being.

Not really. We kill people who threaten freedom.

Albenia wrote:He would be. Government policy. Not his fault.

Keep drones away though.

Not really. We kill people who threaten freedom.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:A soldier does not kill At random, a soldier follows orders. Now if you want to critizice government military action, then maybe you have a point. Understand however, that soldiers do not kill for the fun of it, that's an outrageous claim

He puts a better explanation.

Liberosia wrote:I have a question for our resident American nationalists/patriots (of which I was once). Drone policy. Is the guy sitting behind the controller a soldier and what do you have to say about the immense civilian collateral ratio?

Even they have orders that they must follow

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Even they have orders that they must follow

Exactly m

Albenia wrote:He would be. Government policy. Not his fault.

Keep drones away though.

Not really. We kill people who threaten freedom.

So innocent children killed by drone strikes threaten freedom?

Hallo Island wrote:So innocent children killed by drone strikes threaten freedom?

Even they have to follow orders.

Tell me how often Thay happens?

Right-Winged Nation wrote:Even they have orders that they must follow

If military service is not compulsory, how can you possibly justify the murder of innocent people? These people aren't forced into this profession.

T

Liberosia wrote:If military service is not compulsory, how can you possibly justify the murder of innocent people? These people aren't forced into this profession.

They join to defend their country. Sadly they can't leave.

Albenia wrote:TThey join to defend their country. Sadly they can't leave.

Their "country" is the government, despite your delusions.

Albenia wrote:Even they have to follow orders.

Tell me how often Thay happens?

So far there have been 168-200 deaths of children and more than 2400 other civilians.

Hallo Island wrote:So innocent children killed by drone strikes threaten freedom?

Hallo Island wrote:So innocent children killed by drone strikes threaten freedom?

You honestly believe that children are targeted by drones? You honestly believe the US military targets children?

So the foot soldiers in Al Quaeda shouldn't be held responsible because, you know, they're just following orders?

Right-Winged Nation wrote:You honestly believe that children are targeted by drones? You honestly believe the US military targets children?

Not targets. Collateral. "Accidental"

Right-Winged Nation wrote:You honestly believe that children are targeted by drones? You honestly believe the US military targets children?

The intent doesn't matter, what matters is the result.

Hallo Island wrote:The intent doesn't matter, what matters is the result.

You know there are instances where the children are actually firing at soldiers, trying to kill?

Liberosia wrote:So the foot soldiers in Al Quaeda shouldn't be held responsible because, you know, they're just following orders?

What are you implying?

Liberosia wrote:I have a question for our resident American nationalists/patriots (of which I was once). Drone policy. Is the guy sitting behind the controller a soldier and what do you have to say about the immense civilian collateral ratio?

Hey you might want to check out this article:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20725_6-myths-about-drone-warfare-you-probably-believe.html

Interesting quick read, kinda changed my view on them. Not a supporter still.. but good to go in depth.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:What are you implying?

I'm not implying. I'm blatantly saying that volunteer soldiers of any group are personally responsible for any crimes the committ.

Muh Roads wrote:Hey you might want to check out this article:

http://www.cracked.com/article_20725_6-myths-about-drone-warfare-you-probably-believe.html

Interesting quick read, kinda changed my view on them. Not a supporter still.. but good to go in depth.

Would you give a quick summary of the article and it's conclusions for the RMB?

Liberosia wrote:I'm not implying. I'm blatantly saying that volunteer soldiers of any group are personally responsible for any crimes the committ.

They volunteer to serve the people, protect their rights, protect freedom, they do what they are told. You can't lable soldiers as murderers or criminals.

Right-Winged Nation wrote:They volunteer to serve the people, protect their rights, protect freedom, they do what they are told. You can't lable soldiers as murderers or criminals.

Can I label low level Al Quaeda affiliates as criminals and murderers?

Right-Winged Nation wrote:They volunteer to serve the people, protect their rights, protect freedom, they do what they are told. You can't lable soldiers as murderers or criminals.

Of course some are.

And if you kill someone your technically a murderer.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.