Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
"everything is a social construct!" is 'i am very smrt' levels of thinking
Pevvania, Rateria
Unfortunately, your very comment is a social construct /s
Rateria
I usually separate gender and sex
Um aKsHulLy, intelligence is a social construct
Narland, Rateria
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Our most important social contructs are heavily influenced by biology.
Like the fact that men typically are the hunters and women the homemakers is influenced by the fact that men have 40% more upper body strength and narrow hips that are better for running.
That influenced our brain evolution in such a way that men now are more likely to take dangerous and technical jobs, while women take jobs that are similar to things they'd do in the home.
I'm not saying that that's how it should always be, obviously there are exceptions to the rule in modern society, but our cultural traditions didn't just come from thin air arbitrarily. There was never an equal chance that men would stay in the home and women go out and earn the food.
You actually do see that in a few african tribes, but the reason they give is that the men are staying behind to protect the elderly and children, so even then there's an understanding that men need to protect, because they're best suited for such things.
So I understand that incumbents have a massive electoral advantage, but purely speaking, term limits infringe upon the people's right to elect whomever they want. If the people want to elect the same person twelve times, what gives the government the right to step in and say no?
If you're worried about the agrigation of power to a few old farts, would implementing a national "right to recall" on senators and representatives through a simple majority address this? If they are recalled, they cannot run in the election to replace them.
Arent there more virginian presidents than any other?
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Not having term limits does not make our Republic any less of a Republic. The incumbents are still getting elected to represent.
no but it is slightly humorous when Leftists (or any viewpoint that takes itself too seriously) cannot recognize when satire is directed at them, ala Sokal, et al. :)
I like to blame the professor for oppressing me ironic with the willful and phenomenal attempt at abolition of the self.
I am who I am regardless of who others or even myself rather think that I am. Moreover should professor disagree, we (the students) think of said professor that professor should think that we think professor give us all A+ for no reason other than Social Constructionism be correct, else the professor continue to institutionally victimize us with academic oppression.
Making us perform for inequitable grades when intersectionally we are obviously less erudite and therefore the more worthy of being compensated for our victimhood from the privileged academic class whom should freely give us the A+ we deserve just for being there.
Embrace the madness and blame everyone and everything else but yourself (unless you are arbitrarily tagged as an oppressor by the name-caller class, then you should commit suicide) is what Social Constructionism boils down to (imnsho).
Rateria, Skaveria, Miri Islands
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Imagine this scenario; It's the 2020 primary debates. On the stage are three people, Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, and John McAfee. Bernie keeps making Bernie noises and John McAfee can't understand him, but Trump, being well-versed in speaking like a cartoon character, can understand him, so he must rely on Donald Trump to translate.
Donald Trump translating Bernie Sanders to a confused John McAfee should be a skit.
Pevvania
what the hell is john mcafee doing anywhere near those two
I wish the libertarian party wasn't considered a joke party
I wish a communist party would take off
Miri Islands
I think it's called the labor party in the UK. Hue hue hue.
Pevvania, Venomringo
Wish we had them here but they don't go far enough
I'd support this only to devide the Democratic base.
I wish communism would take off and go somewhere else
Narland, Rateria
The Libertarian Party is a joke. If it wants people to take it seriously it has to first take its self seriously. Which would involve, at the very least, not having random stripping at its national convention
Pevvania, Rateria
I'm trying out a new flag. I wanted to incorporate my national animal like I've done in the past. thoughts?
Narland, Rateria
Nice flag. I like the Stag and the blue, yellow and black, but it hard to see the two black stripes (but that may be intentional). Also it is a bit bare for your national religion being Freemasonry. I would expect a plethora of emblematics woven into an enigmatic tapestry, but it could be an Oddfellow plot to destabilize the Fraternal Order of things. :)
Rateria
Well the colors are meant to be symbolic. My nation is a minarchist state, so the yellow represents capitalism, the blue is the state, and the black is anarchism.
Originally I wanted the stag to go in the blue, because it's the national animal, but there was too little of a contrast between the blue and black.
The omly reason my religion is freemasonry is because I wanted to unlock the option to change it.
I hate having locked options, but I really didn't want there to be a national religion, so I tried setting it as "atheism" but that didn't jive with whenever NationStates mentioned it in an issue.
Then I tried setting it to "Polytheism" but NationStates words issues regarding your national religion assuming they're monotheistic.
So I landed on freemasonry because they accept all monotheists. It's literally the closest choice to not having a religion if you want the option unlocked and for it to make sense grammatically and in context with the issues.
Narland, Rateria
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Thanks for the very interesting info.
What can I put under religion, then, so as to imply all faiths are welcomed, while also, fitting gramatically within the context of NS issues?
So I don't get sentences like "This is an affront to the one true god of polytheism!"
Or my personal favorite
" *random name* grand religious leader of atheism, *says something*
Rateria, Highway Eighty-Eight
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post self-deleted by Highway Eighty-Eight.
My grandmother was a young woman at the time of his funeral, and because he paid all his dues fully even through the Great Depression, and Great War, he was buried with a IOOF funeral, and separate graveside service. She said they had him dressed up like Dracula with a purple sash and star that looked like a badge. His body had been donated to science so they took the casket with them when they left. The also went to the house and took all the IOOF books and logs the could find. They missed a coubple and Grandma had them in the attic. One of the books was in some sort of typographic shorthand and encoded turning me into a conspiracy theory buff at a young age.
Rateria
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Can you recommend any good books on the topic of the Oddfellows?
Rateria
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Normally I'm one to feel sad when there are shootings and take them seriously bit this guy is an f-up in every way possible. Who heard of the Dallas court house shooting
Rateria
Hes been getting memed on ever since the shooting was reported. Pro-gun people who have talked about a revolution against the US government seem to be the ones who make fun of the shooter the most.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
dude joins the military, fks that up, gets radicalized into a pathetic alt-right incel, gets mad at life, goes and shoots up a court house, literally fails to hit anyone, dies to a mallcop.
Imagine living for 22 years and thats how your life ends. lol
Rateria, Miri Islands
I still don't get the "Libertarian National Socialist Green Party" quip from what looks like a photoshopped Political Compass result.
It makes one wonder what kind of meds he was taking. Too bad HIPAA made it difficult for journalists to keep a running tally.
Most street firefights last under 5 seconds. IDR the FBI statistics on hits per shot, but I am glad no one (other) was hurt in the take-down.
Rateria, Jadentopian Order
I am so adding this phrase to my lexicon
The New United States, Rateria
My paternal grandfather used to say that one quite a bit. That grandfather was a sheik/flamer (male counterpart to the flapper) during the roaring 20s. He was in a jazz and blues band that travelled in a 1917 REO touring bus that had extra "fuel tanks" to bootleg their "hooch" through prohibition and up to the start of WW2. Unlike my other grandfather who wore a cowboy hat, that grandfather had an array of fedoras and a very keen homburg. When I asked that grandmother why he never continued playing after the War, she would just smile and say that he never knew if people came for the music or came for the booze. :) But I never learned the real reason.
The New United States, Rateria
US Slavery Reparations if done:
1. Those whose ancestors were not in the US before the 14th Amendment, fought against the Confederacy, were Republicans (as the GOP were radical abolitionists and no Republican owned slaves), or were enslaved regardless of race, colour, and national origin (including "white" slaves) get paid either for their assistance in destroying that chronic institution of the human condition or for their suffering and anguish under it.
2. Those whose ancestors fought for the Confederacy (including the Indian tribes such as the Cherokee), were Democrats (as the Democrat Party advocated slavery and fought against abolition), or owned or participated in the slave trade pay the rest of us for the careless disregard for the Life and Liberty of others that forced the rest of us to right their wrong with their lives, fortunes, blood, sweat, and tears.
3. Those who have mixed genealogy determine how much of a percentage of each category and pay accordingly.
OR
Let the past remain in the past; no one alive today was a part of the Civil War. Otherwise I will demand reparations from France for their snooty Norman curs occupying the England of my ancestors for 400 bloody years; and routinely chopping my paternal ancestors most noble Saxon heads off. I think 50 Million Euros a year should suffice.
I like what Coleman Hughes said in front of the House re: reparations today.
Miencraft, Pevvania, The New United States, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
I've got ancestors on both sides of the Civil War, but about twice as many fought for the Confederacy than for the Union. I can pay 50% reparations to the yankees and the descendants of slaves, and I'll be eagerly awaiting my checks from Turkey, Austria, and the British Crown. :)
Narland, Rateria
The world is, and has always been, a struggle between people, conquering and enslaving each other. Modern people have no obligation to feel guilty for slavery, unless they participate in human trafficking, which is modern slavery.
If reparations were gonna be made, they should've been made to that generation of slaves, or even those affected by Jim Crow, but it's being framed as just cutting all black Americans a check, like they can be bought.
I hear similar non-sense about giving native americans back tribal lands. They were conquered. We have no obligation to feel bad about that. They were doing it to each other for thousands of years before Europeans got to the continent.
And who, praytell, gets this land? Which tribe gets it? The ones we took it from? How about the tribe THEY took it from, or the tribe THEY took it from? At the end of the day, we were just another tribe.
Not only that, but EVERYWHERE has natives. Should Japan give land back to the Anu? Should England turn over the Isles to the Celts?Should the Italians be made to pay reparations to the decendants of the Roman and Latin tribes?
Is the plan that everyone goes back to their ancestral homeland? I know a few white nationalists who'd be down with that.
Miencraft, Narland, Rateria, Miri Islands
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
;) The political/ruling class of course gets the land. Re: Following Questions. Yes, yes, and yes. And the English of Saxon descent need to go back to Germany, those of Teutonic descent need to go back to wherever they came from, and Italy should pay the rest of Europe for the cruelty of the Roman Empire, etc etc etc.
The politics of victimhood is a self-refuting poison for hate-mongers and mind tyrants trying to convince us that we have always been at war with [insert marginalized undesired class here].
Intersectionality is our friend. From this convoluted illogic of bigotry and prejudice we can solve all of the worlds problems by creating a hierarchy of victimhood that only the most emotive bleeding heart burr-head can effuse. No longer do you need a misguided unreasonable excuse for your animus so easily refuted by rational criticism. Now you have an unassailable chart (with pictures) created by "experts" for the political class to rule us all. No thinking required. Just feel the love from that caring boot of "social" justice forever stomping on the human face.
I was going for Lord of the Rings allusion but 1984 is so much more appropriate. Its like they are using it as a how-to manual instead of a dire warning.
The New United States, Rateria
My mom's side had ancestry that goes back to Kansas. They fought in bloody Kansas to keep it a free state before the civil war even started. It pissed me off to no end when my history professor said the free soilers were just as racist as the pro slavery advocates
Narland, The New United States, Rateria
I hope you were able to object and give reason. The first time i went to college the good "non-hard science" profs wanted discussion and debate (the good ones anyway). These days it seems like Profs don't want hearty discussion in their lecture halls. The just want mimicking little clones to go out and spread their dogma. The last time I went to university I was told it was better to find a prof whom agreed with me intellectually (fat chance) or learn to regurgitate their drivel. If i ever need to go back to university again it will only be for hard STEM classes.
Rateria
I did interrupt and say that the free soilers were much better than the slavery advocates because while some of the free soilers didn't like the Africans they at the very least believed that slavery was immoral regardless of their race. She responded with a quick definition of racism and even attempted to make me feel stupid for suggesting it even though she didn't address my point
Miencraft, Narland, The New United States, Rateria
I am glad you did. It may be that a tipping point is coming soon that will reform schooling. The iron triangle of Academia, the Administrative State, and the Mainstream Media is pretty strong and all three probably need to be broken simultaneously if we are to escape from the umbrella road to empire (and return back to being a free country).
The Kansas-Missouri wars were pretty bad. I understand the County Wars there were even worse than in the Far West. One of the neighboring ranchers to our family (when I was growing up) had come from Kansas during the Civil War. Even their grand-kids (mainly of Dutch/Flemish descent) were belligerent against all things Southern. We grew up with a jaundiced eye to Californians and Mexican National Socialists affiliated with La Raza (but not the "free range" Mexican immigrants escaping their peonage whom we gave assistance) -- weird I know, but that Grandfather fought against the Nazis and hated all forms of Socialism but National Socialists the most whom he insisted La Raza was a part.
It always helps to define the terms. Generally, those who define the terms wins the debate. I always insist that racism is the belief that one race is primarily superior to all others. Anything else may be bigotry or prejudice but it is not necessarily racism. To confuse and confound the terms leads to obfuscation and ignorance not to enlightenment and education. :)
The New United States, Rateria
Imo, an American civil war was inevitable. The disagreement over states vs federal right's was intense. That issue just so happened to manifest itself in slavery in the north vs the south, but it could've just as easily been western states seeking autonomy from east coast elites.
An east vs west civil war in the mid-eighteen hundreds would be an interesting concept for a fiction novel.
Narland, The New United States, Rateria
This is part of the reason I don't think we're heading for a civil war right now. There is no singular issue everyone is heavily invested in that would cause people to take up arms. There are radicals but they're just that, radicals. Normal people are complacent and don't want to see the world burn
Rateria
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
California. I want to move to North Carolina though
The New United States, Rateria
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoBa2SyvtpE
Rateria, The United States Of Patriots, Miri Islands
It's a great place and my home state.
Depends on where you are though. There's heavy Appalachian culture to the west in places like Boone county. Even I can barely understand them sometimes.
The beaches are alright, kinda methy sometimes. Kinda feels like someone tried to make a crappy version of southern Florida look like California, but didn't really.
The whole place has kind of a Florida feel tbh, like Florida lite.
The areas in between are swathes of light red counties interspersed with dark blue dots in the cities. All in all it's a purple state.
The big cities like Charlotte and Raleigh are really fun to party in, but they're also really expensive, especially to live in.
The New United States, Rateria
technically time is a social construct
Yeah, it's a shame because they really blew a good shot at legitimacy that year in many ways. It's not a good look when you have candidates getting up on stage calling for the abolition of drivers' licenses.
The New United States, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots
I was thinking of going inland near the Appalachia and commuting to a city for work. I don't like cities and I especially hate suburbs. I'm half way through college for a degree in mechanical engineering. I figure it wouldn't be too hard to get a job no matter where I live. I can't wait to leave this forsaken desert
The New United States, Rateria
It's also scarcely mentioned that reparations have already been tried. The War on Poverty/Great Society was an attempt by Johnson and the Democrats at 'soft reparations' that hoped to alleviate the economic inequalities wrought on African-Americans as a result of centuries of slavery and Jim Crow. What we know now is that throwing money at complex social problems often creates perverse incentives and can deepen existing problems. These 'reparations' took a community that, despite the racism and struggles it faced, had record levels of marriage, family stability, and religiosity, and plunged it into chaos.
How about instead of perpetuating existing problems by mindlessly throwing money around, we fix the institutional problems in criminal justice and welfare? The Marxist idea of replacing the father with the state has truly failed on a massive level. No government program can replace the community of the family and the church.
Miencraft, Narland, The New United States, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots
*God's country
Pevvania
I will destroy all and any confederate sympathizers.
**The worst place on earth
Hell, I live in suburban VA and it sucks.
Rateria
CSA did nothing wrong
Miri Islands
As a teenage member of the JBS we used to hand out Pass the Poverty, Please by Patty Newman like candy
https://www.amazon.com/Pass-Poverty-Please-Patty-Newman/dp/B0007DV3R4/ref=sr_1_6?qid=1561079980&refinements=p_27%3APatty+Newman&s=books&sr=1-6&text=Patty+Newman.
It was obvious that the Great Society and the War on Poverty was an attempt to buy votes of inner city poor and the rural indigent poor to turn them red (colours were reversed back then). What a horrible time for the US --> Viet-Nam, Counter-Cultural Revolution, unabashed Marxist effrontery, dumbed-down Progressive Modern Education/New Maths, non-stop corruption scandals, race riots, constant political assassinations, hippies blowing up police stations, Helter Skelter, Steal this Book, Hare Krishnas getting sucked into jet engines etc. The dominant media (UP, API, ABC, CBS, NBC, and even MBN) touted the Great Society as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Those of us who opposed it were called racist, bigots etc. It worked on one hand in that those herded into the soon to be created HUD plantations er, housing projects or got a welfare check RFD to be rewarded to continue to do nothing with their lives, went from voting marginally or not at all to voting Democrat in order to keep their boon from the public largess. It helped create a solid voting block of Afro-Americans in the Democrat Party away from the GOP.
Pevvania, Rateria
forgive me ms obama but i have to go all out, just this once
Rateria
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Rattle snakes and alligators
Rateria
Come away! Come away!
Rateria
I've been listening to a lot of civil war era songs and Irish folk, they're quite similar.
IRA songs are the best. Give a listen to: "My Little Armalite" and "My Old Man's a Provo."
Irish-American Civil war era songs are great too. Give a listen to: "The Irish Volunteer" and "We'll Fight for Uncle Sam"
Speaking of Ireland, What do ya'll think about Irish independence? I'm in favor of as much decentralization of power as possible, but I've heard Sinn Fein, basically the party of the IRA, is quite Socialist.
Even still, my anti-authoritarianism beats out my pro-capitalism in this instance.
The New United States, Rateria
Seems like it's doing fine to me. Having lived significant portions of my life in other states and outside the US, my little, ancestral home in the "forsaken" South has easily been the most beautiful, decent, and peaceful place I've ever lived. Regardless, I love the whole country and there's good and bad all over, as far as I can tell.
If you are so keen on unionism, try not maligning a whole region of your country out of spite.
The states have a right to secession under the 10th amendment, and several states (New York, Rhode Island, and Virginia among them) specifically, explicitly reserved that right in their documents ratifying the Constitution. Heck, Robert E. Lee was taught out of a textbook [I]at West Point that secession was a constitutional right.
The Confederates weren't traitors any more than the Patriots that threw off the yolk of the British, regardless of how wrong slavery was.
It is not the norths fault that the south split their vote and then refused to accept the results of an election they participated in.
There is little comparison of substance between the south and the 13 colonies save that they were rebelling.
The colonies had no representation in parliament and tried to petition the king and parliament for the rights they were afforded from nature and natures God, and indeed the rights they were entitled to as Englishmen.
The south was represented in congress and was upset over the perceived threat against their "rights". Just as the federal government doesn't have the authority to trammel our rights neither do state governments.
As the great emancipator said:
"This is a world of compensations; and he who would be no slave, must consent to have no slave. Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it."
No man has or ever has had a right to another mans labor, let alone their life. It is against the very principle of natural law, and indeed against our country's founding creed. The south sought to continue this affront to God. And in doing so led themselves to the point that they thought that another so threatened their "right" to own another man that they broke from the union. Regardless of the legality of their rebellion its cause was not the same demand of representation and restoration of their rights that the colonies had demanded before them, but the demand of monopolization and the eternal suppression of others rights.
The south were traitors and identifying them as such is important even if it seems harsh to those living today who bear no responsibility for the sins of their fathers. They shouldn't be romanticized. They sought to preserve the institution of slavery permanently by including it in their constitution.
This is all coming from a person who only had 2 ancestors actually fight in the civil war as most of my family had fled to Zion prior to breakout of the war, an as such I see my self firmly as a mountain-westerner so this doesn't come from a bias against the south. What they did was objectively morally wrong
Miencraft, Rateria, Jadentopian Order
When Patriots said they were not traitors, I believe he meant they were not legal traitors. What you've said sounds like you're calling them traitors to the spirit of liberty and the constitution.
That's different; the former makes them the equivalent of terrorists, the latter makes them the equivalent of modern day American Socialists.
I've also heard from multiple sources that Jefferson Davis had a plan to abolish slavery. He just wanted to do so gradually, so it didn't wreck their economy.
I think a Confederacy that survived to the modern-day would look a lot more like our Libertarian utopia, at least, they'd have a greater respect for decentralization.
Which patriots? Would the real slim sh-patriots please stand up?
I have my doubts that a country that explicitly included a right to slavery in its constitution would birth a libertarian utopia. Especially given the fact that in our timeline we abolished slavery and passed the 14th amendment and it still took a century to fully implement. In a independent confederacy I think it is safe to say they would have done it slower than we did. If at all. The world is a better place thanks to the crushing of the CSA, the biggest failure of the civil war was reconstruction.
Rateria
I was actually referring to the New United States. I got you guys mixed up.
I think that the crushing of the south and forced integration, affirmative action, and anti-discrimination laws have lead to a lot of working class white resentment where none needed to be had. I agree with the part of the Civil rights act that made it illegal for state governments to pass discriminatory legislation, but telling people they must serve someone in their place of business was too far. That, coupled with busing, led to two groups of people being forced to interact with each other when they absolutely DID NOT want to. busing happened even all the way up to the 90s. This comedian, Kristina P, told a story on this once. Her school was forceably intergrated DURING the L.A. riots. Sometimes it's actually not good to force people to be together who don't want to be together.
The only reason integration was pushed by civil rights advocates is because black schools were so terrible. I'm sure they would've much rather been at a black school that was actually equally funded to a white school. Altogether, I do believe government schools shouldn't have rules defining who goes there. My problem is making kids go there who WOULD'NT HAVE in the first place.
I don't think slavery would have lasted much longer under the CSA. It was wildly unpopular outside of the region and the only reason other countries put up with it was cheap cotton. Technological innovations would have made slavery obsolete and international pressure would have made slavery diplomatically unsustainable like it did in Brazil. I think slavery would have ended before the end of the century if things ran their course. I also think segregation would have still been around till maybe the 21st century
Narland
The fiscally conservative party once again pushes for bigger deficits - https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/449808-gop-lawmakers-want-mulvaney-sidelined-in-budget-talks
Prediction: Trump wins re-election, the debt crashes the economy in his second term and some socialist idiot wins 2024 election promising free everything with Democratic majorities in Congress. However, seeing the gravity of the situation and the deepening depression, is forced to agree to an austerity program of deep spending cuts and unpopular reforms to entitlement programs. Is either primaried or defeated in the 2028 general election. The successor will not matter though, because the US will have already become a stagnant second-world country by then.
Rateria
Counter-prediction: A moderate Democrat will win the next election with a promise to end the absurdity of the current administration, no doubt out of an expectation that Democrats will have free rein to enforce their agendas; when it comes time to deliver, however, the reality will be far less glamorous. In the interest of forestalling a depression and preventing the national debt from becoming insurmountably crippling, this president would enact a series of unpopular changes, most likely involving cutting government spending across the board and raising taxes. The populace would only barely tolerate this, and America's position of primacy on the world stage would be seemingly weakened; as a result, a more radical, populist candidate (likely Republican) would win in 2024.
Pevvania, Rateria
Counter-counter prediction that Im not entirely sure about and can easily be wrong: Trump is re-elected to much outrage. Democrats try to fight it but dont do too much because most of them dont seem to have any preparation for a violent revolution or anything of the sort. Spending isnt cut at all and the border wall never happens. The economy slows down greatly, which reflects poorly on Trump. I wouldnt be surprised if he passes more gun restrictions. If he passes restrictions, libertarian-led insurrections happen. If he doesnt, these will happen when a Democrat promising even stricter restrictions follows him into office. Perhaps this Democrat is Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders.
Im honestly spitballing, but the main thing I expect is violent grassroots insurrection within the next eight years, especially within the next four.
All of this is making a Free Libertatem Commune sound even better.
Pevvania
Both could likely happen; prognosticating about American politics at this point is largely useless. Honestly, I could stomach a moderate Democrat with a Republican congress that can get major spending cuts and entitlement reforms done. We are teetering off the fiscal cliff at breakneck speed, and it'll likely be too late to stop the collapse when we realize it's too late. As a major general said, the biggest threat to US national security is the debt.
Rateria
Everybody stock up on MREs, water recyclers, gold coins, automatic weapons, and a windmill, because where we're going baby, there ain't gonna be no U.S. of A.
Rateria
I know this is wholly impractical, but I had this thought: Wouldn't it be cool if we all met up somewhere? I know we got a couple Californians, a Virginian, I'm a North Carolinian, and a few others. We could meet halfway. The geographic center of the United States is Lebanon Kansas. This would only apply to Americans obviously, unless others want to fly out.
Pevvania, Rateria
New poll in Zentari, come and vote! Also, expect poll this coming Friday too, if that's okay with you all!
https://www.nationstates.net/page=poll/p=144225
Rateria
Nope, not nope.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Thats a valid position. The main criticism of people who support a potential revolution online is that theyre all LARPers who do it to sound tough, dedicated, etc. Its also worth noting that most people arent prepared for that level of social upheaval, myself included. One significant problem with starting such a movement is that it is incredibly difficult to start a massive uprising. One person or group might do something, but its highly unlikely that others will follow.
Narland, West Smolcasm
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
We have it too good in America to warrant a revolution. Our political systems still function and we're all (relatively) fat and happy.
The people calling for a revolution don't realize what actual civil unrest looks like. Imagine your house getting shelled by artillery, car bombs, skirmishes in the street of very pissed off Americans. We're the most armed people on the planet. We can't afford a civil war again; we'd decimate ourselves.
Narland, Rateria, West Smolcasm
This is a good point. Right-libertarians are a small portion of the population, and the amount that would fight in any insurrection would be even smaller. All of the potential revolutionaries that Ive encountered are sure that Trump supporters and most Three Percenters wouldnt participate due to their Back the Blue attitudes. I agree with them on this point. Society at large would also be unwilling to fight in a hypothetical civil war, making the pool of combatants even smaller. I personally expect that anarcho-capitalists would eventually come into conflict with other libertarian-leaning factions.
I agree that things are better in the United States than in many other places. Most people dont hate the system to the point of fighting for its destruction through violent means. Some do, but the majority of those are most likely all talk and no action, being very uninformed and unprepared for any sort of societal collapse or civil war. I will say that some of the people who call for a civil war or revolution have a great deal of knowledge on the subject, but that wont guarantee anyones survival, which is a given. The people who want the revolution to happen as soon as possible are called accelerationists, and they are often looked down upon because rushing into an incredibly dangerous situation unprepared is incredibly stupid, to massively understate it. Would this conflict cripple the United States? Im sure that it would, especially if Americas enemies take advantage of it, which they will.
Narland
As much as I would love a violent uprising to overthrow and destroy the US government, it will never happen. Especially since the majority of the military is trained to be blindly obedient of whoevers in charge (despite the govt claiming they are defenders of the constitution). The people would be swiftly crushed by the government forces and the leaders hung for treason.
The government wants you to think that you can dismantle it at any time and that the will of the people will prevail. But really, the people are harmless against a military with tanks, drones, and leaders who wouldn't even hesitate to bomb their own citizens. Our 2nd amendment rights are a farce, the government knows that. I can preach all day about how I want to destroy the government but they know that Im harmless without the might of the US military. People can LARP all they want about being anti-statist revolutionary insurgents who will stop the authoritarian government, but thats what the government wants. I have no doubt the suits in DC laugh their asses off at the thought of some insurrection in the US.
If the people of America decided that they had enough of the tyranny of the government, we would have media pouring out propaganda about how the revolutionaries are communist traitors and only in it to gain power and establish a dictatorship, regardless of their actual ideology. Both parties would preach about unity and peaceful solutions so that they can go back to quietly enforcing the status quo and taking corporate checks. The ruling class will never support a revolution because they want to live their cushy and easy lifestyle. You can bet the masses of liberal billionaires and celebrities will quickly turn their backs on the people.
And a peaceful revolution? Sadly, only in dreams. I think its clear the government will ignore protests until absolutely necessary, where theyll pass some bill that sounds nice, but really, does very little. It will please the people though, because many are too focused on small issues to really want mass-change.
Im sorry that was rambly and edgy. I used to be idealistic and honestly optimistic about the state of American politics and the will of the people to progress and shed our post-9/11 friendliness for statism, but recent years have made me cynical and outright embarrassed by my country. Were too quick to accept authoritarianism and were too scared of the s-word to bring positive change, so instead, we continue to promote the status quo, disguising it behind do nothing legislation. I would love to have my mind changed and see my fellow citizens reject this, but for now, we are brainwashed by the government to believe that leftists are plotting a mass uprising and that any sort of socialist policies will bring the collapse of our civilization.
Again, sorry for rambling.
Narland, Republic Of Minerva, Rateria, West Smolcasm
I share your sentiment, but perhaps our situation is not so hopeless as you make it sound.
The state threatens our civil liberties not with sword, gun, or bomb (despite how easy that would be) but by pen and policy. This is a clear distinction made for a most deliberate reason; the state endeavors, above all else, to maintain the pretense that it governs the livelihoods - indeed, protects and cherishes the very lives and ensures the very rights - of its citizens. Much of its expenditures are dedicated to the maintenance of this fickle, fleeting illusion; so desperate is the state to keep up the appearance of being the sole thing keeping society from returning to a short and brutish state of nature that it will throw vast amounts of money it doesn't have at whatever it considers to be the most effective smokescreen. For all of its power, our government as a whole fears, above all else, not being the hero of its own story.
So we indulge it. We pretend that it is effective at what it sets out to do - indeed, to do otherwise would be to invite it to turn its vast might against us. We play its game... and, in doing so, figure out how to win. If our government wants to pretend that it has our best interests at heart, then by God, we must continually, unceasingly appeal to our own best interests in our dealings with it. We make use of any advantages and entitlements it affords us and raise hell when it tries to weasel out of the deal. And while we distract it with a need to find more pens and enact more policies, we bring people into the government with ideas and proposals of our own. If the pencil-pushers want to play a game of pretend with us, those of us who aspire to the great cause of liberty will just have to play it better.
And, in time, we will bring positive change; the ruling class may keep their cushy and easy lifestyle at the expense of the rest of us for awhile, but their weakness - which they advertise as a strength - is pretense. That, if nothing else, is something we can bludgeon them with until they're convinced that changing the status quo is in their own best interests.
Narland, Rateria, Jadentopian Order
Darn, establishing a secret police force made my civil rights go down to the point I'm a compulsory consumerist state
Miencraft, Narland, Rateria
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
You make plenty of valid points, but I disagree with some of them. I could see some defection in the military, but youre probably right. Most, of not all personnel would fight against the rebellion. Ive seen the idea that if the rebellion depicts itself as a second generation of Founding Fathers, it might win over some people, including military personnel, over, but I have my doubts. Then again, Ive seen most of the talk of a revolution from libertarians and ancaps online, so I see them as the most likely to start a war.
As for our 2nd Amendment rights being worthless as you appear to have said, this might be my main disagreement. If our government officials saw them as useless, then why would they be so eager to infringe upon them? This is most likely due to them wanting to prevent incidents of gun violence. I understand this goal, but disagree with their approach, which is civilian disarmament. Part of me does believe that many gun-control-supporting politicians have some degree of fear of an armed populace. I cant say that I know for sure because none of them have ever publicly acknowledged the idea of being violently overthrown, and I dont think they will for the time being. I also think that if Americans were less armed and this right was not enumerated in the Bill if Rights, we would see people getting arrested for Twitter posts and making their dogs do Nazi salutes as a joke, which we have seen in other countries.
With all of this being said, violent revolution isnt the best approach, at least not right now. Any violent insurrection would lack popular support, and I think that all of us here know that. That combined with being outmatched by the governments superior weaponry and personnel count would certainly spell doom for any revolution. Revolutions have been won before, generally through guerrilla warfare. If a civil war started tomorrow, guerrilla warfare would be the best approach, but fighters would lack advantages that organizations such as the Peoples Liberation Army, Viet Cong, Americas Continental military and Afghani Mujahideen had. Our government knows the land they would be fighting in, would most likely have popular support, and have better technology than the government forces opposing the guerrillas that I mentioned before. I think that this is my main agreement with you.
I also agree that too many Americans are statist-learning. This would certainly need to change before any sort of major revolution, peaceful or otherwise, could happen. I do believe that people in office will listen to constituents, but this would require mass participation. I will use the gun control debate as an example. Massive participation from organizations and individuals on both sides of the debate has led to laws being passed. We now have laws that were advocated for through public participation. Most of this is in the state level, because the heating up of the debate has led to stagnation in this kind of legislation on the federal level. To prove that public participation can change things and that officials will listen if enough effort is put into it, I point to assault weapons bans, magazine capacity limits, red flag laws, and NFA items bans in certain states. For the pro-gun side, the main manifestations of participation are constitutional carry laws in fourteen states including Idaho, Arizona, Alaska, Arkansas, and Missouri, and laws that fly right in the face of the National Firearms Act of 1934 such as the one in Kansas. Sheriffs who refuse to enforce newer gun control laws in several counties of Colorado and either Oregon or Washington (I cant remember which one off the top of my head, so someone might have to dig for it.)
Part of my post deleted, but Ill try to remake it. You could easily say that my gun control examples are proof that many Americans advocate for more statism, and I agree, but it still serves my point that public participation can do things. People must be active in order to even begin to change things. I hope that I can at least help you to not feel so hopeless. Ive had those times too, and I still feel that way sometimes, but I try not to.
I think Im more in line with you in this discussion. I believe that we must make an effort to actually do something. Even if its something little such as signing petitions, voting, and trying to change the minds of close friends, its still better than sitting around and complaining while claiming that doing so will save the world. I personally should do more myself, but Id say that I still do more than some people. Im glad all of us could have these discussions. It helps keep me sharp and shows that I can advocate for my positions.
I dont think that I got to address everything, but I spent over an hour on this, and Im happy that Im capable of writing something like this and engaging in stimulating discussion with people that I respect and will listen to.
Miencraft, Narland, West Smolcasm
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Unpopular opinion: highly caffeinated energy drinks and tablets should be age restricted.
Not ALL of them, but anything over 190 mg per can/tablet.
I'm saying this as a person who has abused the hell out of caffeine products since high school. I was consuming upwards of 800-1000 mgs a day. I've recently started experiencing heart palpitations and it's no doubt due to the caffeine and several other substances I've abused over the years.
Narland, Rateria
learn some self control idiot
I know that was in jest, but will you please not call me an idiot. It brings up some very unpleasant memories in my life. I know you didn't mean anything by it though.
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.