The following is interesting on several levels:
First, contemplate the atrocious – borderline illiterate – construction of this instruction; the Cloverific short-bus cadences:
“That means you are a member of our country.”
“How can you be a part of giving back for the freedom you have?”
“Good citizens take part in their community… that you show love to your country.”
“Being a member of our country is a wonderful privilege.”
Gawd.
And here’s a sample from an adult Clover:
“Eric if you are afraid of a visual search outside your car then yes maybe you do belong in jail. I could care less. Yes Eric you are all for criminal rights. The innocent driver that just wants to get to where they are going safely is something you object to.”
And, this:
“Eric there is no help for people like you that are mentally insane. I talked about a simple stop on a public highway with the police talking to you for seconds. Then you bring up a cop breaking into your house? Eric if it is not bad enough to talk to you in your car that you have to bring up something completely different to prove some kind of point then you need mental help.”
Italics added. Not that they’re necessary.
No doubt, EPautos’ resident Clover was exposed to primers much like the one above.
Remember: These documents are written by educators. Well, by government school apparatchiks. Manufacturers of future Clovers.
How is it that adults who’ve not yet learned to write coherently (let alone correctly) are in a position to “teach” children anything?
But, leaving aside the clear evidence of failure to master basic English sentence construction, there is the sinister undertow of the message itself:
“Rights are special privileges the government gives you.”
And which, being mere privileges, the government may also rescind at its pleasure. In one glib sentence, this document throws every precept of Western civilization in the woods. Your children are taught – told – that they have no rights. They’re merely permitted some things. For now. Subject to whatever restrictions and conditions the government – meaning, people who control the enforcement mechanisms of organized state violence – deem appropriate and acceptable.
These are the source of waters of random, probable cause-free stop-and-searches (and much worse to come). Of the defunct Second, Fourth, Fifth and various other amendments – which articulated sacrosanct, inviolable rights … not “special privileges.”
The latter leads to random checkpoints, arbitrary searches, peremptory seizure of persons and property without proof of guilt having been established in a court of law, the evisceration of due process generally, the presumption of guilt rather the innocence – and, inevitably, to outright murder of innocents. After all, why not?
The former – rights (and general insistence they be respected) is the one – the only – thing that can prevent all that by precluding all that. Which is precisely why the very concept of rights must the stamped out, most especially in the minds of the young.
“Laws are made to help you and keep you safe.”
At gunpoint.
And what if one prefers not to be “helped”? Nor to “help” others… at gunpoint? To be left alone – and to leave others alone?
Who gets to decide what’s “safe” – and by what right?
“Being a good citizen means obeying the law.”
Submit. Obey. Because obedience is the ultimate good.
Do not question.
Ever.
Thus: I don’t make the laws, I just enforce them. Or, as the saying attributed to a camp guard at Treblinka put it: Hier ist kein warum.
There is no why here.
Do as ordered. Or else.
There are additional injunctions about not merely the obligation to pay taxes but that children ought to look forward to the day when they are privileged to pay them.
Double gawd.
And they ask me why I drink… .
If you value independent media, please support independent media. We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer to avoid PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: EPautos stickers are free to those who sign up for a $5 monthly recurring donation to support EPautos, or for a one-time donation of $10 or more. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address for us to mail the thing to!)
Robert Higgs with a good list of what Bastiat would consider ‘unseen’ costs of income redistribution.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1155
Wow, PtheB, what a great resource! Never had heard of this Higgs guy before….but he appears to be an ally! Thanks for posting the link!
Yes, check out his books, such as “Crisis and Leviathan.” If you were close enough I would lend you mine.
Sweet Jesus,This is disgusting,but to be honest not shocking really.The really scary thing is that parents will not find any problem with this.
As @moleman did, the first thing I noticed – and the scariest – was the complete twisting around of the whole original concept of the United States: that rights come from God, not from the government, the idea being that government has no right to take them away. If you don’t believe that, then I’m not sure what basis for protest you would have.
Eric, is this a real sample? If so, and this is what the upcoming generation is being fed, then we are in much more trouble than we realized.
“Rights are special privileges that the government gives you.”
Sadly, that is what the overlords now believe, and how they operate. They grant special privileges to favored groups; and grant them special status and a higher level of protection (e.g. kill a queer, and you’ll get a stiffer penalty than if you killed a normal person)
Our Founders acknowledged and respected that our inalienable rights came from God. Our current gov’t wants to be god- and now they have established themselves as the one who determines what rights you have.
Morning, Mole!
As you know, I am not religious – but your point in re making the state/government “god” is spot on. To put a finer point on it, the people governing us believe themselves to be gods. They expect – they demand – absolute obedience.
And soon, worship.
G’day, Eric!
Heh, yeah- that’s pretty much the way it’s been all down through history- those who usurp power ultimately want to be gods, and so end up demanding unconditional obedience and worship.
I always find it interesting, how other libertarians and I often come to the same conclusions- even when, like yourself, they may not believe in God. We come from opposite sides of the coin, but arrive at many of the same conclusions- which I believe is proof of the validity and ultimate truth of the concepts in which we believe; i.e. those concepts are so sound; and have been refined of error and corruption, that they are undeniable whether one has come to see and accept them from the revealed precepts of divine revelation; or from the observation of the workings of those precepts in the physical realm. Either way, we are both men who refuse to deny the obvious truths; whereas Clovers find those truth inconvenient or distasteful, and so deny them, in an attempt to make the world into an alternate reality, in which they or their elected representatives decree what shall be.
Are you wasting your time?
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/11/paul-rosenberg/why-i-stopped-spending-my-time-on-politics/
That was a great article, PtheB.
“Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them … The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”
That puts my sentiments into words, exactly.
It reminded me of what I’d ee every day back in NY. Some guy who pays $12K in property taxes just to stay in his “own home” is demolishing a backyard shed, because the local Nazis decree that one may only have one shed on their property; not two. They say jump; the people not only say “How high?”, but actually pay the guy who barks the orders at them.
Those are the people who vote. Funny, too- over the years I’ve had numerous people try and convince me that I should vote. Hmm…even if I would have, I don’t think Harry Browne or Ron Paul would have won; and if they had have, they still could not have undone the damage that has been done by all the elected traitors over the last 100 years- nor could they engender a love of freedom in the hearts of the average citizen- and that is primarily what we need- and without which we will continue our present course of slavery and war- at home and abroad.
I’m proud that I’ve never voted. I can have a clear conscience, because at least I’ve never given formal assent to the fiends who occupy political offices. Rosenberg is right on the money about disobedience. I’ve always felt that I’ve accomplished more by bucking their system, than anything else.
“Rights are special privileges that the government gives you.”
That really is disturbing. Emma seems like she is in the first few years of elementary school. I guess the public school system starts indoctrinating them with the clover mindset at a very young age.
Just as I thought, I’m just your average libertarian
Average Liberal: ‘I don’t have a problem limiting government…’ AHH HA HA HA HA HA
‘Libertarians are just as weak minded as the rest of us. If we can take them out of context and make them look bad on television, they’ll be even more vicious towards one another than we are towards them.
This is why we get our news from Comedy Central! – Stop Free Keene!
These egomaniacs are so full of envy and self hatred, that they just can’t wait for an opportunity to smash one another publicly. For all Free Keene’s talk of “principles.” the truth is principles never come into play for most libertarians. They are spiteful, envious, self loathing little brats who will throw one another under the bus just because they think it’s the “cool” thing to do that day.’
@Brandonjin
state of nature rights are defined as: Those things that one would have were there no government.
– I should have just said that, instead of the 5,000 words and 17 seques I used in a failed attempt to say the same thing.
No we’re not wolves, but if there were no government, I think some segment of humanity would choose to live as wolves do, and I’m troubled that freedom advocates seem unwilling to consider this is something that can be accommodated in a limited way.
Arguably no other animal on earth has been as important to humans as the wolf. They were the founders of Rome, itself. Isn’t our society nearer to Rome than anything else in contemporary existence?
Most importantly, the wolf was the first animal to ever be domesticated by man, a process still shrouded in mystery that took place well over 10,000 years ago. They have been our dearest friends and direst enemies, and yet there is still so much we don’t know about them.
I compare humans to wolves as a thought experiment proxy for what options we would have, in the complete absence of government. In an anarchy, in other words.
In the case of wolves there are:
1 completely wild loners, and completely wild packs that have no contact with humans
2 wild wolves that have limited contact with humans and have adapted their behavior because of this contact
3 domesticated formerly wild wolves that live among humans and are called dogs
4 hybrid domestic canines that are half wolf, half dog
5 returning wolves – such as the black wolf, which are part wild wolf, and part domesticated dog that reverted to feral status and is breeding with wild wolves
The world seems fine with their being these 5 distinct modes of existence for wolves/dogs.
Is it really that much of a leap of faith and reasoning to consider there might likewise be 5 distinct modes of existence for civilized/wild humans?
The question I have is: should all topics be discussed with the same rigor and intelligence as automobiles, motorcycles, and politics. Or is joyriding a segway into a wide range of technical discussions outside the scope of this blog?
Some specifications on the latest makes and models of Canis Lupis:
10
Black wolves don’t occur naturally. A Stanford study found that the mutation responsible for black fur occurs only in dogs, so black wolves are the result of gray wolves breeding back with domestic canines.
The mutation is a dominant trait, like dark hair in humans, and is passed down to the majority of offspring. It is not entirely clear what benefit black fur has for the animals; they do not seem to be more successful hunters, but do show a marked improvement in immunity to certain infections. Black wolves are far more common in North America than they are in the rest of the world.
9
A large percentage of coyotes are actually wolf hybrids.In areas where wolves have been largely eliminated, coyotes have thrived. Over the last few years, large populations have moved east, into suburban areas and even major cities like New York and Chicago.
Genetic testing on 100 coyotes caught in Maine revealed that 22 had some wolf ancestry. Coywolves are generally bigger than regular coyotes, but smaller than wolves, and are said to be extremely cunning.
They exhibit a fearlessness of human civilization as seen in coyotes, but seem to maintain the wolf’s pack hunting instinct and high level of aggression
8
Cannibalism is common amongst wolves. Wolves are extremely opportunistic carnivores, and they will not miss a chance at a meal. Living in some of the most unforgiving terrain on the planet, they are sometimes forced to eat sick or injured members of the pack, and any wolf that has died is generally fair game.
Wolves caught in snare traps must be very quickly attended to by hunters or they will be torn apart by other wolves. When two packs come into contact, very often they will engage in a fatal battle, with the alpha males most often being killed. Sometimes they are even eaten by their own offspring.
7
The heaviest wolves can approach 200lbs. The now extinct dire wolves as seen in Game of Thrones commonly weighed 250lbs. Wolves increase exponentially in size the further they are from the equator. Wolves of the tropics are often no larger than medium sized dogs, but those of the far north in Alaska, Canada, and Russia can be in excess of 120lbs.
The largest wolf ever killed in North America weighed 175lbs. In Ukraine, a still more massive wolf was killed that weighed 190lbs.
6
Rabid wolves are extremely dangerous. Wolves can catch rabies from other species such as raccoons and fox but are not themselves carriers. Wolves fly almost immediately into a rage when they contract the disease. A significant number of attacks on humans are tied directly to rabies.
Although there are treatments available for people bitten by rabid animals, the wolf’s propensity is to bite near the head and neck, and often times the virus reaches the human brain before medical help can be sought.
5
American Wolves are less likely to attack humans than elsewhere in the world. There are very few verifiable records of wolf attacks in the US and Canada, but in Europe and Asia, wolves are far nastier.
Historical accounts indicate over 3,000 people killed in France between 1580-1830. In the Middle Ages throughout Europe, special structures were built along highways for travelers to take refuge from roving packs.
The wolves of India and Russia are also particularly well known to claim human victims. During World War I, soldiers from the Allied and Central Forces were occasionally forced to join forces fighting off starving wolves attracted by the scent of blood on the battlefield.
4 Wolves find dogs delicious. Although they are closely related (practically the same species) and can readily interbreed, many wolves consider dogs prey items. In a fight, even large dogs are outmatched, as wolves of equal size have larger teeth and a more devastating bite.
In Russia, where stray dogs have become a serious problem since the fall of the Soviet empire, they have become a staple in the diet of wolves.
Often, a single wolf will solicit a dog to follow, and lead it into an ambush by the remainder of the pack. Only the largest and fiercest livestock guardians such as Caucasian Shepherds generally have a chance defending themselves
3
The black plague put humans on the menu for wolves. The Black Plague devastated Europe in the Middle Ages, which may explain the recent strained dynamic between wolves and humans.
With corpses stacking up faster than they could be buried or burned, it was only natural that wolves would gather at the edges of cities to feast on the dead.
In doing so, whole generations developed a taste for human flesh and likely began viewing humans as prey items. No doubt horrified, the highly superstitious people began spinning tales, contributing to already prevalent beliefs of werewolves, vampires, and ghouls.
2
Smallpox also increased the amount of human flesh in many wolves diets. Smallpox brought to the Americas by European settlers had a devastating effect on the natives. Having had no contact with the disease in the past, their immune systems were defenseless, and of those who contracted it, 80 to 90 percent died.
A Swedish naturalist in 1748, records that in the period preceding the Revolutionary War smallpox was at a particularly devastating point along the east coast.
Sensing an easy meal, wolves invaded Indian villages, devouring the bodies and helpless sick. Although many Native Americans revered wolves, they also had a healthy instinctual fear of them, especially in wooded areas, where one could encounter them unexpectedly and at close range.
1
Wolves eat their prey alive. Wolves will eat nearly anything to stay alive, but their preferred meal is large ungulates such as deer, moose, and elk. Unlike bears or big cats, and similar to humans, wolves do not have an anatomical weapon capable of quickly dispatching such large animals.
Wolves kill by attrition, the entire pack swarming and slashing at the haunches and groin, ripping away at the legs and the gut, until their victim collapses from exhaustion. They begin eating immediately, even though the prey is often still alive for quite some time.
– – –
Bloodhound Gang – Bad Touch Novelty Song
Sweat baby sweat baby sex is a Texas drought. Me and you do the kind of stuff that only Prince would sing about. So put your hands down my pants and I’ll bet you’ll feel nuts.
Yes I’m Siskel, yes I’m Ebert and you’re getting two thumbs up.
You’ve had enough of two-hand touch you want it rough you’re out of bounds. I want you smothered want you covered like my Waffle House hashbrowns. Come quicker than FedEx never reach an apex just like Coca-Cola stock. you are inclined To make me rise an hour early just like Daylight Savings Time.
You and me baby ain’t nothin’ but mammals. So let’s do it like they do on the Discovery Channel. Gettin’ horny now.
– – –
“Closer” – A 9 Inch Nails Brutally Honest Love Song
You let me violate you, you let me desecrate you. You let me penetrate you, you let me complicate you. Help me I broke apart my insides, help me I’ve got no soul to sell. Help me the only thing that works for me, help me get away from myself. I want to fuck you like an animal. I want to feel you from the inside. My whole existence is flawed. You get me closer to god.
You can have my isolation, you can have the hate it brings.
You can have my absence of faith, you can have my everything. Help me tear down my reason, help me it’s your sex I can smell. Help me you make me perfect, help me become somebody else.
Through every forest, above the trees. Within my stomach, scraped off my knees. I drink the honey inside your hive.
You are the reason I stay alive.
It’s good to work out the amygdala. Its unfair whatever I’ve said. Because we’re stuck with this language suited only to Elois, and what I’m bringing up for discussion are things that would pertain to hypothetically good Morlocks.
Morlocks who capable of living as ethical anarchists, and not survive through human cannibalism of course.
I’ve just been typing things in the reply box, don’t take of this seriously. It’s amusing to play the Morlock and observe everyone trying to respond to uncharted sharkisms in frenzied newspeak Eloi mode.
This will come in handy should I ever attempt to discuss my daughter born out of wedlock. To use one of David’s favorite verbs, it’s a story filled with nuancing.
Most popular media freeloader sites in Germany
Rank among all sites in Germany
#15 Xham… adult videos, photos, dating …
#27 Streamcloud .eu movie streaming
#34 Youp… watch streamed adult clips
#36 Kinox . to online movie streams
#58 Movie4k .to movie & tv streams
– I had assumed high traffic guaranteed revenue, but from what I hear among independent libertarian bloggers, that’s not the case. Is this explained by economic warfare.
– I do find pay sites like google play, amazon prime, and such sites useless. All they want to do is force me down various paths of rigamarole and not provide my content. Fortunately I live with a few Eloi Weena’s who have the patience of Job and can order my things for a buck or maybe two at the most. Not me, I get Morlock rage and consider hulksmashing the Galaxy Tabs.
The amygdala in 5 minutes
Amygdala hijacking – Don’t let it happen to you.
Eloi: Political Correctness ‘Triggering’ Dangerous Herd-like Mentality
Eloi – The Time Machine
I wonder what the average Eloi dandy thinks about Cosby? I see his reruns have been unpersoned from our cable channels. I guess separation of commerce and state is another forgotten percept.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2gHwCOL4YA
Chinese citizens gather to watch US debt reach 18 trillion
http://www.theonion.com/articles/chinese-citizens-gather-in-beijing-square-to-watch,37450/
The truth about worthless US and EU currency reserves
http://www.theburningplatform.com/tag/hugo-salinas-price/
The bald truth is that $12 trillion dollars in international monetary reserves is the imperial tribute extracted from all the countries that do not issue a reserve currency, and delivered to the countries that issue the reserve currencies, in the course of the last 43 years since 1971.
It cannot be anything other than imperial tribute, because those funds represent bonds that will never be paid. Exports exchanged for bonds that will never be paid are tribute which the exporting world has delivered to the United States and Europe.
The monetary reserves of the Mexican central bank are included in the above-mentioned sum; which means that Mexico extends credit, mainly to the US, because the majority of reserves in Banco de Mexico are invested in dollar bonds.
Extending credit means that Mexico has not been paid what it is owed. Mexicans are financing the US, Europe and others who issue reserve currencies, to the extent to which the Mexican central bank holds reserves in bonds denominated in dollars, euros and other currencies.
Since August 1971, Mexico, like most other countries of the World ceased to have the option of receiving gold in payment of their favorable balances of trade. Since there was no more payment in gold, the world had no option but to grant credit while it waited for the real payment from the deadbeat reserve currency nations – which has not arrived, and never will arrive.
– if you want to really strike a blow for morality. stop using federal reserve notes entirely. find an honest ethical way to exchange value for value. every dollar you hold in your hand. every digital dollar you move around using debit cards and electronic dollar payments. is evidence of a massive swindle by the reserve nations from the exporting nations. a swindle that often results in real harm of starvation and life threatening poverty for everyone in the world except the societies of the elite western crooks like you and me.
this is the root of all the corruptions you complain about. strike at this root, instead of hacking at the branches or obsessing over the leaves.
Adult? Are you sure? 😉
No doubt though, a c-lover child would be just mashing keys. Oh.. wait..
Most likely dreams them up for the curriculum. I wouldn’t let him operate a typewriter.
Sure c-lover, the ones written by grabbermint or the ones cops make up on the spot?
I cause no harm, nor threat of harm to anybody’s life, liberty, property or Rights and, will continue to do so with infinite impunity. That is my absolute, fundamental and therefore unalienable Right.
Those that wish to impede this Right know they’re doing the opposite and deserve everything they engender. The gloves are off and the steel gauntlets are on.
Note: I’m using hyphenated c-lover as the unadulterated version seems to have vanished some my posts to the ether. No, Mr. Spam Filter, I don’t trust you anymore 😉
What a primer. You have to look at it and ponder what it means a bit. They’d probably be better off in a real prison segregated by age. At least they’d learn some manual labor skills. Really learn about getting along with others. With survival. What an amazing thing really.
Hier ist kein warum – Roderick Long
http://aaeblog.com/2010/02/17/hier-ist-kein-warum/
At least the girl Elois are cute
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ReKHwUFG140/TjAbDUl-bpI/AAAAAAAAJuM/c_pgynL1v8Y/s640/Eloi.jpg
Well in 1960s films anyway, not so much in real life.
Lots of good comments in here.
In an institute of “higher” learning, I was taught the following:
All rights, even state of nature rights (there are different kinds of rights you know), can only exist if granted by a provider.
A gazelle that can’t outrun a cheetah has no right to life. Its body must provide the right.
Why is it that Americans have the right to a phone but no right to live to the age of 250? – You can only provide phones.
What do you guys think?
I’m glad I believe in God-given rights. He is my provider.
My rights may be violated, but that does not change the fact of their existence.
“A gazelle that can.t outrun a cheetah has no right to life. Its body must provide the right.”
Somewhere in there is a lesson about government’s right to exist only because people don’t kill all of those who own, run, and operate it.
Why is it that Americans have the right to a phone but no right to live to the age of 250? . You can only provide phones.
See above. If people resist government in mass, phones cannot be provided.
Furthermore, we have every right to live to 250, the execution of it is difficult, like many other things.
“A gazelle that can’t outrun a cheetah has no right to life. Its body must provide the right.”
That sounds like “Might makes right” to me. So Lincoln was ‘right’ that the southern states had no ‘right’ to secede, because they didn’t succeed?
PtB – that sounds like “Might makes right” to me.
Sort of. What is right? By what standard?
Ultimately, in the end, it is only about who is willing to do what the others will not. Morality is just a handicap it the big picture, thus the sociopath/psychopaths win as long as the prey are weak and unwary.
It’s not right, just reality.
For me, “right” means according to God’s standard, as revealed in Scripture. Primarily the Hebrew Scriptures, with some modifications in the New Covenant.
I don’t believe there is any ‘natural’ law, only vestiges of the image of God in which Adam (man) was created. Some parts are still fairly universal, e.g., murder, but even that is lost in some cultures.
Ahrg. Religious.
No further interaction required. Carry on.
Hi Brandon,
Several options here. The religious one’s obvious – but ultimately relies on “so it is written” (that is, on faith).
I take the position that rights are a kind of social keystone without which civil society cannot exist. If I do not wish to be beaten, robbed, caged, ordered about (and so on) it seems to me I owe the same consideration to other people. Rights may not be real in the sense that gravity is real, but hypocrisy is real. If one wishes to have peace, one cannot expect others to do without it.
Problems arise, of course, when some people refuse to abide by these “house rules.” Or do not comprehend them. Clover, for example.
Thus, the dilemma.
A group of conscious devotees of the NAP could probably co-exist on that basis. But, inevitably, along comes a spider… or rather, a Clover.
This is why there is (historically) an ebb and flow between freedom and not-freedom.
Most humans do not understand – or (worse) value – freedom. Those who do must be ever vigilant against those who do not. Sometimes, our side wins. More often than not, the other side does.
@Eric-
I wrote my comment before I read yours. I didn’t realize you already addressed the religion angle.
I suspect that if a group of Christian libertarians and secular libertarians were to live side by side, we’d get along just fine. In that sense, I agree that religion isn’t required for someone to be non-aggressive.
The real question is why it is moral to be a non-aggressor. It seems like, in your post, you implicitly admit that it isn’t really a moral issue. Its purely pragmatic. You want to be left alone, so you’ll leave others alone, as a practical matter. OK, fine. And I believe you. But, that’s still just pragmatism. There’s no absolute reason why politicians and their hired thugs (police officers, soldiers, IRS workers, and the like) are morally wrong.
Interestingly, from what I understand, even the more Deistic founding fathers recognized the importance of Christianity in society and that divine revelation is the only rational basis for human rights. I’m less and less of a fan of “the Founding Fathers” as a group the more I read, but I still think this is worth noting.
Is any of this proof of Christianity? Not really. But I’m convinced that it is the only absolute basis for freedom in society. Despite the fact that there are plenty of agnostics and atheists on this board that have more of what I would consider to be a Christian political viewpoint than the average evangelical does. The only reason you guys are (mostly) right about politics is because you are wrong about religion.
Think about this for a minute. In Christianity you have a creator who is all powerful, all knowing, and all good. God sets the rules. Since he knows everything, since he created everything, and since there is no being more worthy than him to set the moral standards, we trust that he knows what he’s doing. Mind you, there are certain things I don’t understand. I don’t understand why God told the Israelites to destroy the Canaanites, for instance. But I know that God has the right to execute judgment for wickedness and that he used his Chosen Nation to do so at times (and for those heretical pseudo-Christian scumbags who try to use verses like this to justify the US government’s acts of murder and violence around the world, they should repent and trust Jesus instead of trusting their stupid flag). Do I like this? Do I take joy in it? Not really. I trust God because he knows better than I do. The non-aggression principle, as a general principle, is stated multiple times in scripture. We aren’t supposed to steal, we aren’t supposed to murder, we aren’t supposed to kidnap, we aren’t supposed to assault, and there is nothing in the Bible that makes exceptions to these moral laws if you are “government”. Most Christians think Romans 13 does make said exceptions (or they are too stupid to realize that their position requires an exception.) Deuteronomy 17 says they are wrong.
On the other hand, if darwinism is true and there is no God (note that I am talking about atheistic evolution here, not theistic evolution, which is a different subject), there is no absolute moral standard at all. “Survival of the fittest.” If some people are fit enough to murder, steal, etc. with impunity, what right do we have to complain about that? They’re simply being the most fit. And if some people are brilliant enough to not only create massive gangs that murder and steal, but also are brilliant enough to persuade the masses to accept their murdering and stealing as legitimate, aren’t they the fittest? Aren’t they just doing what their biology tells them to do, surviving and thriving? Who cares about everyone else? WHat objective reason should make you care, if you have the power?
I would submit that the fact that our consciences typically don’t conform to darwinism is one piece of evidence that darwinism is false. Romans 1 says that we all know the creator at some level. No, I can’t prove this definitively to be true, not empirically at any rate. Its more consistent than any of the alternatives, ESPECIALLY if one loves liberty. Heck, I’ll even say it was more consistent even if the Theonomists are interpreting the Bible correctly and I am not.
@Brandonjin- “All rights, even state of nature rights, can only exist if granted by a provider.”
I actually agree with that line. And I submit that God granted us our rights, as revealed in Holy Scripture (the Bible.) Atheism logically leads to a viewpoint that the collective is God, because they don’t really have anything else. If there is no God, everything is permissible, and thus only collective-granted privledges are ours for “rights.”
David – I am in basic agreement with you also. I don’t even know what “state of nature” rights are. I submit that TJ was right, even if he didn’t actually believe it himself, when he said in the Declaration the our rights were endowed to us by our Creator.
I don’t know for sure what “state of nature” rights are either…
I suspect that Thomas Jefferson and the other deists, as well as proponents of two-kingdoms theology (I could be wrong on this point), would say that God reveals our rights to us through nature rather than through propositional revelation. However, despite the fact that these people would say that those rights aren’t specifically derived from the Bible, and that we can figure them out rationally, they’d still ultimately say that those rights come from God.
As a Calvinist presuppositionalist, I still see big problems with a deistic viewpoint, but at least deism gives some semblance of basis for why we should take “natural law” seriously, and it does give us some hope of finding moral certainty, despite the very tenuous nature of any absolute claim to have found it. I don’t see how agnosticism or atheism gives a similar reason for why we should take natural law seriously.
Hi David,
” Atheism logically leads to a viewpoint that the collective is God, because they don’t really have anything else. If there is no God, everything is permissible, and thus only collective-granted privileges are ours for “rights.”
With all due respect, atheism logically leads to the conclusion that there is no god; it certainly does not logically lead to the viewpoint that the “collective” is god. In fact, atheism logically leads to a rejection of the legitimacy of the state, and it’s supposed authority. Unfortunately, just like most Christians, many atheists are Statists. However, like you, who consider Statist Christians to be deficient in their understanding of Christianity, I consider Statist atheists to be illogical.
Atheists do not believe in the legitimacy of religion because they consider the beliefs that underlie religion to be myths. Logically, atheists should reject the State because the beliefs that lend supposed legitimacy to the State are definitely myths.
Logically, your claim that we have rights because God made us that way is no different than the claim that we have rights because it is in our nature to have them. Both claims are equally unprovable. Now, I believe that it is in our nature to be social beings that cooperate with each other for mutual benefit. Of course there are many people who choose violence over cooperation, however they are a minority (and many of them gravitate towards the State). So, as Eric explained, rights are “natural” in the sense that they are the necessary foundation of social cooperation. You claim that this formulation is merely pragmatic, and thus invalid. However, an appeal to God is also merely pragmatic, as it solves the supposed logical problem of “absolute authority”.
Of course, none of this is to say that you are wrong to hold your religious beliefs so devoutly, I actually admire that. I am an atheist, but I am not anti-religious. However, your appeal to God is logically indistinct from my appeal to “nature”. Yet, you claim people cannot have rights or be moral without God. With all due respect, that claim is false.
Kind Regards,
Jeremy
@Jeremy- I’m not saying you can’t be moral as an atheist. What I’m saying is that without God the term “morality” makes no sense. What’s the standard? Nature? Animals do things to each other in nature that we all know would be abhorrent were humans to do them to other humans.
Why is it morally wrong to murder, steal, cheat, kidnap, etc? I believe it is because God, the eternal lawgiver, says so. But for the atheist, what? I don’t see how evolutionary biology gives us any morals that we have to obey. Survival of the fittest reigns supreme in that case.
My problem with Christian statists is that they, in many cases, actually worship two gods. If we’re using “statist” broadly just to mean anyone who supports the existance of the State, I would not say that all statists worship two gods, but many do. Furthermore, all statists have a moral system that isn’t internally consistent, and I would also argue doesn’t fit with scripture. From an atheist standpoint though, I’m really not sure why the state “shouldn’t exist. Why not?
Dear David,
Thanks for responding.
“What I’m saying is that without God the term “morality” makes no sense.”
I believe that humans are naturally inclined toward voluntary cooperation for mutual benefit. If this were not so, none of us would be here today. If I am correct, morality would develop naturally as a means of tempering the aberrant, but real, tendency of some humans to favor violence and predation over cooperation. But, social opprobrium would be heaped upon those who choose violence. In this way, the evolution of moral standards, based on human nature, makes perfect sense.
“Why is it morally wrong to murder, steal, cheat, kidnap, etc? I believe it is because God, the eternal lawgiver, says so.”
It is morally wrong to murder, steal, cheat, kidnap, etc because those actions undermine the moral systems that develop naturally as a result of human cooperation. I recognize that, to many, this is an unsatisfactory argument. However, it is no less satisfactory than the argument that “these things are wrong because God says so.” Invoking God does not solve the problem.
“Survival of the fittest reigns supreme.”
What if the “fittest’ are those who cooperate the best; those who enhance the lives of others through innovation? Your understanding of “fittest” is extremely narrow.
“From an atheist standpoint though, I’m really not sure why the state “shouldn’t exist. Why not?”
Because an atheist should reject obedience to authority based on myth. The legitimacy of the State is based entirely on myth (or, if you prefer, lies). “The just powers of government derive from the consent of the governed”. This is a lie, nobody has granted meaningful consent. “We are the government”. This is a lie, for proof consider the fact that I cannot legally kidnap my neighbor’s child for smoking dope and lock him in a cage, but government can. Government can be legally limited. This is a lie, for proof see my and Tor’s previous posts on this subject, etc…
Kind Regards,
Jeremy
Hello everyone, thanks for the replys.
In this class, state of nature rights are defined as: Those things that one would have were there no government.
So perhaps the Earth, the sun, etc.
I did not know this would turn religious. I figured the main reason I was taught this was so that I’d “learn” that everything I have is provided by someone (Government?) “You didn’t build that!”. Though I suppose the lesson is correct because TPTB could easily do whatever the hell they want to me.
And the gazelle rationale can be applied so broadly that I’m not sure its practical. I have the right to live under a non-tyrannical government, or no government even, but only if my mind and body provide it. So if I cannot protect myself from my rights being violated, by this rationale, I have no right to any rights. Pretty much what everyone was saying. And Brent, good point on the phones thing. I guess rights are completely subject to the environment, though I wish it weren’t that way.
@PTB, by this logic, I guess so. If the south had won they would have the right the secede.
@Me2, Yes, morality is a handicap. You’ll notice those who are most immoral are the ones who own us all, in government and the corporatocracy. See part of David’s comment.
@Eric, yes, there is always an ebb and flow… when will humanity grow beyond it? Societies start small, with a few strong-willed people. They produce, the civilization grows, and then there is enough surplus wealth to sustain those who are unproductive, which are the early clovers, the clovers vote for more centralized power, it collapses, and only the strong are left to start the cycle over.
But you once said, that when the new cycle begins, the baseline of freedom is always a bit higher than before. So maybe we’ll get it right one day. Sucks being born into this part of our current cycle though.
@David, you’re right. They don’t care, they have no reason to care. They won, that is why they’re at the top, in control. Brilliance, not your local school teacher clover of course, but the ones up top. They did it right, and they certainly are the fittest for this environment. Look at what they’ve done? The position they’re in. Now, I do feel they are morally wrong, because they harm others, or threaten others. Someone who is moral would not harm or threaten others to benefit themselves, I don’t think. If God is real, then I guess things will be better after this life.
I’d love to know what it would be like if a collection of moral people were all that was left, and no clovers ever spawned. Thank you all for the comments.
“Under the Obama administration, both the Department of Education and the Department of Justice have been leaning on public schools around the country to reduce what they call the “disproportionate” numbers of black male students who are punished for various offenses in schools.
Under an implicit threat of losing their federal subsidies, the Minneapolis Public Schools have agreed to reduce the disparity in punishment of black students by 25 percent by the end of this school year, and then by 50 percent, 75 percent and finally 100 percent in each of the following years. In other words, there are now racial quota limits for punishment in the Minneapolis schools.”
See Thomas Sowell on LRC today: http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/11/thomas-sowell/punishment-by-quota-in-schools/
Some of this is an effect of the increasing feminization of our schools (Fred Reed had written a good article on this). Women by nature are more risk-averse and conformist than men, and expect others around them to behave that way too. As the teaching profession has become more female dominated, boys are being forced to behave like good little girls, not run around, and get rewarded for effort rather than original thought and results. The outcome is a sissified society that lets big brother decide for them.
Just one good reason why women’s suffrage was a bad idea. If there is going to be a vote, it should be limited to 1 per household, with the head of the house doing the voting. Better yet, eliminate the sham of election and the flawed ideology of democracy – 2 wolves and a lamb voting on the dinner menu.
Universal suffrage was a bad idea. What really needs to happen is that anyone who receives a government check does not get to vote as it is a conflict of interest – such people will invariably vote for armed government thugs to pilfer ever-increasing amounts of their neighbor’s wealth.
Originally in “new England” only property owners could vote – i.e., someone who had a stake in what would be taken as well as what would be given.
H.L. Mencken said it well. “”Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.”
As you said, no one who receives a gunvermin check, and that includes “employees” as well as those directly on the dole.
I agree, Jason.
I oppose all taxation in principle – because if it’s not voluntary, if a person did not agree to it, did not incur an obligation, then it is theft.
That said, a sound reform would be just what you and Phillip have advocated. Only those who pay the got-damned taxes get a say in how those taxes are disbursed.
Problem:
Taxes are taken even from Social Security / Disability and Unemployment and (whatever) – so “the dole” is taxable / TAXED income.
This would mean that everyone can vote anyway….
Still think we have a Feine solution, if you follow…
But that’s another John Brown @ Harper’s Ferry situation. It’s not time yet.
Jean – I was not saying that everyone who is taxed has the right to vote, just that only those with skin in the game have that right. If you prefer, we could do a ‘net’ calculation – only those who pay more than they receive. This would rule out gunvermin employees, ‘office holders,’ etc. as well as those who survive on the dole.
Sounds good. 🙂
Thanks for clarifying!
Jason, I could second that….and will. All those farmers gettin’ gummint checks, no votee, soon, no gummint checks since it only trickles down to a few others…..and most of the trickle-downs eventually end up doing a bit of farming of their own.
Of course farming in and of itself isn’t bad, if you grow something needed and depend on the fair market. That’s the reason the federal gummint goes way out of it’s way to see that growing commercial crops without chemicals, crops people eat, doesn’t get out of hand. They’d rather it all be shipped in from S.A. (San Antonio?, same thing according to my friends who live there)so it can be produced cheaply and the big marketers make all the money and nobody can say pooh to the growers about the chemicals they use.
8SM – I wish it were that simple. Most of the ‘farmers’ getting gunvermin checks, or at least most of the total $, are BigAgra corporations, and their checks are the result of large campaign donations – a payback a la Mencken above.
Escher, not sure what you’re supposed to get on with it about but you’re dead correct. In my day there was no ADD or the like. The only ADD was in arithmetic. When I first went to school “recess” was the mainstay of discipline. Let kids run around wild for an hour at a time and they could sit still for an hour. Now all the boys must be “good little girls”, hence the mass drugging of boys with drugs that will shorten their life. I work with a kid just turned 23. He said they told him he had ADHD or something so they gave him drugs he hated. He practically had to be held down for them. He was sitting at the dinner table and liquid started to run from his teats, a side-effect of the drug they gave him(and now a massive lawsuit that will benefit no one but lawyers). He began to cry, tears of real angst. Only then did his parents start to catch on as to how miserable he was. That wasn’t the end though. He finally had to refuse to take the stuff as in force it into him. He began to get better immediately after not taking it. To this day he still has the perception that all drugs ruin your mind and body except for the ones from the doc. I think I’ve made him see a bit of the error in that thinking. He’s a clover though, a 6’4″, 270 lb., fat-ass clover. I think back to when I was his age and anybody his size would have been 220 lbs of muscle and no fat. I used to go into the doc’s office and get weighed, look on the chart and see I was overweight. I finally asked the doc how I could be overweight and have no fat. He laughed and said muscle weighs more than fat. I detest “generalized” charts of any sort. They may be good for inanimate things but fairly much suck for anything else.
It’s true that the BMI, or body mass index, is whack for those who have substantial amounts of muscle. Think Aaahnold, or Sly Stallone. There is another stat that calculates your body FAT percentage. That is a more accurate signal. But most people who are fit don’t need it. And the BMI is probably sufficient for them (or me).
What is more dangerous both for the individual and society as a whole is unwholesome fat between the ears.
“Well get on with it why don’t you”
Is your tongue planted firmly in your cheek, or are you the next Clover? Sorry, I can’t tell from this post.
I tried to find out if this wasn’t true. Instead I found more evidence that it is:
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/school-handout-government-gives-us-rights
There is also a link there to a easy to read pdf of the same content:
http://www.ohiolibertycoalition.org/media/pdf/BeingAGoodCitizen_full-version.pdf
What most people do not realize about the Bill of Rights is a) these are not citizens’ rights, they are HUMAN rights; b) this is a PARTIAL listing of pre-existing rights that the gunvermin is forbidden to violate. Rights that, as TJ wrote in the Declaration, were endowed on us by our creator. I often think that a big part of the reason the GICs are so intent on evolution is that, if they can take away our creator, then they can eliminate our creator-given rights.
Just a side note, any gunvermin employees, including GIC babysitters, are NOT a good source of information about electoral candidates. Neither are MOST parents for that matter, because they went through the same brainwashing.
We allow these people to live… WHY?
We need to chlorinate the shallow end of the gene pool.
I do NOT exaggerate. We have enabled and REWARDED the stupid, made life so simple an imbecile can live with minimal discomfort – and we need to pay the price.
We pay now, culling the herd of Clovers –
Or we pay later, WITH OUR BLOOD BEING SPILLED – for NOT being clovers.
Why is this so difficult to understand? r/K selection theory, incentivizing bad (and stupid) behavior, penalizing advance planning, time management, actual productivity.
This is no different from training a fucking dog, people. Immediately reward the behavior you want; immedately punish the behavior you DON’T want.
Obviously, our society rewards those who don’t save, plan for the future, or take care of themselves.
We should put them ALL through a meat grinder. Alive.
Otherwise, there’s no reason to complain about clover. Complain water is wet or fire burns, it’s the same thing. DISCOURAGE clover, or be consumed by clover.
There IS NO THIRD CHOICE.
Jean – the first requirement for training a dog is that you have to be smarter than the dog. Luckily for the PTB (not PtB) most of the sheeple are not that bright.
Well get on with it why don’t you, let us know when you have done them all in.
You can’t kill your way to freedom. Every nation and power group meddles in every other nation and power group.
Remember when Fox TV came on the scene. Then there was Simpsons. Married With Children. Bush the Elder cried don’t watch them, they’re morally toxic.
Well no shit Poppy. Fox is just the Aussie wing of the BBC. The Brits have been outsmarting and handing the Americans their ass since forever.
Invent your own language and culture. Or suffer the consequences of being puppets.
If you kill all the Americans. Then Canadians and Mexicans will fill the void. The Germans, the Chinese, The Turks, they’ll all happily take up the Culture Wars in the absense of Americans.
HBO Borg Time Warner offers very appealing programming. But at a strategic detriment. That’s the price you pay for the open market. Be smart, or be slaves.
It’s not just some Americans that are lower animals. It’s the whole culture really, that have no idea how to think philosophically and independently.
Americans are all just Pakleds. Pakleds that want to be free. We need free. We need things that make us free. Give us what we need or we will kill you. You are smart old world and Asians and have things that we need. You get the picture.
Star Trek was riddled with Jews. The stardates corresponded to the got dam Hebrew Calendar. How obvious do they have to make things. Nothing is just what it seems. Always ask, what is the real existential essence of everything.
In the code of Star Trek. Americans are the idiots wearing Red outfits that always end up dying a few minutes into the episode.
Boldly go where no American has gone before. To the Agora to actually think independently is one place to go.
Very true; however, I must point out: If the US does completely become the USSA, with any and all evils justified “for your safety / for the children / for your own good” … … … Well, where CAN you go? rome ceased to control the world, but the remnants of the empire lasted for quite some time, and the culture even longer….
In England, there is now a campaign against sharp knives. No shit.
In the US, we have muslims beheading people, and establishing Shariah Law wherever/whenever they can, and even making “No-Go” zones for non-Muslims.
We have a constant assault on our rights, a recent example being a town seeking to prohibit all sales of tobacco within town limits. (The entire populace showed up to tell the town council NO, and the town council ended the meeting rather than lsiten to them – happened in MA somewhere.)
We can’t “kill our way to a better world,” you say; but if we make clover fertilizer, everywhere, all the time – Clover can’t breed. It saves the rest of us from mindless brutality – which as you noted, is much of their culture, even the things I like. (Near-nekkid women….? Anyone? 😉 )
Remember when the school idiot was known, and had to stay back? When the town idiot was known, and everyone knew to disregard what he said?
Now we worship the idiot-box – and become idiots. Sedentary. Unable to think our way out of a paper bag with a set of directions.
And yet, that is being rewarded! As noted elsewhere, the only skill the clovers teach is, “Dial 911.” Well, SOMEONE has to take responsibility, and if Uncle Shithead is the one taking “responsibility” for the herd (NEVER pack!) – well, the point is to ensure that those most apt to vote for support survive OFTEN ENOUGH that the rest of us are forced out.
If, instead, we assist the truly stupid to their end – we make the world better for EVERYONE.
As for those who suggest I start the ball rolling? Working on it. Rest assured, it WILL get started. (No, I wasn’t involved with feine, lose that last e.)
As the anti-smoking meeting shows, Americans are starting to wake up. Very few people in the town smoke; the excuses for the action (flavored tobacco, colorful advertisements to attract children, etc) don’t fly when the stores haven’t had an underage sale in years; yet the people woke up enough to tell the town council to stuff it! And were then ignored, and the meeting ended. Gee, I wonder what the decision will be?
Go the way of ape-hanger handlebars, maybe? Or the helmet-free riding era? Or the way of the Crown Vic, Park Avenue, etc?
And there’s another impact that needs to be considered, the concept of costs vs. benefits. Shmoozing means you know everyone. The people who know you, like you. You run for office… the rules no longer apply! You know the cops, the judges, the prosecutor… (and you don’t NEED to be a politician, but that makes the transition more effective.)
So they cut you slack on one offence after another. Paperwork is lost, people don’t show up to testify, witnesses recant… Whatever.
All positive reinforcements for bad behavior – AND ENCOURAGING TO OTHERS WHO WILL DO WORSE.
It becomes essential to stop the corruption; early on, ONE duel can do it.
Once the system is riddled with lesions?
Now you need a batallion, and some armor support. For EACH TOWN.
If someone had simply voiced the problems publicly the first time? Probably would’ve been driven out of the town.
If they’d sniped the individual, especially publicly? Disappeared?
Problem solved. Negative incentive on future takers, too. THAT is what I want to drive at: Incentivize GOOD (moral) behaviors, most of which we take for granted – yet these behaviors suddenly become abnormal in the halls of power.
But also dis-incentivize the EVIL characteristics. I don’t have an issue with the first guy using his position to “fix” an occasional parking ticket (though I am ina sense conceding the field.) But sending the police to brutalize the opposition party’s lead, and hiding behind an “anonymous tip?” Worlds of difference there from the start!
Need to deal with the “minor scratch” before it turns septic; you’re swimming in raw sewage, after all….
If you find out about the parking ticket “fix” and don’t complain, you’re part of the problem. If you are attacked and don’t defend, you don’t deserve any sympathy. Regardless of the injuries.
I learned that the hard way.
Too old to change that now.
If they are only targeting ‘sharp’ knives, then the Shrub has nothing to worry about.
So what do you say, Clover, is it okay for me to carry a large knife, as long as I don’t put too good an edge on it?
It may take more effort to behead someone with a dull machete than with a good samurai sword, but it will still work.
The Limeys are no better off now than they were under George III, yet our ‘dear leaders’ keep getting us into wars on their behalf. Wasn’t that war of secession bank in 1776ff supposed to free us from them?
Well now what you’re saying is within the realm of the outlaw code.
I guess the distinction is, you can only use deadly violene in self-defense.
If you want to go about like Rorschach and provoke the stupid clovers to threatening you and then killing them. That’s something you can do.
But that doesn’t make you one of us outlaws. Because that kind of thing is permitted and maybe even encouraged by the system.
As you’ve said, you wanted to join these expert killers, but your physical limitations caused them to reject you.
Why not start your own security firm. One that protects property, but to the extreme. Where its guards look for any reason to escalate things against the Clovers and the Uncle Toms.
If you move to Ukraine or Eastern Europe, this is an actual thing. Ukraine is about respect, and those in government nakedly use their strength against any they so choose.
If you can’t join the state. Form your own little franchise of the state and work for your security corporation. There’s a huge market for those willing to do violence to others. Especially the ones who are skilled at it and can do so with stealth.
That’s not our thing here though. We just want to be outlaws. As peacefully and anonymously as possible. We don’t want to artificially shape humanity.
Killing is allowed to us in legitimate defense. Killing for sport or for scientific purposes is against the code. Whether its legal or illegal is of no consequence. The good news for you is killers are always in demand. Why not drive down south into Mexico and central America.
There’s a vibrant cartel and kidnapping industry with all kinds of opportunities there. Find your agora. Pursue your craft as you see it should be performed. Become a life Ender. Play the Ender’s game. Once you’re accepted. You can probably come back north and help them increase their presence here.
Well shit, then there’s crap like this. My phone just started making a god-awful sound. Of course I pick it up since I have no idea what’s going on. It’s an “Amber Alert” and you can’t opt out of them. This one simply says Amber Alert Galveston, Tx. then a license number for a 1990 Ford Exploder. OJ back? I just found I could opt out, and did, except for “presidential alerts”. And why would I want to hear anything from a president? If it affects me personally I won’t get the phone alert, just have my doors and windows punched in. I’m not guessing. I know it from experience.
Sorry 8SM, no such luck. OJ is black but his Exploder was white.