How statist do you think the womens' suffrage movment was?

[Lithium381]

It was very statist because the movement caused the size of government and taxes to grow

you're confusing the 16th amendment with the 19th here buddy

 

[Incorruptible]

you're confusing the 16th amendment with the 19th here buddy

The whole womens suffrage movement helped to increase the size of government and lead to more taxes

 

[Lithium381]

The whole womens suffrage movement helped to increase the size of government and lead to more taxes

"helped" or "caused"?

you've used them both and they mean very different things. I'll agree with "helped" but not caused.

 

[Incorruptible]

"helped" or "caused"?

you've used them both and they mean very different things. I'll agree with "helped" but not caused.

It had a big impact on the size of government and taxes

 

[CrackRabbit]

It had a big impact on the size of government and taxes

[Citation Needed]

 

[Incorruptible]

[Citation Needed]

Here you go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

 

[CrackRabbit]

Here you go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

I looked at the summaries.
The correlation is interesting, but we should all know by now that correlation does not equal causation.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Objective lesson time. There are no objective rights. None. Nothing of the sort is written in spacetime. What we do have is a social species who tend towards selfishness and are highly aggressive. The natural consequence is that people will take your stuff and possibly kill you. That got old and the smarter ones figured that being killed sucked and nothing got done. So they made some rules with consequences. That was the first government. More complicated situations required more complex rules. Eventually someone had to have the last word and that would have been an alpha male. Now w have many people working towards one goal with a leader, and that was to beat up other people and take their stuff. Eventually some of these leaders thought themselves so good that they convinced others to work for them and beat the shit out of those who didn't listen and obey. That was the first police force. Now once in a while things sucked so bad people ran off/killed/ate the old leader and they got another bastard. I mean people who had to look over their shoulder constantly must have had some incentive. Thats called power. You can get stuff for the asking. That's taxation. With that you can pay people to beat other people up in distant lands and take their stuff. You can even take their people and have them do the nasty stuff. Thats called slavery. Have you noticed "rights" hasn't appeared? That came in when enough people have the finger to the leader with enough force behind it that they would eat yet another king if he didn't play ball. Someone said "Shit, what happens if we forget this stuff? We had better write this down. These were legal protections and when they were around long enough people felt naturally entitled so they became rights. Why not? Now we have back up a bit. Remember this is an aggressive primate species who "wins" by taking your stuff. That's hard to do when there are those higher up on the food chain. Those people however are protected and so good that they have learned how to convince people to do what they want. These are politicians. Politicians form groups to help them convince people that they want to be ruled by their pod. These are political parties. In the US we have I've just two that have any real control. They say you can have one from column R or D. This is Democracy. If you go along with the establishment they will let you some things. That's freedom. Rights? They exist as long as you are a good boy or girl. Otherwise you learn the realities Power and they lock you up and take your stuff.

 

[Anarchist420]

The correlation is interesting, but we should all know by now that correlation does not equal causation.

That's true. There is no denying the correlation, however. That said, my point still stands that most of the women's suffrage movement was statist and many people who were against it were extreme States' Rights Democrats (i.e., libertarians).

 

[Anarchist420]

The whole womens suffrage movement helped to increase the size of government and lead to more taxes

Thanks for backing me up

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Thanks for backing me up

So if you were a slave would you be free?

 

[Anarchist420]

So if you were a slave would you be free?

We're all slaves... to the state.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

We're all slaves... to the state.

So you feel that there is no difference between your situation and Uncle Toms?

 

[Incorruptible]

Thanks for backing me up

Your welcome, many people have no idea just how damaging the movement was for liberty and people need to know this

 

[Capt Caveman]

The whole womens suffrage movement helped to increase the size of government and lead to more taxes

Good. Now, women have more rights and less suffrage.

Your welcome, many people have no idea just how damaging the movement was for liberty and people need to know this

Yes b/c slavery and inequality is better.

 

[Incorruptible]

Good. Now, women have more rights and less suffrage.



Yes b/c slavery and inequality is better.

There were other ways for women to get rights and I never said I wanted slavery and inequality, but bad things came with this movement

 

[Capt Caveman]

There were other ways for women to get rights and I never said I wanted slavery and inequality, but bad things came with this movement

Please explain how women and minorities could gain equal rights without laws to protect them? It didn't exist before.

 

[Incorruptible]

Please explain how women and minorities could gain equal rights without laws to protect them? It didn't exist before.

There is the constitution which gives everyone their rights, Im not against the laws but more the increasing size of government and taxes along with affirmative action programs

 

[Capt Caveman]

There is the constitution which gives everyone their rights, Im not against the laws but more the increasing size of government and taxes along with affirmative action programs

Huh? How did the Constitution stop slavery and women suffrage? Heck, the writers of the Constitution owned slaves themselves and didn't consider women equals.

 

[Incorruptible]

Huh? How did the Constitution stop slavery and women suffrage? Heck, the writers of the Constitution owned slaves themselves and didn't consider women equals.

The writers opposed slavery though, the constitution guarantees everyone their freedom but the government didn't obey the constitution just like there doing it now. Anyways the whole suffrage movement lead to an increase in the size of government

 

[CallMeJoe]

The writers opposed slavery though, the constitution guarantees everyone their freedom but the government didn't obey the constitution just like there doing it now. Anyways the whole suffrage movement lead to an increase in the size of government

The writers of the Constitution were split regarding the issue of slavery and compromised to allow its continuation. Slavery was not prohibited until the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment.

My condolences that your instruction in American history was no more successful than your instruction in basic grammar or reasoning.

 

[IronWing]

Is the whole point of this thread that the OP, in addition to being too lazy to find gainful employment, is also too lazy to vote?

 

[Doppel]

Has anybody ever noticed that anarchist in his first post of a thread throws out a complex, if ridiculous argument, but in later responses just very short little things? It's because his first post is a summary of a web page he found somewhere; one he didn't write himself and thus cannot really defend the thesis he presents on another's behalf.

 

[Anarchist420]

It's because his first post is a summary of a web page he found somewhere; one he didn't write himself and thus cannot really defend the thesis he presents on another's behalf.

Not quite. I'm not all that great at summarizing things others say.

 

[momeNt]

Has anybody ever noticed that anarchist in his first post of a thread throws out a complex, if ridiculous argument, but in later responses just very short little things? It's because his first post is a summary of a web page he found somewhere; one he didn't write himself and thus cannot really defend the thesis he presents on another's behalf.

Anything to keep the wool over your eyes. He also has never had a job, lives in his parent's basement, wishes he never would have to work because of a deflationary environment that would allow him to liquidate his parent's assets for increasing gains. Supports Ron Paul. Ample supply of ad hominems to keep your sheeple status.