Poll - "Americans": Do you think you are free?

[NoStateofMind]

What violence did I advocate?

The mirror is clean. I've got a microfiber cloth I use to give it a really spotless/smudgeless clarity.

You do support "taxation" don't you? You think its necessary for society correct? Then you support the robbery, kidnapping and caging of those who don't pay "their taxes". In fact I bet you applaud when "tax evaders" get tossed into a cage. To have moral values would tell you that taking from your neighbor without his consent is wrong and you would consider that theft but when its in the name of "government" its seen as a virtuous act. How do you get this disconnect?

You do vote don't you? Your "ballot" is your approval of authority over man. That belief in authority, the belief that some mythical entity has more rights than any individual, is what caused, has caused and will continue to cause untold numbers to be abused, subjugated, extorted, robbed, caged and murdered. Statist blather on about how man needs to be controlled because he is too violent and therefore "authority" is needed. Yet the mental disconnect happens when they imagine "authority" to be immune of mans so called ills and all of a sudden to be virtuous when given the right to rule. Even simpler, if man is so bad that he needs to be controlled, why give men "authority" over man at all?

Might need to clean that mirror again.

 

[LightPattern]

Theft from "government" is called "taxes" and therefore seen by the masses as legitimate. However for it not to be theft consent must be given. No consent equals theft. Period.

Well, you can protest your slavery by not using the roads to get where you want to go. Shut off your water and go dig a well, too. Oh, please return that education that obviously provided you no benefit.

Making the argument that all these things exist because of "government" is a fallacy and shows you haven't thought it through. We want roads. We want water. We want education (the ruling class's version of this is abhorrent). We make these things happen in spite of authoritarian intervention. The only thing "government" becomes is a parasite sucking the life out of the productive and giving to the unproductive.

You benefit from the ways that tax dollars are spent.

It's called a shared burden for mutual benefit.

That cannot be said without consent. "Mutual benefit" would imply I came to an agreement with two or more people and that I get X by providing Y. That's not what is happening here.

Define "we." You might say: "we the people" Can those people agree to enter into an agreement to.. say.. provide for the common defence against.. each other or marauding "governments" that you're so concerned about? Or would any written agreement with other people automatically be a contract into slavery in your mind?

"without consent"
What do you propose? Do you want to be asked at age 18 (an arbitrary age) for your "consent?"

 

[brycejones]

"without consent"
What do you propose? Do you want to be asked at age 18 (an arbitrary age) for your "consent?"

If you don't consent do you get out back in the womb? If everyone consents except nostateofmind is the rest of the world supposed to do whatever nostateofmind wants because he/she did not consent?

 

[NoStateofMind]

Define "we." You might say: "we the people" Can those people agree to enter into an agreement to.. say.. provide for the common defence against.. each other or marauding "governments" that you're so concerned about? Or would any written agreement with other people automatically be a contract into slavery in your mind?

People want roads. So people build roads. Water, education etc etc. I have no problem with written agreements. Those who choose to be in the contract will sign and those who don't won't. However you cannot sign an agreement with others to aggress against others. It must be willing participants or the contract is broken.

"without consent"
What do you propose? Do you want to be asked at age 18 (an arbitrary age) for your "consent?"

Consent is just like anything. I won't drive your car without asking and therefore neither should anyone else. The answer to what age someone should enter in an agreements would not be up to me. That would be between the two or more people to decide.

 

[NoStateofMind]

If you don't consent do you get out back in the womb? If everyone consents except nostateofmind is the rest of the world supposed to do whatever nostateofmind wants because he/she did not consent?

At least he can formulate a rational question. You seem to be incapable. "government" schooling at its best right here.

 

[brycejones]

At least he can formulate a rational question. You seem to be incapable. "government" schooling at its best right here.

Damn auto correct....but whatever. I see your response about written contracts for damn near anything. So hypothetically you don't consent to have the road built are you allowed to drive on it? I am trying to understand how you think this utopian vision of yours would actually function.

 

[LightPattern]

People want roads. So people build roads. Water, education etc etc. I have no problem with written agreements. Those who choose to be in the contract will sign and those who don't won't. However you cannot sign an agreement with others to aggress against others. It must be willing participants or the contract is broken.



Consent is just like anything. I won't drive your car without asking and therefore neither should anyone else. The answer to what age someone should enter in an agreements would not be up to me. That would be between the two or more people to decide.

So written agreements are fine so long as there are no enforcement clauses?
ie. Agreements that aren't worth the paper they're written on.

 

[LightPattern]

Damn auto correct....but whatever. I see your response about written contracts for damn near anything. So hypothetically you don't consent to have the road built are you allowed to drive on it? I am trying to understand how you think this utopian vision of yours would actually function.

I'm trying here as well. But the vision seems pretty myopic. I could see a small moon colony functioning the way he wants, but not a group much larger than family sized that has to compete with other large groups over limited resources.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Damn auto correct....but whatever. I see your response about written contracts for damn near anything. So hypothetically you don't consent to have the road built are you allowed to drive on it?

Roads are built to travel on. I don't see why not. Unless of course, the owner decides not to allow you passage. It has been contemplated that a solution to this might be that his insurance contract may have a stipulation to ensure passage to travellers for the repair of the road or it may be apart of his home insurance. Contracts ease conflict because each individual knows the boundaries going in.

I am trying to understand how you think this utopian vision of yours would actually function.

lol if you think I'm trying to create utopia you would be wrong. That's impossible. However a world without authority would be immeasurably better.

and thanks for joining the discussion.

 

[NoStateofMind]

So written agreements are fine so long as there are no enforcement clauses?
ie. Agreements that aren't worth the paper they're written on.

Who said that?

All agreements have stipulations and consequences. Say theres a stipulation in a mans insurance for his property that includes rights of passage through his land and later the homeowner bars people from passing through. The insurance agency threatens to drop his coverage for breach of contract. The homeowner either complies or finds another insurance agency. Here's the catch, once the homeowner breaks his contract he becomes a liability to any other insurance agency. So he may be charged higher premiums until he can establish trust again or he may not be offered insurance at all if he breaks too many. This is just one example of countless number of solutions yet to be thought of.

 

[jackstar7]

You do support "taxation" don't you? You think its necessary for society correct? Then you support the robbery, kidnapping and caging of those who don't pay "their taxes". In fact I bet you applaud when "tax evaders" get tossed into a cage. To have moral values would tell you that taking from your neighbor without his consent is wrong and you would consider that theft but when its in the name of "government" its seen as a virtuous act. How do you get this disconnect?

You do vote don't you? Your "ballot" is your approval of authority over man. That belief in authority, the belief that some mythical entity has more rights than any individual, is what caused, has caused and will continue to cause untold numbers to be abused, subjugated, extorted, robbed, caged and murdered. Statist blather on about how man needs to be controlled because he is too violent and therefore "authority" is needed. Yet the mental disconnect happens when they imagine "authority" to be immune of mans so called ills and all of a sudden to be virtuous when given the right to rule. Even simpler, if man is so bad that he needs to be controlled, why give men "authority" over man at all?

Might need to clean that mirror again.

No no, my mirror is spotless. You've used microfiber right? Works really well.

You do let me know how yours is though. I can't help but note that you spend all your time noting the flaws of the "me" you've defined in your imagination and effectively none on yourself and how the interactions of people following your ideology would yield positive results. Makes for a pretty good yarn though. Very dystopian and persecuted and heroic of you.

 

[NoStateofMind]

I'm trying here as well. But the vision seems pretty myopic. I could see a small moon colony functioning the way he wants, but not a group much larger than family sized that has to compete with other large groups over limited resources.

So people can't be free because there are too few resources is that it? You are thinking from the perspective of the authoritarian mindset. You have to look at this as if everyone from the day they were born were taught to live virtuously.

Today people are not taught to live morally from the time they are born. We are taught that obedience to "authority" is just as righteous. That mindset is used to turn otherwise good people into murderous thugs. "I don't want to put the Jews in boxcars but I'm just doing my job" or "I don't think you are harming anyone selling weed to some consenting individual but I have to do my job".

In a moral society such mind numbing illogical and irrational mental disconnect would not happen. The moment someone said "I command you to fight war against those people over there" would immediately be recognized as evil. The megalomaniac would either be ostracized or conform to society just as people conform to "authority" today..

 

[NoStateofMind]

No no, my mirror is spotless. You've used microfiber right? Works really well.

You do let me know how yours is though. I can't help but note that you spend all your time noting the flaws of the "me" you've defined in your imagination and effectively none on yourself and how the interactions of people following your ideology would yield positive results. Makes for a pretty good yarn though. Very dystopian and persecuted and heroic of you.

It's not exactly you, but the whole of humanity. Statists think this way and its important you see the error so it can be corrected. Whether you think so or not I am not here to condemn you but only to help you see. You have two options. You can dismiss these words out of hand and continue trying to be rude or you can think about it and possibly change your mind. Its never too late.

 

[mistercrabby]

Hey, NSOP, friends of yours??

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ap-torture-kill-authorities-article-1.1435158

David Allen Brutsche, 42, and Devon Campbell Newman, 67, were arrested in Las Vegas for plotting to abduct and kill local police officers after an undercover investigation that spanned several months. The couple are members of the Sovereign Citizens' Movement, an extremist group that federal authorities call domestic terrorists.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...i-government-sovereign-citizens-movement?lite
By Erin McClam, Staff Writer, NBC News
A Las Vegas couple who plotted to kidnap and kill police officers are part of a growing movement whose adherents believe they aren’t subject to laws and follow a complex theory about the secret enslavement of American citizens, authorities say.
The couple spent hundreds of hours developing a plot to attract attention to the movement, a cause known as “sovereign citizens,” which holds that police do not have legitimate power, authorities said.

You read up on these people and their ilk and it sounds like the tripe you've been spouting off here. Hmmm?

 

[gevorg]

As stated multiple times, freedom is a relative term. But just because US is more free than any other country, doesn't necessarily make it free. The peak of freedom in US was during the 1980s-90s era. Since 9/11, it became a downhill towards police state (ex: no dictatorship in human history had such a deep insight into personal lives of its citizens as what was revealed about NSA).

As for slavery, the best slave is the one who doesn't realize that he is a slave.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Hey, NSOP, friends of yours??

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ap-torture-kill-authorities-article-1.1435158

David Allen Brutsche, 42, and Devon Campbell Newman, 67, were arrested in Las Vegas for plotting to abduct and kill local police officers after an undercover investigation that spanned several months. The couple are members of the Sovereign Citizens' Movement, an extremist group that federal authorities call domestic terrorists.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...i-government-sovereign-citizens-movement?lite
By Erin McClam, Staff Writer, NBC News
A Las Vegas couple who plotted to kidnap and kill police officers are part of a growing movement whose adherents believe they aren’t subject to laws and follow a complex theory about the secret enslavement of American citizens, authorities say.
The couple spent hundreds of hours developing a plot to attract attention to the movement, a cause known as “sovereign citizens,” which holds that police do not have legitimate power, authorities said.

You read up on these people and their ilk and it sounds like the tripe you've been spouting off here. Hmmm?

Where have I advocated violence? Nowhere. lol and whats with this "secret enslavement" stuff? haha its no secret!

"sovereign citizens" are too nationalistic for me. As that just leads to division. People should be free to roam as they see fit boundaries be damned.

You sure are trying awfully hard to discredit this message though. I must have struck a chord.

EDIT: Those people would have broken moral principles if they had carried out their act. So IDK how you apply what they intended to do to what I've been telling you.

 

[zinfamous]

Where have I advocated violence? Nowhere. lol and whats with this "secret enslavement" stuff? haha its no secret!

lmao

what's with this "American" stuff? as if you never even knew what that meant.

lol.

still waiting for your balls to drop eh, Chico?

 

[Darkman]

Free at last ......

 

[mikeymikec]

There's no such thing as a free lunch.

Yes there is, I've been bought lunch before.

 

[mistercrabby]

Where have I advocated violence? Nowhere. lol and whats with this "secret enslavement" stuff? haha its no secret!

"sovereign citizens" are too nationalistic for me. As that just leads to division. People should be free to roam as they see fit boundaries be damned.

You sure are trying awfully hard to discredit this message though. I must have struck a chord.

EDIT: Those people would have broken moral principles if they had carried out their act. So IDK how you apply what they intended to do to what I've been telling you.

If the shoe fits... :whiste:

 

[Acanthus]

Highest prison population per capita in the world.

Problems with gay rights.

Problems with religious rights.

Problems with women's rights.

Problems with personal privacy.

Problems with heath care, to the point where we have the highest infant mortality rates and shortest life expectancy in the civilized world for our nations poor.

Problems with mental health care.

Problems with jurisdictional rights.

Serious problems with corruption in government. (money buying elections)

I think the US is less free than Canada and some western EU nations. Although "free" is subjective, I would say the US is less free than it was in the past, and it certainly not the "freest" nation as i would define it.

 

[NoStateofMind]

lmao

what's with this "American" stuff? as if you never even knew what that meant.

lol.

still waiting for your balls to drop eh, Chico?

Another one without the mental capacity to develop an argument or the ability to read. That was already discussed. Do you even care to discuss or are you just dropping by a crap?

 

[NoStateofMind]

If the shoe fits... :whiste:

Oh ok little one.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

If you don't like the laws you're free to do the following:

1) Vote for candidates that back your views
2) Write your representatives and express your views/concerns
3) Run for office and if elected then you can talk to your hearts content about your beliefs
4) Get on a soap box in your town (mall, court house,...etc) and talk to your hearts content about your beliefs
5) Take a stance on your beliefs (be prepared to pay for the consequences should you violate a law)
6) Move to another country that espouses your beliefs or close enough you could live with their laws.

 

[Darkman]

... and the score is ... 70 - 50 ... -- to the 4th Quarter we proceed )))