Wilsonian/neocon peace theory refuted.

[Anarchist420]

http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0803c.asp

Democratic Peace Theorists are more easily refuted than Young Earth Creationists and is as easily refuted as most royal candidate theorists.

The article linked above also points out the problem with the executive power in a democracy and the fact that democracies aren't composed of pacifists.

 

[Siddhartha]

never mind

 

[DesiPower]

Right, exactly, few centuries back, the great democracies in the world, namely, the French, British, Portuguese and Spanish people stayed in their homes minding their own business and never bothered people in other countries and continents.

 

[Anarchist420]

If you could set up the government on a Federal and State level how would you do it?

Going by your earlier threads and posts I take it you are against Democracy and Representative governments, what form of government do you support?

I would abolish the Federal government and replace it with the Articles of Confederation. Having 50 smaller republics that were free and independent of each other would be tolerable for an anarchist like myself.

 

[guyver01]

I would abolish the Federal government and replace it with the Articles of Confederation. Having 50 smaller republics that were free and independent of each other would be tolerable for an anarchist like myself.

so.. you finally admit you're not an anarchist.... or you have no clue what the word means.


Anarchism is generally defined as the political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful.

Proponents of anarchism (known as "anarchists") advocate stateless societies based on non-hierarchical voluntary associations.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

I would abolish the Federal government and replace it with the Articles of Confederation. Having 50 smaller republics that were free and independent of each other would be tolerable for an anarchist like myself.

Read the history, it failed.

 

[mk]

Right, exactly, few centuries back, the great democracies in the world, namely, the French, British, Portuguese and Spanish people stayed in their homes minding their own business and never bothered people in other countries and continents.

Is this a serious post?

 

[jman19]

Is this a serious post?

Obviously not.

 

[ElFenix]

your linked article doesn't support your headline

 

[cybrsage]

No two democracies have yet to go to war against each other. Yes, it is a young style of government, but so far, so good.

 

[Anarchist420]

so.. you finally admit you're not an anarchist.... or you have no clue what the word means.


Anarchism is generally defined as the political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful.

Proponents of anarchism (known as "anarchists") advocate stateless societies based on non-hierarchical voluntary associations.

I said they would be tolerable dumbass.

I prefer a stateless society which makes me an anarchist even though that's very hard for you to accept apparently. However, some governments are more harmful than others.

 

[woolfe9999]

your linked article doesn't support your headline

Yes, his thread title isn't supported even by the sophomoric article he links. That article purports to debunk the straw man myth that democrocies are 100% peaceful, using a series of questionable historical observations. However, the author does not argue that democracies are less peaceful than other forms of government.

 

[guyver01]

I said they would be tolerable dumbass.
.

true anarchists find NO FORM of government 'tolerable'

you're not an anarchist, despite the fact you pretend to be.

 

[Anarchist420]

Yes, his thread title isn't supported even by the sophomoric article he links. That article purports to debunk the straw man myth that democrocies are 100% peaceful, using a series of questionable historical observations. However, the author does not argue that democracies are less peaceful than other forms of government.

You're right. I skimmed through most of it and only later examined the 50% more likely part.

I'm going to change the thread title.

 

[Anarchist420]

true anarchists find NO FORM of government 'tolerable'

you're not an anarchist, despite the fact you pretend to be.

Hey dumbshit,

I like how you think you know what I am when you don't.

 

[guyver01]

I like how you think you know what I am when you don't.

you are a 16 year old kid who lives at home with mommy and daddy, and has mental issues and THINKS he's an anarchist, because he saw the cool logo on a magazine cover once before.


did i miss anything?

 

[Anarchist420]

you are a 16 year old kid who lives at home with mommy and daddy, and has mental issues and THINKS he's an anarchist, because he saw the cool logo on a magazine cover once before.


did i miss anything?

Yes bitch, yes. I'm an anarchist because I've rationalized that it's not right to force people to provide an institution with revenue and because I don't like centrally legislated monopolies.

 

[Lemon law]

Hey dumbshit,

I like how you think you know what I am when you don't.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pardon me Anarchist420, this forum can tell you are dumb and dumber by the very questions you continually bomb this forum with. As you accept, without any personal evaluation, every dumb shit blogger theory that comes down the pike.As you somehow suggest you are the enlightened one on this forum for going ga ga at every half baked theory that comes along. And somehow think such half baked idiots you like have profound
lessons for the rest of us.

Your Behavior might be overlooked if you were only ten years old and really asked for answers in your posts, but when you are double that age, and ignore all the facts of world history, your questions of why might be better answered by BECAUSE. The typical answer a parent gives to children too young to understand complex issues yet.

In short kid, go back to school, read some world history, do some personal thinking, learn to think for your self, and then and only then will you be prepared to be a productive member of this forum. Or maybe W.C. Fields said it best, " go away Kid, don't bother me."
Grow up and learn to think for your self before asking stupid questions.

Because now, in my personal opinion, you are nothing but the classic definition of a forum troll best not fed.

 

[guyver01]

I'm an anarchist because I've rationalized that it's not right to force people to provide an institution

funny considering you'll be in an institution for the rest of your life.

pot
kettle

 

[Zebo]

Put any of these wars to a referendum on dollars and bodies we will contribute and I guarantee you none would be possible. Maybe WW2 and even then there was high aversion until Pearl Harbor. We don't really live in a democracy but a representative republic that gets further from democracy by day, especially so with citizens united which I'm sure you're favor of.

 

[Brigandier]

http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0803c.asp

Democratic Peace Theorists are more easily refuted than Young Earth Creationists and is as easily refuted as most royal candidate theorists.

The article linked above also points out the problem with the executive power in a democracy and the fact that democracies aren't composed of pacifists.

No one ever said it would be nonviolent, hell, America was founded in violence. Jefferson even thought that revolution was necessary to keep a democracy honest.

 

[cybrsage]

I would abolish the Federal government and replace it with the Articles of Confederation. Having 50 smaller republics that were free and independent of each other would be tolerable for an anarchist like myself.

To be honest, I think you should move to Somalia. They currently have one of the closest systems to anarchy on the entire planet.

Log into the forum from time to time and let us know how you like it.

 

[cybrsage]

Yes bitch, yes. I'm an anarchist because I've rationalized that it's not right to force people to provide an institution with revenue and because I don't like centrally legislated monopolies.

The problem with anarchy is that it does not work...it actually fosters the creation of nations.

Since everyone can do whatever they want to each other, bands of people will gather together for mutual protection. The strongest (funding, tactical thinking, military prowess, does not matter) will rule the others. This band will do as they please to outsiders but will have to have laws and rules in their own encampment else they will disintegrate quickly.

As more bands form for mutual protection, the individual who does not join a band becomes less and less secure, until there are almost no individuals left and we have large bands of people who have rules for their own groups in order to survive.

Anarchy simply does not work...it is a transitional state from one form of society/government to another. Out of all the styles of government, democracies are the closest to anarchy.

 

[Siddhartha]

You're right. I skimmed through most of it and only later examined the 50% more likely part.

I'm going to change the thread title.

You just lost any credibility you may have had on this forum.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Hey dumbshit,

I like how you think you know what I am when you don't.

It`s obvious that you don`t even know what you are..................
If you were Israeli we would all move to Gaza...

Pack your bags and go home kid.....or just go away...
This one thread has made it impossible for you to have any credibility at all........