|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Aug 26, 2006 9:52:34 GMT -5
Phelps Adams was definitely focusing on laissez faire, free market "capitalism" since "state capitalism" (i.e. corporate welfare) is based on a similar principle to communism... me/ *sighs* [here]...  (as me wonders, Oliff, if he's misked me main point-sk?!) tsk, tsk... there can (acknowledged) be two "capitalisms", but only one "communism"... the "bad, bad, bad" one??? [said, as this child of the '60's still catchs himself readying to scurry under his desk at the mention of the word...]  what of the laissez-faire communist?? ;D oh what the heck... where's the fair lassie (Bay Watch) voluntaryist?!  |
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Aug 26, 2006 10:09:15 GMT -5
Darren provided a quote from Roy A. Childs' book:
"(As quoted by Roy A. Childs in "Crime in the Cities", in the excellent book "Liberty Against Power".)"
I read that book about 20 years ago and have long since forgotten the name. It's a wonderful book. Roy Childs was a wonderful thinker. I highly recommend it. One of the essays that I still remember well was his discussion of someone ( a friend? I don't recall ) who was a heroin addict and who led a perfectly happy and normal life.
Thanks for pointing out the book, Darren. I commend it to anyone here as well worth their time.
- NonE
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Aug 26, 2006 16:38:22 GMT -5
Darren provided a quote from Roy A. Childs' book: "(As quoted by Roy A. Childs in "Crime in the Cities", in the excellent book "Liberty Against Power".)" I read that book about 20 years ago and have long since forgotten the name. It's a wonderful book. Roy Childs was a wonderful thinker. I highly recommend it. One of the essays that I still remember well was his discussion of someone ( a friend? I don't recall ) who was a heroin addict and who led a perfectly happy and normal life. Thanks for pointing out the book, Darren. I commend it to anyone here as well worth their time. - NonE Indeed, well worth the dozen BCNs I spent on it... The chapter (essay) I quoted from, of course, discusses the foolishness we know and love called Duh Drug War. With logic and reason.  And Mr. Childs doesn't just say "legalize all drugs" he says "let's go item by item through the issues, the objections the 'authorities' give to justify prohibition..." and he exposes each and every one (crime, physiological dependency and harm, social impact, ability for addicts to live normal lives among the rest of us, etc.) as a myth, deception, even 180degrees OPPOSITE to objective, historical/scientific reality. Brilliant. A copy of that essay should be mailed to every "legislator", with a "followup quiz" a week later ;D |
|
|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Aug 28, 2006 15:08:05 GMT -5
tho "neocon" works very apropos if one simply hears "the con" as in "con man", "con artist", and "con game" rather than "conservative"...  (tho technically, that makes all the politicos neocons...) |
|
|
|
Post by sagas4 on Aug 28, 2006 15:51:18 GMT -5
doesn't neo mean new?
What's new about it then. It's like the second oldest profession isn't it? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Aug 28, 2006 17:05:36 GMT -5
All politicians are fascists -- they differ only to what degree (and to what success) they hide it from the masses. |
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Aug 29, 2006 9:50:26 GMT -5
Darren, Regarding your post about Eric Margolis' article, I'm currently reading his book, The War at the Top of the World and am finding it an extraordinary look into the history and complexity of international politics that have been played out by the world powers in that small area of long, rich history and strong clan and tribal loyalties. In today's climate of hate and fear and manipulation, this book should be required reading for anyone who desires to understand what is going on and why. - NonE |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Aug 29, 2006 15:18:12 GMT -5
...should be required reading for anyone who desires to understand what is going on and why. - NonE Well that excludes me then. I'm tired of understanding anything, let alone what is going on or why. I am more interested in what might be happening in the future, and what I can contribute to it.  I'm half joking btw; of course I know learning the mistakes (and evils) of history is a great investment of time in preparation for paving a new and better future... |
|
|
|
Post by NonEntity on Aug 29, 2006 22:07:04 GMT -5
How silly, Darren. We all know that the past is the only thing we can change! The future is totally unknown. - NonE |
|
|
|
Post by sagas4 on Aug 30, 2006 1:30:39 GMT -5
How silly, Darren. We all know that the past is the only thing we can change! The future is totally unknown. - NonE Why NonE, that is most profound: I can change the past by what I decide to do today, because tomorrow, today will be yesterday and therefore I have changed the past in more ways than one especially since today is yesterdays tomorrow. In essence you could say we are constantly in the process of continually changing the past. ;D Or were you simply talking about re-writing differently things that have already happened than they actually happened? or something else? |
|
|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Aug 30, 2006 1:37:09 GMT -5
Why NonE, that is most profound: I can change the past by what I decide to do today, because tomorrow, today will be yesterday and therefore I have changed the past in more ways than one especially since today is yesterdays tomorrow. In essence you could say we are constantly in the process of continually changing the past. ;D
Or were you simply talking about re-writing differently things that have already happened than they actually happened? or something else? otay, Buckwheat-- que up the Who's On First here X(meanwhile, me thinks I likes this "essence" thinkin'...) |
|
|
|
Post by Darren Dirt on Sept 18, 2006 10:46:53 GMT -5
And must not government cease when crime ceases, for very lack of objects on which to perform its function?
Not only does magisterial power exist because of evil, but it exists by evil.
Violence is employed to maintain it, and all violence involves criminality.
Herbert Spencer ---The right to ignore the State
BRILLIANT ;D A lot of that quote seem to be the kinda thinking behind much of Rand's dialogue (of the Evil-Doers ) in Atlas Shrugged, i.e. "if we don't have enough control over the people, we must have more of them afraid of being a criminal and thus we must make more crimes"  |
|
|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Sept 27, 2006 15:27:54 GMT -5
Boy, but to then build upon that as to ask: How many votes are there? How many votes does a "citizen" have?
of course there is the most popularized one: the ballot box
but as is often the case with what is blared about and focused upon, it perhaps the least important and influential ones held! focus then means distraction!
another vote is of course: the jury box
sadly today, the courts are so morphed and intertwined with one another, this one is a difficult one not to participate in, as it involves the very literal lives of so many
then there is: the tax box
"check here" box (ie "I am a U.S. Citizen" and "I had this income" etc)
i propose it to be unarguably the second most important!
finally (from my observation) is: the money box
i propose it to be unarguably the most important!
it is of course linked with the tax box; but it goes beyond that in tons of initially undistinguishable paths of support and justification~
yes, i propose that if you think about it, you'll see that every dollar that one spends, is a vote!
|
|
|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Oct 3, 2006 12:34:22 GMT -5
"When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes...Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain."
- Napoleon BonaparteAnd this is true, be it State Government of self government. (as i recall the old Lone Ranger & Tonto joke here): "What do you mean, 'we', keemosabe?!?"  seriously, perhaps a too easily slipped into habit by all of us... 'er... correction: make that "by too many of us" -----> perhaps a too easily slipped into habit by too many of us is the use of such pronouns? such "group speak"... a result of course of much influence by the Statist progandist... one huge example: We The People...so of course! that's all of us (U.S.)! as honestly, i've never mocked nor humiliated this guy--- (why, i hardly knew him...) ;D --eyeTonto2 |
|
|
|
Post by eye2i2hear on Nov 21, 2006 10:05:21 GMT -5
this one sure bears a repeat imho! its one of those it seems to take quite some intensive thinking through in order for it to sink in... Errol E. Harris puts it this way :
Political power "can never be exercised without the acquiescence of the people- without the direct cooperation of the large number of people and the indirect cooperation of the entire community." Therefore, tyranny has "fluorished where the people through ignorance, or disorganization, or by actual connivance and complicity, aid and abet the tyrant and keep him in power by allowing themselves to be instruments of his coercion."
... a nation gets the government which it deserves. with one modification-- that last statement (State-meant) would more factually read: ... individuals get the government which they deserve. forum linkperhaps its also in the questions: 1) what is freedom? and 2) who is accountable for freedom and any lack thereof? |
|
