When a system or form of Government, does not exist in a society, society will create one.
The lack of a government is the equivalent of living in the wild west.
There's nothing to keep me from robbing you, killing your family, taking your earning, sacking entire villages, "rape the horses, and ride the women".
You might say, oh we'll the town will appoint a Sheriff. NOPE.
A Sheriff = Government. Who do you think is going to PAY this Sheriff?
Everyone's agreed to no government. So...no sheriff.
I like the part where I get censored. I stated nothing controversial to Incredulous in an earlier comment down at the bottom. I believe the real Statist today are the people who claim they are fighting the statists.
oh shit, I don't even know what you are talking about to be honest. I just watched a video, thought it was pretty good and said so, and the next thing I know, I am reading all of your posts about Shanklin's loyal followers or whatever. Honey, sweetie darling....I am nobody's follower, I tend to think for myself, to a fault, and I don't even read Shanklin's posts, so I don't know what his agenda is, there may be places I agree with him, and places where I don't, but who cares? I mean, seriously, when does everyone on current ever agree about anything?
Uhhh, okay but why was the comment taken down then. I didn't mention anything offensive or criticize you. You can agree with him but he needs to admit the obvious that he does use followers to spam his messages to the top. He also needs to admit that he censors comments. Shanklin is simply a bad liar. Nothing against you but I find the lack of reason over my comment being censored disturbing.
I don't know who makes the decisions behind the screen, and I don't know how or why certain posts rise as fast as they do, but I think it's silly to let it bother you. I enjoy reading the stuff I don't agree with as much as I do the stuff I do agree with...reminds me to think critically, and I mean that in a good way.
He has continually lied and not checked his facts. I am rather tired of his constant mistruths about me and censorship. You can't trust these people. I am NOT rich, nowhere near it. I am not even middle class. I am actually in the lower class, extreme lower class as of now... although I could of had a nice job as a lobbyist or a politician....I chose to whistleblow. I respect our differences and have tried to "turn the other cheek" numerous times, but the lies need to stop, and I would appreciate you defending those around you who are falsely attacked. I have never censored anybody on here, not once. I don't even have the ability to delete comments on my own posts. When he makes attacks at me and calls me douche bags and pieces of shit.... current.com deletes the content because they view it as an attack on a member. I have NOTHING to do with it, and a little equality of truth would sure be nice around here. Peace, and thank you for not viciously attacking me for our philosophical and political differences.
Talk to current.... it had nothing to do with me, and check your facts next time. They can explain why they deleted your post. Most likely sent you an email telling you why as well. It is IMPOSSIBLE for me to delete comments anyways,....and I wouldn't do it even if I could. I have nothing to hide. You are the one who has a lot of lies to prove, and you will be caught looking foolish for jumping to false accusations.
Extreme lower class . . really ?
how does a poor boy like you get private flying lessons at age 9 - pay for college degrees from Campbell university - manage a senate campaign - become a political director for libertarian party - open up your own consulting firm & still have money left over to buy your video cameras & fancy suits you wear when you are a guest speaking at 9/12 rallies?
Because my GRANDPARENTS are rich. Now, as a collectivist, I'm sure you associate me and my grandpa to be the same person...haha, but believe it or not, I have NO control over his check book!!! Can you believe that?!? The person actually controls his own life ....somewhat. I got full ride scholarships to my University, it costs nothing to become a libertarian party anything..... fancy suitS? You act like I have multiple suits, and most of them I got as presents from my Bachelor graduation. The video camera I got on sale for less than $250 with Christmas/birthday money years ago. I'm a guest speaker at rallies (and even turned an entire group AWAY from Glenn Beck) because I have researched for years and have a passion for individual rights and for ending serfdom.
Proof of Shanklin HYPOCRISY
Commenting on why this post was added to comedy Shank says -
" i didn't post it in comedy. I think stoneyroad of unimatrix do it to make it so others vote it down. "
" I never place it in comedy, only in news and with appropriate tags. I ask others not to add it to these various niches when they do not belong. Peace "
But if you go to his activity page & look at his submissions you will see when i posted a story he didn't like (let's flood current) HE took the story that i posted under OPINION and added it to Music-Green-Movies-Gaming-Tech-Comedy-Art&Style-News-Liberty all so he could flag it multiple times.
But how dare someone treat him as he treats others !
(it was not me or unimatrix by the way)
Like a parasite , you use current for your own ends . Self aggrandizement . Marketing of political propaganda for you own PFP site . No one else does this , but , you . Using the current community , not truly contributing to it , forcing your views on it . Do you feel unwelcome sometimes ? You are like the dude that knocks on the door to tell us the good news about about some religious deity gonna save us , if we simply agree to believe without question . Only you KEEP doing it . Clear ?
On a very important note, I suggest to everyone on the site to call North Carolina State Psychological institutions in order to get Shanklin checked in for I fear that his political gibberish of non-sense is leading down a dangerous road as he may have the fire arms on hand to pose dangers to others.
The lies must stop now! I cannot delete comments and I would not do it, even if current.com gave us that ability on our own posts. I authorize current.com to give proof to whoever wants it that I have not deleted or censored anybody. If there is a way possible, I authorize current.com to give out my activity information on anything that people might believe I "censored" so that the truth and light can be shown. I am strongly against censorship and would not censor people, if current.com can prove that I haven't deleted comments, I ask that you take the time to seek this information before creating slander/libel. I do not censor or delete comments, I don't even have the ability. Only current.com does when the comments are attacking other members....which tells you what kind of comments have been deleted....not nice ones...directed at me. Even if I was in charge of current.com though, I would not censor..... just saying.
This video is pure corporate propaganda. Who benefits from elimination of Government? Corporations and the ultra rich! Because government, even with all its shortcomings and corruption, is the common people's only defense against total exploitation by the power mad and the hyper ambitious. Representative government was created to give the average person a chance to control their own destiny. It is flawed, but it is necessary. This video asks us to believe that if only Government were removed, the world's problems would somehow magically disappear. Dangerous hogwash.
I must disagree. Corporations always takeover their governments and make things MUCH worse than left to compete for our wages (which would be much stronger without governments). Governments HELP corporations oligopolize industries through protectionism, barriers to entry, tax loopholes, subsidies, and various other forms of advantages. Competition is the last thing any business man wants, and government helps him/her eliminate it, or greatly reduce, which harms the poor the most. It's not that I want to take down corporations, just that I want all of them to have to answer to consumers, not fight for special concessions through their lobbyists to the tyrannous political sector.
One has to wonder if you actually believe what you are saying. My first impression was that you did not, and were just promoting cynical propaganda; a corporate shill as it were. But if you actually do believe that the great masses of average people would be better off without Government, you are truly to be pitied. The real enemy is Corporate Personhood, not Government.
are u for real? where do corporations get their protection from? the government of course, through a limited liability corporation. its very hard to sue the ceo personally because they hide behind the the protection that the government gives them. so, keep believing the lies that the mainstream media and government schools keep telling you.
That is why I said Corporate Personhood is the enemy. Corporations have gained undue influence on Government, but Government was designed to promote the common good. To make it work, however, more people need to participate. Otherwise it gets taken over by scoundrels and corruption. I recommend reviewing the founding documents of the USA; the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. They are remarkable. Never equaled, before or since:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
Government has always been evil. Look at the whisky rebellion of 1791.
Angered by an excise tax imposed on whiskey by the federal government, farmers in the western counties of Pennsylvania engaged in a series of attacks on excise agents.
The tariff effectively eliminated any profit by the farmers from the sale or barter of an important cash crop, and became the lightning rod for a wide variety of grievances by the settlers of the region against the federal government.
While citizens in the east did not find it difficult to abide by the concept that individual states were "subservient to the country," people west of the mountains were less accepting of decisions made by the central government.
The rebel farmers continued their attacks, rioting in river towns and roughing up tax collectors until the so-called "insurrection" flared into the open in July of 1794 when a federal marshal was attacked in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Almost at the same time several hundred men attacked the residence of the regional inspector, burning his home, barn and several outbuildings. Pittsburgh was another scene of disorder by enraged mobs.
On August 7, 1794, President Washington issued a proclamation, calling out the militia and ordering the disaffected westerners to return to their homes. Washington's order mobilized an army of approximately 13,000, as large as the one that had defeated the British, under the command of General Harry Lee, the then-Governor of Virginia and father of Robert E. Lee. Washington himself, in a show of presidential authority, set out at the head of the troops to suppress the uprising.
This was the first use of the Militia Law of 1792 setting a precedent for the use of the militia to "execute the laws of the union, (and) suppress insurrections," asserting the right of the national government to enforce order in one state with troops raised in other states. Even more importantly, it was the first test of power of the new federal government, establishing its primacy in disputes with individual states. In the end, a dozen or so men were arrested, sent to Philadelphia to trial and released after pardons by Washington.
I thought the dismantling of corporations was implicit in the video, though in retrospect it definitely wasn't. So now I feel the video had good supplemental points to my current assumption that pretty much all corporations got to go.
But at the same time, I don't think the video's blindspot on this point makes it pro-corporate propaganda, necessarily. As was stated by poor maligned mike, I believe that government has been abused by corporate interests to protect their monopolies. "too big to fail" is a key example. extreme bureaucratic control over industry regulations, endless paperwork, intense restrictions on certification and the like may all seem like moves to protect consumers, but more often than not they make small businesses suffer when large established businesses already have control of the market and can simply buy them or push them out. not to mention most large corporations have the time and money to seek out the loopholes and tax breaks to benefit their bulk where little businesses can't. walmart's push to build I-69 to bypass US port customs is an example of that.
where mike and i differ is i do want to take down corporations. my key point is that government currently protects them, as the government (police, ect.) protect property over lives.
I can certainly understand how a statist who sees a dichotomy between government and big business would at first take my information as propaganda, but rest assured, I am not a corporate shill, and I do not work for any corporations....especially ones that get government corporate welfare....I try to refrain from activity with these evil institutions.
The thing is, corporate personhood can only come from government..... it REQUIRES government coercion to prop up the advantages. That is what I am saying, is that governments always lead to corporatism...
Free markets force the rich to compete for the little guys dollar, versus some lie that voting every 4 years will make life better on the poor....when we know government does not have this magic ability. At least you are not being rude like some of the other hurtful people on this wall. Peace
Propaganda is propaganda, doesn't matter WHO it's for.
I love how you get others to post your spam, in comedy of all places, then come in with your gang and work to get it up on the front page. Very coordinated of you.
At least it keeps you off the streets and hosting political rallies....
Oh, it isn't comedy? You do realize the egotistic maniac you are and how no one really cares for your useless opinions on this site. You sir are a fail troll and fail trolls go back to the dungeon. I've personally had enough of trying to have a serious debate with you due to your high regard for your cult like status. You probably have a rally somewhere sometime in North Carolina. I assume you live in the Piedmont region? Charlotte? Fayetteville? Expect a cream pie sometime around.
I don't subscribe to the "Free Market as Panacea" hype of the right wing. I have a Libertarian friend who expresses it perfectly. He says, "If it makes money, it's good. People vote with their money, and the world rewards the good ideas with financial success." He's a pretty smart guy, but it strikes me as odd that he can't see that there are endless examples of bad and evil things that make a ton of money. To me, money is the problem. As the abstraction of value, it gets pursued as an end in itself, at the expense of real values, which is at best neurotic, and at worst, totally insane. You propose a world without Government. I propose a world without money.
Is there really a line to be drawn between the two? Our military-industrial complex is a product of corporatism/Late Capitalism. So is the prison-industrial complex. So is NAFTA. So is the corrupt FDA. So is the outsourcing of most government responsibilities to private corporations. So is the War on Drugs. So is the subsidization of grain. As it stands, you can't take one down without the other. Our country is ideologically tied to corporate domination to a degree that doesn't allow for the removal of specific parts. The world is not going to get significantly better unless drastic changes are made. The way the majority currently live in the First World couldn't be maintained in a better system.
Maybe I'm confused over what exactly government would do without corporatism. What can only it do? Don't you dare mention the police.
shanklinmike said, "I can certainly understand how a statist who sees a dichotomy between government and big business would at first take my information as propaganda..."
Me? A Statist? You have no idea who you're addressing. I see you anti government types are throwing this term around a lot. I am no statist. A statist sees power as vested in the state, as opposed to the people. That pretty much tosses out the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution right off the bat. Like George Washington, I view Government as a necessary evil. Period.
I am not wrong when you actually get down too the business of who is the Government. It's supposed to be us, my friend, you are right in who runs and owns it now I must admit.
That's exactly what is wrong with the government these days, I always bring that fact to the table, getting it back in the rightful hands of the people is our biggest problem, then there would be true fear in the Elite's eye's. How we do that? Well that's really what needs to be decided by a people who no longer own their government.
Yes , there is a line . We need government to balance the power of the other power structures that also exist . When there is a void , power moves in . Think extremist fascist religions . Gangs in Mexico . Who protected people from the church during the inquisition ? No one . So people like Galileo got tortured to support church doctrine , despite how wrong he knew it to be . Read some history .
If you define any acceptance whatsoever of the need for Government as Statism, you are an Extremist. Just to make myself perfectly clear, I am not a Statist, because I see government's powers ultimately residing in the people, as in "Deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed." Why do you think the Constitution begins with "We the People?" Statism sees the source of power in the state, not the people. Our country's framers specifically tried to prevent Statism, unless you believe that any government at all is Statism. And if, as I have observed, this is your belief, that makes you an extremist in my eyes, and in the eyes of the world. Good luck with that. You are going to need it.
The enemy of corporations is the free market. Which is to say, the People are the enemy of corporations. Right now, as has been for some time, the government is the friend and ally of corporate regimes and monopolies.
Why would there necessarily be a void without a state if its of its actions were performed by separate smaller organizations? If all needs are met, why would people allow for other groups to assert themselves on top and coerce them into servitude? For the people's own benefit, of course. The problem lies where people are convinced that they lack something that they don't. It's what our current capitalist system hinges on. Moving beyond statehood necessitates this change in consciousness, I admit.
BTW the church was the state during the inquisition.
Anarchy in explicit definition means no state. In that way, this video seems right. But no anarchist I've met or know(n) would agree with the use of the term in this video.
Anarchy as a political ideology has a leftist lean that argues against excessive property ownership and the privatization of what is a public and common right. Even without state intervention, as this video argues against, the idea that pretty much anything can be owned would still be rampant, which is inherently oppressive.
I find it odd that a right-leaning anti-statist view would use the anarchist symbol and concept to represent its beliefs, as if it was an advertisement to get anarchists on board. Because the A certainly only scares away most, and represents frivolous adolescent rebellion to many others. Seems not to match the otherwise convincing arguments.
People need to want less material accumulation, and realize their wants not only DON'T benefit them, but cause severe harm. I don't believe that it is inherently human to endlessly desire, and if it is, it doesn't necessarily require the subjugation of others, including the planet, cultures, peoples and oneself.
You talk about history as if it's always been a perpetual and static cycle. Since language we've lived under matriarchies, then patriarchies, and now we're ready to move under something new, if our alienation, oppression, destruction and waste doesn't do us in first. Like I said it requires a change of consciousness for a big part, but it's illogical to think that power must exist for power's sake, especially when we live in such an interconnected time that is for some reason linked to pretty severe state suppression (neoliberalism). The evidence of its uselessness is more pressing now than before, which will hopefully lead to positive change in the short. Or maybe not. There's lots in the air. But in no way is it necessary. I feel like we're arguing from such different foundations this isn't really going anywhere though.
I wish, I really do, that all people were nice and peaceful, but that is not so. It has not been so since the beginning of civilization. That is why we have our government. To protect people. Obviously, It does not always do that, and it seems even less so in recent times, but that is it's purpose. To protect the people, via the protection of our individual civil liberties.
Government is but a necessary evil. If we could go without it and have a peaceful, secure society, then I would be the first one to advocate it's abolition. I just can't do that.
People are not nice and peaceful because the rise of civilization allowed for small rogue groups to exist for the first time that acted in total and oppressive self-interest. Pre-agriculture, there was no excess and people only foraged/consumed what they needed, so there was no way individuals could manage to survive on the backs of others without actually doing equal work themselves. With agriculture, these rogue groups survived as either thieves of agrarian bounty (as crops produced excess that also brought about alcohol, the proto-sedative of our species) or "protectors" of farming communities, thwarting other thieves and receiving a payment or tax in return. It's essentially comparable to how mafias work. In time these groups used myth and intimidation to rise to the power of deistic leaders, and thus government was born. To protect you from yourself, from others, from it, when really the only real threat we face is our own cynicism, greed and fear/hate of/for absolutely everything.
There's always been excuses for why government exists. And there are currently a lot of systems in place like globalized goods that do necessitate it to a point. But then I feel all such systems are harmful and should also be abolished.
"Pre-agriculture, there was no excess and people only foraged/consumed what they needed, so there was no way individuals could manage to survive on the backs of others without actually doing equal work themselves."
This is false. People have always enslaved others, and there has always been some sort of pecking order in social groups. It is misleading to try and romanticize pre-agriculture, hunter-gatherer societies.
So after doing some research, I realize I was wrong. More complex/sedentary foraging societies generally had high populations, wealth hierarchies/status based on descent, and stored excess production. But then it seems like property ownership is a cornerstone for selfishness even among outlying groups, not to suggests its the primary cause but a near-universal variable. Aw well. Learned something new here.
Actually, Somalia has gotten much better in the regions that have broken away from statist Sharia law and the communist governments that once ruled most of Somalia before going bankrupt and into civil war....
Death mortalities are down, diseases are reduced, cell towers are being built, and much growth is occurring, but they still have statist regimes like the UN and the WTO trying to infiltrate and create some new formation of a coercive institution.
I can't truly say that Somalia is quite anarcho-capitalist (market anarchist), but I do believe they are making great gains compared to the tyranny they recently left.
Every country takes time to transform. America didn't just become what it is today overnight. The industrial revolution was rough, many learning points where taught the hard way, but we were better because of it, and it all had to do with more economic freedom.
I'm just saying, Somalia is doing much, much better...but to call it a libertarian paradise? We have a lot of things to fix from statism....which can take a while.
100 years of growth can be destroyed by one stroke of legislation, too bad the opposite isn't as easy.
The Swiss Bank is a part of statism with it's fiat currency and central planning, along with the UN, and Halliburton. None of these institutions are peaceful/free market based. They all require coercion.
Even the micro credit loans done through the WTO in Somalia are like little mini Federal Reserves that inject loose credit into the system, creating more booms and busts. Halliburton?!? The second they come in, anarcho-capitalism is REALLY dead. All these government military contractors are a part of stolen money statism, not peaceful free markets.
Most countries go through transitional periods from communist to freer societies...and that is what is occurring in Somalia. It is getting better as the years progress, and if you think there weren't problems with the statist communism they had imposed on them just a decade previous, you are the one ignoring real history.
Government is what ravaged this country in the first place, and allowed for corporatism through government to take a foothold. It sometimes takes a while for the market to find harmonization, especially with so many outside statist influences trying to take over.....like you mentioned earlier....Swiss bank, Halliburton, WTO, micro credit loans through statism..........
Because....I don't want to have to go through the transitional period. In 25 years, Somalia is going to be much nicer....if the statist countries around it don't happen to intervene with the corruption purge process.
great planning strategy. Somilia will rise to the top, and if it doesn't its the boogymen in the closets falt not thiers or mine. Personal responsability FOR HE WI.... wait something in that statement did not add up.
You could have disneyGE militia , and Bank of Americorp militia , Rupert Murdock would have his very own , or perhaps he would just hire XE/Blackwater ....... Mike shankliin would have his own small militia/propagandist , kind of like he does here , and would make a killing for such PR services ... Religions would have their own of course . Some already exist . So what is left for the have-nots ? We would all have to choose who to "serve" with . Instead of kings , we have undying corporations . At least when kings die one had a chance to change things up a bit . But corporations never die , like zombies , they want your brains and steal your life . Growing ever larger and acquiring more resources and influence . This , to me is the real problem .
nephwrack , Please , do not waste decent bile on this nitwit's account . I believe this is a little experiment for him . We , are a test market . To see if there is a way we , or even a small percentage of the community here , can be swayed . IF he finds the right approach , it will be a gold mine for him . It can be used elsewhere , to greater effect . There is no way he BELIEVES this drivel . He will keep trying , though . Until he becomes a hated pariah here . Even that will serve a purpose , to weaken the site , cause division if possible . Marketing . The more i studied it , the more i realized , i could never do it . Couldn't live with myself . They make evil possible . Enable it , like the banks did for Hitler when he stole the wealth of Czechoslovakia . The bank of England allowed him to deposit it in an account for his use . His army grew massively , after that . They are cut from the same cloth .