Community | September 08, 2011 | 46 comments

The Failed Policy Called Government

source: http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5642/the-failed-policy-called-government/

Image
shanklinmike
Methodology – a set or system of methods, principles, and rules for regulating a given discipline; the underlying principles and rules of organization of a philosophical system or inquiry procedure; a branch of pedagogics dealing with analysis and evaluation of subjects to be taught and of the methods of teaching them.

Policy – a definite course of action adopted for the sake of expediency, facility, etc; a course of action adopted and pursued by a government, ruler, political party, etc.; action or procedure conforming to or considered with reference to prudence or expediency.

In the army, training doctrine is drawn and taught with a methodology that is set forth as a policy. On the most basic of levels, it is slimmed down and simple. This is not because it assumes a new recruit is stupid. It is done because in order for a large body of people to act in a coordinated and efficient manner, the more synchronized they have to be. The only way to do this, is to teach all recruits the basics, and grind them so far in that what is learned becomes almost as natural as breathing. You are taught to obey, not to question. This is on the premise that th....

http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5642/the-failed-policy-called-government/
  1. groups:
    Community,   Liberty,   Decepticons,   ShankLitarian Propaganda
  2. tags:
    News,  News and Politics,  Not News,  Economy,  54 more
  3.     
    |

46 comments // The Failed Policy Called Government

  • unimatrix0
    • +1
      unimatrix0  

    • “Libertarianism. A simple-minded right-wing ideology ideally suited to those unable or unwilling to see past their own sociopathic self-regard.”

    • 7 months ago
  • Jake_Witmer_Hammond_Indiana
    • -1
      Jake_Witmer_Hammond_Indiana  

    • As a point of clarification on my prior statement, I mean that the DEA is vastly more evil than the postal service. The postal service might be inept, and might be in the same category as all other inept and unnecessary tasks financed with violence (wrong, coercive), but the degree of wrongness of the DEA is vastly larger than the degree of wrongness of the post office. Of course, generally opposing the evil of the entire unnecessary system is great: I agree with that overall goal, and can't deny that it's correct. But 100% of that game is "fighting the federal reserve." Fighting the Federal Reserve is a good thing to do, but I think it's highly unlikely that there will be success on that issue any time soon: they print the money, and jail dissenters, like Bernard von Nothaus, with rigged juries.

      Nearly 100% of the viable battle against the Federal Reserve is the battle to create competing monetary systems. By rigging von Nothaus's jury trial, the state has shown its soft underbelly, as well as a viable means of attacking it:
      1) Fight to the death for a competing currency, direct all spare tactical and technological resources toward developing an alternate currency that is as easy to use as cash. Ease of adoption by the common man will determine whether we all remain shackled by government. If alternative currencies are easy to use, the cost of continuing to do business by coercion will drive government out of business, by removing its support in the face of a better alternative.
      2) As a subgoal, defend your fellow man, and do not allow him to be sent to jail by rigged juries: inform those juries of their power over the judge, to the very best of your ability.

    • 8 months ago
  • Jake_Witmer_Hammond_Indiana
    • -1
      Jake_Witmer_Hammond_Indiana  

    • A jury-checked government without a central bank is significantly different from a totalitarian government with a central bank. I would encourage people, especially lapel-grabbing anarchists, to remember that there is an enormous scale of relative values within right and wrong. To oppose with all your might the minor wrongs and remain silent about the major wrongs is a disservice to justice, indicative of bad or shifting/inconsistent motives. I encourage Mike Shanklin to focus on the essential, and continually prioritize the the greatest extent possible. There is almost infinite room for improvement in one area: getting previously-uninformed liberals to nullify mala prohibita.

    • 8 months ago
  • Jake_Witmer_Hammond_Indiana
    • -1
      Jake_Witmer_Hammond_Indiana  
    • Image

    • I was just thinking about what the shortest description of collective government, as it stands, might be, and I came up with "Government is a war cartel." The activity of war, being purely destructive, redistributes money by destroying value. The activities by which value is thoroughly destroyed require effort, and this effort is financed by the suppression of alternative currencies. The suppression (by force) of these alternative currencies makes them unstable and thus nonviable. The government then offers its vastly inferior currency as an inferior substitute, the value of which steadily progresses toward zero value. Although the government's currency is worth far less than the freedom it supplants, it still has significant value (because it destroys and limits things of greater value). So, this relatively small but significant value becomes the greatest collectively agreed upon material value of society. The government then pays its own agents to destroy value, with this artificial "top collective value."
      In order to pass off paper as society's "top collective value," the government must be in control of education, because an educated citizenry does not tolerate a system whereby paper is society's money. Only an uneducated population would allow this. So, the government schoolteachers avoid the subjects of (properly taught) history, math, economics, and philosophy. They do this by applying perverse incentives to the schoolteachers.
      Through the control of (the limiting of) education, the government controls society. They prevent rebellion this way. The child who believes he would not have gotten even the rudimentary education he has received without government becomes an obedient serf of an adult.
      There is only one significant peaceful check on government power in our system of government. That check on government power is the jury. The other checks on government power are all physical checks: lack of power, fear of retaliatory violence, and death (the same checks that limit tyrannical lifeforms in nature). Juries cannot function in ignorance, so our government has found a "work-around" method of defeating juries: ensure their ignorance.
      If the government can no longer put innocent people in prison, or otherwise punish them, my work will be complete. To that end: http://www.fija.org

    • 8 months ago
  • Da_Bonster
    • 0
      Da_Bonster  

    • Imho anarchy is utopia unattainable as a result of our biology and lack of spiritual awakening as a species, en mass. Until my fellow humans are all on the same page that is is never ok to cause harm deliberately, we will need an armed force to protect and serve those who can't protect themselves. Until the rest of my species is on board with we are all in this together, there will be the hoarding of resources. This planet has a finite life span, as do we all. WAKE UP! We don't have enough resources in the drought stricken regions but they have the natural resources. They have the populations unsustainable and Aids and Ebola. We have obesity,rampant ignorance and hatred, cancers,and heart disease. Again I say WAKE UP! Stop being a petty small minded bigot and look for the shiny bright spots. Try to let go of some preconceptions that hold you(collectively) in bondage. There is no real difference between us and them. I am an individual. My reality is subjective. So is yours. I am not right, neither are you.

    • 9 months ago
  • DDJohnAdams
  • DDJohnAdams
  • Menso
    • 0
      Menso  

    • There is no reason to think there would be no rules. Laws and rules are very different. Rules are inherent in all human society. They form regardless of government. Laws, on the other hand, are how government attempts to control you and reward its friends. -->http://theruleoffreedom.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/law/

      I would suggest not replacing it with anything. People are natural organisers, which is why you could be sure they would self-organise, perhaps by community, perhaps in larger or smaller groups.

      Improving the system we have now never works. Millions of people are trying, with millions of proposals, and none of them are working. Ever wondered why that is? -->http://theruleoffreedom.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/lets-reform-the-system/

    • 9 months ago
  • iowawashington
  • Menso
    • 0
      Menso  
    • iowawashington:

      I didn't say they should have government. I said they should organise. Government is predicated entirely on the use of force, ie. do what we say or you will go to jail. Organisation and leadership, with which government is sometimes confused, are voluntary associations based on good ideas. People will organise because that's what they do. They do not need to oppress each other.

    • 9 months ago
  • hombre76
    • +1
      hombre76  

    • I always wonder too If we just gave up all Government today and therefore no standing millitary at all, How long you suppose it would be before China or for that matter any nation would be on our shores and claiming our land as their own?I dont care how much money you have the world with out rules and government is the wild west and people only put up with that for a while.

    • 9 months ago
  • DDJohnAdams
  • hombre76
  • shanklinmike
  • hombre76
    • +1
      hombre76  

    • http://children.th

      if everyone were willing to give their share to the community then we would not need the guns. Unfortunately some members of the community are selfish and wish to gain of of the labors of the community and not contribute to them proportionaly. So we have the Law require that we all pay a proportional amount of the earnings we make on the backs of the structure built and maintained by the community in tax io our national community so as to pass that structure on to our children.the wild west only happens in new land or on the edges of society if you wish that life you can still find it in the remote places of this world. but do not think that you will ever convince the world to let you have the frontier in their town or city or even country.

    • 9 months ago
  • davids80
    • 0
      davids80  
    • hombre76:

      "if everyone were willing to give their share to the community then we would not need the guns." - By share I am assuming you mean the monies needed to provide for infrastructure?
      "Unfortunately some members of the community are selfish and wish to gain of of the labors of the community and not contribute to them proportionaly." - I am assuming you mean those who use public works but do not pay for them?

    • 9 months ago
  • ozzone
    • +1
      ozzone  

    • But what would you replace it with. Remember that ‘Government’ is just a word. There are many types of governments. You can look around the world and find any type you like. Maybe live there for awhile and see how you like it.

      The other choice is to buy an island/country and try different governing methods and see what happens. I think you will find that it’s not as easy as it might appear. Why? Well because we are not as evolved as we like to think we are. You can see it everywhere.

      So instead of putting down the system we have, which is not perfect by any means, I think it’s much more constructive to figure out ways of trying to improve the system we live in now. It’s just better Karma.

      Another way of looking at it is if you stand at the bottom of a hill and try to stop a boulder from hitting your home by standing in front of it and holding out your hands, well you’re going to get squashed. But if you run down the hill with it and push against it as you’re running, well then you can change it’s course and direction and thereby save your house!

      It’s better then getting squashed and it’s better Karma.

    • 9 months ago
  • davids80
  • unimatrix0
    • +3
      unimatrix0  
    • Image

    • More spam from the shanklitarians - a sad and pathetic collection of politically naive and intellectually deficient creatures that spout a confused jargon in an abysmal attempt at self-promotion.

    • 9 months ago
  • hombre76
  • Nick19
    • 0
      Nick19  

    • Failed policy of government huh? Hmmm, lets look at how long governments have been formed since:

      5000 B.C- City States of Mesopotamia

      Today- Nation-States

      Hmm, I wouldn't call that the fail policy called Government rather than the Successful policy called Government.

    • 9 months ago
  • EugeneNixon
  • shanklinmike
  • Polochick09
  • Polochick09
    • +1
      Polochick09  
    • EugeneNixon:

      Of course he does, he would tackle your 90 year old grandma and throw her in a cage over taxes, just because she disagrees with government. He admits every day that he is for violence on peaceful people by supporting government guns on peaceful people. If a mob boss hires a hitman, that does not mean the mob boss is innocent... just that he got someone else to do his dirty work.... which means he is also a wuss. Can't even steal from us to our own faces, has to have someone else do it for him....

    • 9 months ago
  • Nick19
    • +1
      Nick19  
    • EugeneNixon:

      You cannot deny history has been violent. Now look at us here today typing away peacefully bitching about things. I personally don't support violence so thats why as a responsible citizen, I would vote for a congressional figure who doesn't support violence either.

    • 9 months ago
  • EugeneNixon
  • Paulusmj
    • +3
      Paulusmj  
    • Nick19:

      If I could find a candidate for congress whom I felt I could trust to actually not use nor advocate/delegate the use of violence I might consider voting for that person.

    • 9 months ago
  • davids80
    • 0
      davids80  
    • Nick19:

      @Nick - and yet when empires are running around the world vying for control, peace an prosperity always seem to happen. The Punic wars did not start until Rome got to big for her britches, and saw Cicily as a strategic point to own and invaded the far more peaceful nation that was thriving on trade - as was Rome. From then on in - Rome did not thrive on freedom and trade, but by conquering - which by the way - now government in the day was able to prevent either. This means that a government had started the wars, and the opposing governments were every bit as useless in stopping them.
      If that's to far back for you, thing before the dark ages. Truly free trade etc dominated the european areas, and all countries thrived as a result. Then the Tudors and numerous other state makers moved in - promising the people that if they followed their leadership, then they would benefit. This created an imbalance that continued to snowball until you had France, England, Italy etc all fighting each other - created by government.
      I can cite many more examples if you wish.
      The point is, your argument on government being around for so long makes it right fails - you are doing what everyone else does - you take a general fact, ignore the details, and find your belief. Seems rather short sighted to me.
      Now have governments existed in times of prosperity that did make its people happy? Yes. Have they ever lasted over a generation to the same ends? No. Once again, just because something works once in a blue moon, does not mean that it should be accepted as the policy by which to rule over everyone else.

    • 9 months ago
  • Nick19
    • +1
      Nick19  
    • davids80:

      No you're right on the concept on empire and it's need to rapidly expand constantly which hence causes it's collapse. The rise of Nation-States proved to be more stable that the model of Empire and even when an empire fell, new states came into fruition and new governments took over. No matter how many times you destroy and empire or a state, another one comes to take it's place. The fall of the Roman Empire witness the rise of the Byzantine Empire, Holy Roman Empire, Italian and other Germanic States. What I'm getting at that its a process that cannot be destroyed. When agrarian societies came into fruition, governments came into being as a result of specialization. SPECIALIZATION is the big term that must be noted in early developing agrarian society that formed the beginning of governing bodies. Now, what would the alternative be to a modern nation-state? The answer to that is simple, there is no alternative. Why would you want to dismantle a system that has allowed people like us to debate each other over the internet in relative peace? This whole definition of "violence" that is being brought here is extremely narrow in scope and overly specific in order to fit an extremely specific political agenda and hence, that definition can't be taken seriously.

    • 9 months ago
  • davids80
    • +2
      davids80  
    • Nick19:

      Finally - a good argument - and most of your points I am forced to concur with, and even in my last article addressed. It is a cycle that has existed nearly as long as man, and shows little or no signs of stopping. Come to think of it, i know of no historian who does not acknowledge the cycle of societies and government. However - here we claim to be an enlightened society - an educated one full of wisdom etc etc. Yet here we are anyway - making the same blunders of countless of societies before us.
      I write articles like this to remind people that there are other ways... Just because we do not know them at the moment does not mean that they do not exist.

    • 9 months ago
  • EugeneNixon
  • trut
    • +1
      trut  
    • EugeneNixon:

      I suppose you taught yourself how to read and write too. eugene? I guess the last time you crossed the street you looked up to see if the light was green, didn't you? Man those evil statists are always hampering your style aren't they eugene? ou don't own that road do you? Did you pay before you crossed? You didn't pay? you are a communist eugene, go back to vietnam.

    • 9 months ago
  • timelord999
  • TruthBTold
  • TruthBTold
    • +4
      TruthBTold  
    • timelord999:

      Government is nothing but an institution that has a monopoly on violence. When government defrauds people, when government steals from people, when government uses force on people its okay. When anyone else does it its illegal. Why is that?

    • 9 months ago
  • shanklinmike
  • critic
  • hammywill
  • davids80
    • 0
      davids80  
    • hammywill:

      The right to breath - the right to defend oneself. The right to keep what you earn, and use it as you see fit. The right to respect others, and be respected. The right to help others as you know how you can do best. The right to act on your own behalf instead of being forced to have someone else you don't know doing so. The right to speak as you wish - the right do as you wish.
      Thats just how i see it anyway in a nutshell - how do you see rights?

    • 9 months ago
  • EugeneNixon
  • shanklinmike
  • hammywill
  • JohnGalt
  • Polochick09
  • Anonmaly
    • -7
      Anonmaly  
    • Polochick09:

      Neutralized (for now), but the statist already come along downing stuff....

      They're probably just upset a qualified candidate is soon going to be president and no amount of fear-mongering, and creating "threats" out of foreign nations will prevent it...

      Maybe one day they'll respect life, even those lives of the darker skinned, or unborn varieties...

    • 9 months ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos