PDA

View Full Version : As of yesterday, I am no longer registered to vote.




Baptist
05-01-2010, 06:44 AM
I know that most of you will disagree with this. We went to the registrar today and unregistered to vote. They asked if we were upset. I gave them the letter below along with a copy of Hacking Democracy. I gave a copy of the letter and movie to the head registrar and his two main sidekicks.

I will still continue to spread the message of liberty. I passed out dozens of videos this week alone. But we are done working within the system. We are sick of it.



Thank you for your service to the citizens of our county. The United States is a republic with a strong democratic tradition, and ensuring safe polling locations and secure ballots is an essential component of our representative form of governance. As of today our family no longer wishes to be registered voters. Instead of simply quietly removing ourselves from the voter registration list, we decided to use this opportunity to explain to you why we no longer have faith in the electoral process.

The first reason does not concern you workers at the county level. Nevertheless, because it affected our decision we will make it known to you. We believe that there is no real choice in this country. Both major parties are two sides of the same coin and every election we are asked to vote for the lesser of two evils. The same special interests fund the major candidates of both parties, so no real change ever comes to this country. Every now and then a real choice comes along, running as a third party candidate. But the two major parties in tandem with the media see to it that the American people never learn about these candidates.

The other reason we no longer wish to vote concerns the election process at the county level. All across the country county registrars are switching to electronic voting. Our county is one such county. What little excitement we managed to muster during the presidential election of 2008 was quickly removed when we walked into one of your polling stations. For the first time in our lives we were forced to vote on electronic voting machines. This means that we knew who we were intentionally casting a vote for, but felt as though we had no idea who we were actually casting a vote for. You see, we have no faith in electronic voting. More specifically, we believe that Diebold voting machines are faulty at best, and fraudulent at worst.

Enclosed is a disk that contains a documentary. Please take the time to pop this disk into your computer and watch it. The documentary exposes how electronic voting is not secure, and is open to election fraud for anyone who wishes to manipulate elections. All across the country counties are banning the use of the voting machines deployed in this county. If this county became one such county to ban Diebold voting machines, it would increase our faith in the electoral process greatly. Until then, we regretfully will abstain from the electoral process.

Thank you for your service to the citizens of this county, and thank you for taking the time to watch the documentary.


Hacking Democracy (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7926958774822130737#)

specsaregood
05-01-2010, 06:50 AM
I know that most of you will disagree with this. We went to the registrar today and unregistered to vote. They asked if we were upset. I gave them the letter below along with a copy of Hacking Democracy. I gave a copy of the letter and movie to the head registrar and his two main sidekicks.

I will still continue to spread the message of liberty. I passed out dozens of videos this week alone. But we are done working within the system. We are sick of it.


Your mixing of singular and plural pronouns is confusing.

LibForestPaul
05-01-2010, 06:56 AM
Your letter is long and windy.

No one in their right mind is going to pop in a disk to watch a video.

Baptist
05-01-2010, 06:56 AM
Your mixing of singular and plural pronouns is confusing.

Bible states that when you get married two become one flesh. "I" and "we" are interchangeable when I'm referring to us. Just like the trinity is mixed all throughout many verses =)

Baptist
05-01-2010, 06:59 AM
Your letter is long and windy.

No one in their right mind is going to pop in a disk to watch a video.

Dude, are you joking? My parents asked me if they should vote for McCain, the lesser of two evils. Off the top of my head I wrote them a 7 page letter (single spaced) explaining why they should not. That was long-winded. I hope that Americans are not dumbed-down enough to think that a 4 paragraph letter is long and windy.

ChaosControl
05-01-2010, 07:19 AM
Dude, are you joking? My parents asked me if they should vote for McCain, the lesser of two evils. Off the top of my head I wrote them a 7 page letter (single spaced) explaining why they should not. That was long-winded. I hope that Americans are not dumbed-down enough to think that a 4 paragraph letter is long and windy.

Sorry to inform you, they are.

pacelli
05-01-2010, 07:36 AM
You are one step further to re-gaining your sovereignty. At least you are DOING SOMETHING about it. Congratulations!

johnrocks
05-01-2010, 07:39 AM
70% of the people who are able to vote don't vote, that plan is really working out for them and us isn't it?

awake
05-01-2010, 08:34 AM
If we automatically took voter turn out as a plebiscite on keeping democracy we would be much better off. The problem is not that you do not have enough people voting , it is what the power to vote yourself the property of others is doing to our civilization.

FunkBuddha
05-01-2010, 08:35 AM
You do whatever you feel is right. You're taking a stand and for that I applaud you. A revolution can be personal just as it can be global.

FrankRep
05-01-2010, 08:36 AM
Voting takes about 10 mins depending. Suck it up.

ClayTrainor
05-01-2010, 08:43 AM
The problem is not that you do not have enough people voting , it is what the power to vote yourself the property of others is doing to our civilization.


You do whatever you feel is right. You're taking a stand and for that I applaud you. A revolution can be personal just as it can be global.

+1

torchbearer
05-01-2010, 08:46 AM
we lost the SRLC straw poll by one vote.
what would you think if Ron lost the delegates of your state by one vote?
like a complete fucking douche bag?

Danke
05-01-2010, 08:56 AM
Letter to Rescind Voter Registration

Whether your concern is the I.R.S., property taxes or traffic enforcement, there are a couple of preliminary conditions which must he satisfied before all else. This letter repudiates the evidence of Consent to majority rule (voter registration) on the basis of incomplete disclosure (misrepresentation) and mistake. We will do that with a letter which will function as a Writ of Praecipe. Praecipe requires no seal of any "court," nor the signature of any "court officer" to make it valid. It is a simple Writ used by the sovereign to politely command a servant to perform a duty imposed by Law. The sovereign Elector handles all his affairs of Law with Writs and Affidavits. Writ of Praecipe will operate to take action on any public, elective officer so long as the duty commanded by the Writ is one which belongs to that office.

The letter will also function as a legal notice without citing any political statutes to insure there will be no factual basis for any future claim of "defective process." In case you haven't figured it out yet, disentangling yourself from this monster is somewhat like negotiating your way through a (legal) minefield. So don't change the way this letter is written.

Those of you who are not registered to vote and never have been obviously have no need for this letter but it won't hurt to have the information. Those of you who were previously registered to vote but let it lapse also need not bother with this letter, especially if it were in a different state. However, if you are the meticulous sort and want to make it certain, then go ahead and use the letter. Nothing is changed except you will have to put nunc pro tune immediately above your signature. This is a Latin legal phrase which means, "now as (it should have been) then." You will also have to change the present tense reference to the voter registration to a past tense reference and give the last known year of registration. Those of you who are currently registered to vote, or were at the last election, and desire to "undo" that will need to customize this letter, adding your own name and particulars.


John Doe
c/o P.O. Box 111
Eugene, Oregon CF[97402]CF

July 11, 2005

Office of the Secretary of State
for Oregon State
Elections Division/Department
Oregon State Seat of Government

RE: Notice & Praecipe; Elector Status Change.

Greetings:

You will please take notice that I recently discovered that there are certain political liabilities which attach to the voter registration/roll which, if they had been fully disclosed to me at the time I was induced into the Consent Contract, would have dissuaded me from doing so. I incorrectly registered as a voter, as I am a free will man, not a legal identity which was created and is owned by the State of Oregon. For that reason and on that basis, I am hereby repudiating the said Consent contract and withdrawing and rescinding my signature from and Declare void any and all forms, cards and Instruments which may evidence the said mistake.

You will also forthwith please remove my name from the voter roll for Oregon State and any political sub-division thereof as well as notify any and all interested parties of this Elector status change. My individual sovereign Consent is withdrawn and reserved until further notice. No answer to this instruction is required, but acknowledgement of compliance would be appreciated. In the event you are unable or unwilling to comply with this instruction, I shall alternatively require of you evidence of your Article VI Oath of Fidelity as well as the policy number and name and address of the underwriter of your Bond.

Respectfully,
John Doe
John Doe,
Oregon Elector

cc: Lane County Clerk


The c/o postal service address is so they don't mistake you for the political person mask using your name. That box or street number address belongs to the U.S. Postal Service, not to you. It is a kind of "station stop" number along a designated public right of way. I haven't met anyone yet who actually lives inside their mailbox, have you?

The use of "CF" on both ends of the zip code is strongly advised, but remains your option. It signifies that you regard the number as a constructive fraud and that your use of it is in no way to he taken as a Consent to or acknowledgment of it's validity In Law. It is a jurisdictional precaution that costs you nothing to take. The fact is, the zip code is what you might call a numerical designation for a precinct or suburb of Washington, District of Columbia. It is one of the legal devices that can be used to "prove" that you are subject to the purely political statutes of Congress. When you do not qualify your use of the zip code, you're helping Congress to extend and exercise political power over you that it doesn't otherwise have.

Our Constitution, at article I, Section 8, Clause 17, authorizes the exercise of absolute federal authority but only if you live in or on "Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, Dock-Yards, and other needful ‘Buildings’, and only if such ‘Place’ is purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be..." Unless you live in or on such a "Place”, the use of the zip code is a fraudulent attempt to extend federal authority beyond Constitutional limits. Still, it's your choice. If you have some concern about your letter getting to the intended addressee, not to worry, it will get there. Can you imagine any public functionary or postal employee admitting to not knowing where the Seat of Government for the State is located?

The body of the letter requires little explanation. It suggests that you have been defrauded without actually saying so. If there is anything that is most likely to make a public official nervous, it is the idea that you might put a claim and lien against their bond. In most areas of the country, if this happens they become unbondable, and without that bond, they cannot perform any official function without personal liability. There may be a few who try saying that they are "bonded" by "the government”. That is pure horse-pucky. It is common knowledge that "the government" is broke and incapable of "bonding" anyone, unless the "national debt" has been paid off or cancelled and nobody was told about it.

A copy of the letter is sent to the local county elections functionary (usually the County Clerk) as a courtesy so your name can he removed from the local poll and jury lists.

Your instructions are simple. You mail the originally signed letter to the Secretary of State, addressed as shown, using a Certificate of Mailing slip which can be used to evidence that you actually mailed it. If the letter is not returned to you (undelivered) in a reasonable amount of time, it is legally presumed "delivered”. Do the same with the copy sent to the local elections functionary. Keep a third copy of the letter and the two Certificate of Mailing slips in your own files/records. Should it ever become necessary, that is your proof that you have met all the necessary criteria of withdrawing your general Consent to majority rule and re-claiming that aspect of your sovereign Elector status.

It doesn't matter if your letter is answered or not. If it is, put that in your files/records too. There may come a day when you will need that evidence, so don't be careless with that file/record. Think of it the same way you would an insurance policy.

Please note that "Certificate of Mailing" is not synonymous with "Certified Mail". Those are two different services offered by the postal service. If you are not familiar with the Certificate of Mailing and how it works, just ask your nearest postal counter person. S/he will be happy to explain it to you.

specsaregood
05-01-2010, 09:00 AM
we lost the SRLC straw poll by one vote.

what would you think if Ron lost the delegates of your state by one vote?
like a complete fucking douche bag?

Didn't Gary Johnson get 3 votes in that SRLC......just saying.

torchbearer
05-01-2010, 09:03 AM
Didn't Gary Johnson get 3 votes in that SRLC......just saying.

You can't assume Gary's 3 voters would have preferred Ron. Ron may have truly been their second choice.
It doesn't change the fact that elections can be decided by one vote, and if you didn't bother to show up to vote, you could possible prevent a ron paul presidency.
had one more person showed up, that one person would have changed the headlines across the country.
the last thing we need are retards in our movement making a point by not voting.

constituent
05-01-2010, 09:05 AM
70% of the people who are able to vote don't vote, that plan is really working out for them and us isn't it?

Actually, the problem is the other 30% who think that the minor act of voting entitles them to push the other 70% around.

Non-voters aren't the problem, it's (a great number of) the voters who are.

specsaregood
05-01-2010, 09:14 AM
You can't assume Gary's 3 voters would have preferred Ron. Ron may have truly been their second choice.

Don't impinge on my freedom to assume whatever I want! :mad:
How can you assume that Ron was their second choice? It might have been Romney. :p

I agree though, not voting seems even less pointless than voting on rigged machines.

torchbearer
05-01-2010, 09:18 AM
Don't impinge on my freedom to assume whatever I want! :mad:
How can you assume that Ron was their second choice? It might have been Romney. :p

I agree though, not voting seems even less pointless than voting on rigged machines.

there are states that still use the caucus process for presidential nominations. those are usually done on paper ballots.
in the presidential primary, your power as a voter is huge because so few people show up.
about 1800 people decided who got Louisiana GOP delegates in 2008.
we had delegates that were only one or two votes away from pushing us into a super majority, even with all the rule-breaking going on.
and i know, personally, some anarch-libertarians who were sitting on their asses refusing to participate. fulfilling their own prophecy.
"nothing changes by voting, therefore i won't vote" self-fulfilling prophecy.

specsaregood
05-01-2010, 09:26 AM
there are states that still use the caucus process for presidential nominations. those are usually done on paper ballots.
in the presidential primary, your power as a voter is huge because so few people show up.
about 1800 people decided who got Louisiana GOP delegates in 2008.
we had delegates that were only one or two votes away from pushing us into a super majority, even with all the rule-breaking going on.
and i know, personally, some anarch-libertarians who were sitting on their asses refusing to participate. fulfilling their own prophecy.
"nothing changes by voting, therefore i won't vote" self-fulfilling prophecy.

I remember. :mad:
Didn't you have a screenshot of foxnews censoring/altering the LA caucus results they reported? I thought I had a copy but can't dig it up.

mczerone
05-01-2010, 09:28 AM
I know that most of you will disagree with this. We went to the registrar today and unregistered to vote. They asked if we were upset. I gave them the letter below along with a copy of Hacking Democracy. I gave a copy of the letter and movie to the head registrar and his two main sidekicks.

I will still continue to spread the message of liberty. I passed out dozens of videos this week alone. But we are done working within the system. We are sick of it.

Congratulations! While I don't share your fear of electronic voting (paper ballots re just as easy to rig), dropping out is the only alternative if you don't like the monopoly process that is used to determine your fate.

How nice of them to ask if you were upset, as though they were some customer-service representative! I can just imagine the rest of that conversation:

"Oh, I'm sorry that we haven't met your needs, sir, we'll get around to fixing that problem right away, because we don't want you to forgo us in favor of our competition. Wait, what? We don't have competition? Oh, well then if you're upset you can vote to change things. Oh, your upset about voting procedures? Well, then you can lobby the state legislature to change things. Oh, that doesn't work either because they have no incentive for procedural change? Then, um, um, um, run for office yourself! Yeah, that's the ticket."

When the system is the problem, there's only so much that can be done from within the system, and at all times you're wading up the rapids to get to a point when you can really affect any change. Outside the system activism is akin to getting out of the frigid waters and building a stairway to the source of the rapids. It may not be easy, and the rapids may still get you wet, but each step is rewarding and sets an example to others.

torchbearer
05-01-2010, 09:31 AM
I remember. :mad:
Didn't you have a screenshot of foxnews censoring/altering the LA caucus results they reported? I thought I had a copy but can't dig it up.

i'm looking for it, all i'm finding are news reports on it:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/01/23/louisiana-republican-caucus/
http://reason.com/blog/2008/01/23/so-who-won-the-louisiana-gop-c

mczerone
05-01-2010, 09:38 AM
there are states that still use the caucus process for presidential nominations. those are usually done on paper ballots.
in the presidential primary, your power as a voter is huge because so few people show up.
about 1800 people decided who got Louisiana GOP delegates in 2008.
we had delegates that were only one or two votes away from pushing us into a super majority, even with all the rule-breaking going on.
and i know, personally, some anarch-libertarians who were sitting on their asses refusing to participate. fulfilling their own prophecy.
"nothing changes by voting, therefore i won't vote" self-fulfilling prophecy.

I don't refuse to vote (I figure that if the pirates allow me to speak, I may as well drop a ballot to try to influence their actions), but I do think that these people were not voting for a reason: to not legitimize the system. They don't view voting as a valid decision making device, and refuse to pretend that they need a majority to sanction their worldview. They are principled because they are principled, not because the mob-mentality of their neighbors weighs in their favor.

A self-fulfilling prophecy is something akin to saying "This diet won't work, but I'll try it anyway", and then gaining weight and quitting the diet half-way through. It is not saying "This diet won't work, so I'll try something different". You seem to be the one with a self-fulfilling prophecy; your an-cap "ass-sitters" seem to have made a rational decision to just ignore the democratic process as much as possible and get on with their lives because they see that that diet doesn't work.

If you need masses of voters to turn out for you to "win", the blame is on you in not convincing people to vote your way - not on those who "win" by other means and don't see the value in voting. It's your fault for not convincing them to vote, because that is your goal, not theirs.

slothman
05-01-2010, 10:16 AM
If the voting machine is Diebold, I think they changed their name, or something then your vote may literally not count.
You might have an effect on smaller people though.
Especially if you run yourself.

brandon
05-01-2010, 10:43 AM
I think the letter is very well written. It clearly and concisely explains your actions, while retaining a respectable tone. Good job, and I respect your decision.

surf
05-01-2010, 11:19 AM
i have never subscribed to the theory that, "if you don't vote then you have no reason to bitch and moan." as we all know, democracy is generally best described as "two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner."

that said, i've never missed an election and, as long as i can find candidates that better embody liberty principles than his/her opponent i will continue to vote and campaign for these people.

i guess you could call it "hope for change...."

ps - i wrote in RP in 2008 and felt good about it.

angelatc
05-01-2010, 01:03 PM
Your mixing of singular and plural pronouns is confusing.

No it wasn't. Some things he did with his wife, and some things he did alone.

Baptist
05-01-2010, 10:06 PM
So we got a letter in the mail today, less than twenty-four hours after visiting them. It was from the General Registrar. The letter was two pages long, but here is a summary of it.


I am in receipt of your request to withdraw from our voting list. This is unfortunate because this take away your ability to vote for your choice of candidate or voice your position on particular referendum. It is always a sad day when this happens.


He then spent five paragraphs explaining how after the 2000 fiasco Congress passed the Help America Vote Act. This made available over $500k for our county if the county went electronic. Because our machines were "deteriorating rapidly and were being held together by ingenuity and rubber bands," our county decided, after much testing, to go with Advanced Voting Solutions WINvote machines.



We take pride in our elections and the security measures we take. Our Officers of Elections who are your neighbors and actually run the elections are also mindful of their security responsibilities. They take them seriously. So I wish you would reconsider and re-register. We need individuals like you, who are interested in keeping the Republic together and protecting the security of the vote.

Well he read the letter. Hopefully they watch the documentary too. He makes a good point about referendum. However, there are no liberty candidates in my state for the 2010 elections and no referendum either. I already skipped out on the governor election last fall because McDonnel = Deeds. We are moving away next year and in the mean time I will enjoy less junk mail.

I'll probably write him a quick letter thanking him for his timely response.

TCE
05-01-2010, 11:13 PM
No point in rigging local elections, it's costly and time consuming. Besides, most people that "matter" don't really care who the mayor of a town is nor who is on the school board. However, if you live in that town, it matter to you, if your kids go to that school, it matters to you. Look at the Ron Paul Mayor kid, tptb didn't stop him. Why not do that across a ton of small towns?

Akus
05-01-2010, 11:24 PM
Baptist, you always vote, even when you don't.

Danke
05-01-2010, 11:43 PM
Baptist, you always vote, even when you don't.

http://images4.cafepress.com/product/281571784v9_240x240_Front.jpg

Baptist
05-02-2010, 12:26 AM
http://images4.cafepress.com/product/281571784v9_240x240_Front.jpg

Tyrants love elections because it gives them legitimacy.

Even though I just did this, I've felt this way since the primaries of 2008. The fact that Paul got 10% in Iowa's caucus and placed 1st/2nd/3rd in many other caucuses, while getting 3% or 4% in EVERY primary is highly suspicious to say the least. But I have you all know that even though I feel this way about voting, I am not vocal about it and over the past two years I've been spreading the message, it has only come up twice. I figure that if I can just wake people up to the false left-right paradigm, they will naturally want to support liberty candidates, third party candidates, or "fringe candidates" (IE Paul and Kucinich) within the two parties. I am convinced that once an American decides to actively support any candidate who is not anointed by the establishment ("top tier"), they will see through the facade that we live in a free society with honest elections. They will see that the system is broken and that it is almost impossible to see a true statesmen get elected. Once they see this they might decide for themselves to abstain from voting like I do.

tpreitzel
05-02-2010, 12:52 AM
Baptist,

IMO, you've made a mistake. I understand your rationale, but those voters supporting tyrants will still be voting. This issue is basically similar to the philosophy espoused by G. Edward Griffin when he finally realized that the only thing worse than power was not having any power at all. Although well intentioned, you're playing into the hands of the enemy. I know you think voters are playing into the hand of the enemy by participating in a corrupt process and thereby "legitimizing" the process. Personally, I'd rather participate in a corrupt process while working to change it.

nobody's_hero
05-02-2010, 03:20 AM
How does that Adam Kokesh quote go:

"You don't do politics? That's okay. Politics will keep doing you."

.Tom
05-02-2010, 03:31 AM
Stop legitimizing the State. Don't vote!

GunnyFreedom
05-02-2010, 04:06 AM
So we got a letter in the mail today, less than twenty-four hours after visiting them. It was from the General Registrar. The letter was two pages long, but here is a summary of it.



He then spent five paragraphs explaining how after the 2000 fiasco Congress passed the Help America Vote Act. This made available over $500k for our county if the county went electronic. Because our machines were "deteriorating rapidly and were being held together by ingenuity and rubber bands," our county decided, after much testing, to go with Advanced Voting Solutions WINvote machines.



Well he read the letter. Hopefully they watch the documentary too. He makes a good point about referendum. However, there are no liberty candidates in my state for the 2010 elections and no referendum either. I already skipped out on the governor election last fall because McDonnel = Deeds. We are moving away next year and in the mean time I will enjoy less junk mail.

I'll probably write him a quick letter thanking him for his timely response.

When faced with that very same prospect, I decided to run myself... :D

LibertyMage
05-02-2010, 07:31 AM
We should have learned by now that we cannot change the system from outside the system. I sympathize with the idea of rebelling against the system to point out its illegitimacy but half of the voting population is already not voting. That is a path that is fruitless and frankly we are just being run over. Every science of social change states plainly that the system cannot be changed from outside.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 07:37 AM
We should have learned by now that we cannot change the system from outside the system. I sympathize with the idea of rebelling against the system to point out its illegitimacy but half of the voting population is already not voting. That is a path that is fruitless and frankly we are just being run over. Every science of social change states plainly that the system cannot be changed from outside.

So Democracy is the only possible solution to our problems?


Stop legitimizing the State. Don't vote!

YouTube - True News 5: The Truth About Voting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igbBItLemsM)

nobody's_hero
05-02-2010, 07:57 AM
So would voting for Ron Paul be 'legitimizing the state'? Someone should probably tell Ron—I'm sure he doesn't realize the harm he's doing. :rolleyes:

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 09:08 AM
So would voting for Ron Paul be 'legitimizing the state'? Someone should probably tell Ron—I'm sure he doesn't realize the harm he's doing. :rolleyes:

+1.
let's not forget that most of the activist here, think about all the harm we are doing.
i think we all just need to bend over and take it in the ass. at least that way we wouldn't be participating in it.
wait.... hmmmm either way we are getting fucked.

just because we don't show up to play the game doesn't mean the game isn't played.
and if you think the laws of the state and federal government don't apply to you because you don't vote, tell that to the jack boots who will be fucking up your life and wealth.

FSP-Rebel
05-02-2010, 09:13 AM
I vote simply out of self defense. They're taking money from me whether I like it or not and voting at least allows me to minimize the damage. That said, I understand the whole not legitimizing the system routine. Likely, I'm around more anarchists on a weekly basis than anyone else in this forum.

ProBlue33
05-02-2010, 09:14 AM
Hacking Democracy (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7926958774822130737#)

Thanks for this video, if you take the time to watch this, you will see that American Democracy has been effectively sabotaged. The 2000 and 2004 elections were frauds, with the help of Diabold type machines and Gems software.

Ron Paul is right, America isn't a Democracy anymore but a Corporaticy, this is why he more about the message than actually winning.
He knows his winning or attempt to win can be sabotaged, in many different ways.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 09:21 AM
+1.
let's not forget that most of the activist here, think about all the harm we are doing.
i think we all just need to bend over and take it in the ass. at least that way we wouldn't be participating in it.

wait.... hmmmm either way we are getting fucked.


Where is the diginity in begging your ass-raper to stop by scratching some opinions down on a piece of paper? Does it ever work?

Is democracy the path to liberty?



just because we don't show up to play the game doesn't mean the game isn't played.
and if you think the laws of the state and federal government don't apply to you because you don't vote, tell that to the jack boots who will be fucking up your life and wealth.

Every time I've ever voted and tried to convince others to vote with me, the laws still become progressively more oppressive.

Ron Paul is a rare gem. Washington will never become a bunch of Ron Pauls, no matter how hard libertarians vote. I'm not even sure that Rand Paul will live up to Ron Pauls principles.

I see solutions in pursuing the market, not the state...

YouTube - Entrepreneurs can change the world (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6MhAwQ64c0)

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 09:25 AM
Where is the diginity in begging your ass-raper to stop by scratching some shit down on a piece of paper? Does it ever work?

Is democracy the path to liberty?



Every time I've ever voted and tried to convince others to vote with me, the laws still become progressively more oppressive.

Ron Paul is a rare gem. Washington will never become a bunch of Ron Pauls, no matter how hard libertarians vote. I'm not even sure that Rand Paul will live up to Ron Pauls principles.

I'm not begging anyone. I'm building coalitions to infiltrate and take over the ruling mafia. i'm putting fear into the rapist. our OP has become the rape victim who goes to a happy place while they are getting raped. victimized so much that they just lay there and take it, all the while trying to pretend it isn't them getting fucked. the OP has given up and used poor logic to justify it.

what i hate about reponding to you, is that your point I have already answered in this thread. Should I repost all of my responses in this thread in a new post for you or would you mind going back and reading them?

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 09:33 AM
I'm not begging anyone. I'm building coalitions to infiltrate and take over the ruling mafia. i'm putting fear into the rapist
Do you really think they fear your ability to vote?

What do these coalitions do beside vote? Is building coalitions for democracy the most viable path to liberty, in your opinion?


. our OP has become the rape victim who goes to a happy place while they are getting raped. victimized so much that they just lay there and take it, all the while trying to pretend it isn't them getting fucked. the OP has given up and used poor logic to justify it.

That's dishonest. Just because he doesn't vote, does not mean he's not taking action against the actions of the state. He just doesn't appear convinced that democracy is the solution, or the proper action to take.



what i hate about reponding to you, is that your point I have already answered in this thread. Should I repost all of my responses in this thread in a new post for you or would you mind going back and reading them?

Nobody forced you to respond to me, or answer my questions, and I already read the thread.

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 09:41 AM
I already read the thread.

then respond to each of these


we lost the SRLC straw poll by one vote.
what would you think if Ron lost the delegates of your state by one vote?
like a complete fucking douche bag?




You can't assume Gary's 3 voters would have preferred Ron. Ron may have truly been their second choice.
It doesn't change the fact that elections can be decided by one vote, and if you didn't bother to show up to vote, you could possible prevent a ron paul presidency.
had one more person showed up, that one person would have changed the headlines across the country.
the last thing we need are retards in our movement making a point by not voting.




there are states that still use the caucus process for presidential nominations. those are usually done on paper ballots.
in the presidential primary, your power as a voter is huge because so few people show up.
about 1800 people decided who got Louisiana GOP delegates in 2008.
we had delegates that were only one or two votes away from pushing us into a super majority, even with all the rule-breaking going on.
and i know, personally, some anarch-libertarians who were sitting on their asses refusing to participate. fulfilling their own prophecy.
"nothing changes by voting, therefore i won't vote" self-fulfilling prophecy.



just because we don't show up to play the game doesn't mean the game isn't played.
and if you think the laws of the state and federal government don't apply to you because you don't vote, tell that to the jack boots who will be fucking up your life and wealth.




you will see two themes of critical point-
self-fulfilling prophecy. (you say it can't be changed by voting, so you stop voting, then nothing gets changed- proving your own point by aiding its conclusion)

not voting is not opting out of the system. the system doesn't allow you to opt out. Ron Paul has a bill on the floor of the house to allow people to opt out of obamacare. You know how Ron Paul got in office? He was elected with people's votes. (yeah, voting is rigged and useless. :rolleyes: )
Guess how Rand is going to get into the senate?

i have proof that anarchs who have stayed home on voting night have cost us dearly in the political landscape. I've posted it.
And Ron Paul is the proof that voting can change things.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 09:53 AM
then respond to each of these


You can blame others for your losses, all you want. Ever heard of the term "sore loser"?



you will see two themes of critical point-
self-fulfilling prophecy. (you say it can't be changed by voting, so you stop voting, then nothing gets changed- proving your own point by aiding its conclusion)


And voting is a self-fulfilling prophecy as well, as you legitimize the very policies and politicians that you vote against. After all, they usually do get more votes, regardless of your opinion as to why.



not voting is not opting out of the system. the system doesn't allow you to opt out.
I didn't claim that not voting is opting out of the system, that is a straw-man. I am saying that voting legitimizes the system. I agree that the state will rule over us, regardless of my choice to vote or not.



Ron Paul has a bill on the floor of the house to allow people to opt out of obamacare. You know how Ron Paul got in office? He was elected with people's votes. (yeah, voting is rigged and useless. :rolleyes: )


You know how Obama, Bush, Gore, Pelosi, etc. got into office?

Saying that voting works because we have Ron Paul, is like saying Macdonalds fries are healthy because they have some potato in them.



i have proof that anarchs who have stay home on voting night have cost us dearly in the political landscape. I've posted it.


Proof? Are you unable to accept any responsibility for failure? It's not up to the anarchs to vote, just because you are convinced that it's the answer. The burden of proof is on you, sorry.




And Ron Paul is the proof that voting can change things.


Ron Paul is a rare gem. Washington will never become a bunch of Ron Pauls, no matter how hard libertarians vote. I'm not even sure that Rand Paul will live up to Ron Pauls principles.

LibertyMage
05-02-2010, 09:57 AM
There is too much political science to get into right now, but the bottom line is that those that are opting out are more than irrelevant. Democracy sucks, but it at least gives us a chance to fight back. There is a difference between Lew Rockwell and Ron Paul; Lew is irrelevant, Ron started a movement. Instead of using the Illegitimacy of government excuse to opt out of doing anything, we need to be creating more Ron Pauls. That is how movements are built. It has been done before and we can do it again. You can do this outside the political and election systems, but unless you are in a position of influence it is meaningless.

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:00 AM
You can blame others for your losses, all you want. Ever heard of the term "sore loser"?



And voting is a self-fulfilling prophecy as well, as you legitimize the very policies and politicians that you vote against. After all, they usually do get more votes, regardless of your opinion as to why.


I didn't claim that not voting is opting out of the system, that is a straw-man. I am saying that voting legitimizes the system. I agree that the state will rule over us, regardless of my choice to vote or not.



You know how Obama, Bush, Gore, Pelosi, etc. got into office?

Saying that voting works because we have Ron Paul, is like saying Macdonalds fries are healthy because they have some potato in them.



Proof? Are you unable to accept any responsibility for failure? It's not up to the anarchs to vote, just because you are convinced that it's the answer. The burden of proof is on you, sorry.

so, it not the fault of the individual who chose not to show up, but all the people who did show up?
i'm not understanding your logic here?

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:06 AM
i think everyone should takes clay's advice and stop voting.
tell rand and ron to retire and stop participating.
this world will be so much better. :rolleyes:

(finds happy place while being ass raped by daddy government)

Yes clay, you are right. this is much better now.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 10:06 AM
so, it not the fault of the individual who chose not to show up, but all the people who did show up?

It's the fault of those who are convinced voting is the answer, not being able to convince enough people to vote their way, for whatever reason. As you know, I do not see democracy as an answer, nor do I see electing politicians as our solution.




i'm not understanding your logic here?

Blaming other people is just a cop-out for your own loss.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 10:08 AM
i think everyone should takes clay's advice and stop voting.
tell rand and ron to retire and stop participating.
this world will be so much better. :rolleyes:

You're the one in attack mode here. I think you should vote if you want, I'm simply explaining why I personally see no legitimacy in the act.



(finds happy place while being ass raped by daddy government)

Yes clay, you are right. this is much better now.

Right or wrong, I'm not telling anyone to do anything.

You and I are both getting ass-raped, and we have different views on how to reduce/stop the ass-raping and the effects of it.

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:11 AM
It's the fault of those who are convinced voting is the answer, not being able to convince enough people to vote their way, for whatever reason. As you know, I do not see democracy as an answer, nor do I see electing politicians as our solution.




Blaming other people is just a cop-out for your own loss.

Yes, I understand you don't see people like Ron Paul as the solution, but if it wasn't for him or the election process, most of you anarch jerk wads wouldn't even be posting on this forum, nor would 90% of the members here even have a clue as to the freedom message.
You are dead wrong in everything you believe... and normally i wouldn't give a fuck, except for the fact that your belief directly effects me in a very negative way.
you might as well be working for the opposition.

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:13 AM
Oh, I just had a wonderful idea.
Why don't we send people like the OP and Clay over the DemoUndergound. For the sole purpose of trying to convince their members not to vote. If we can reduce their voting members, then we have an advantage.
otherwise, we will keep sinking as more and more retards in our movement stay home.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 10:14 AM
Torch, I think we should stop. I like you, and we always get so dam confrontational when we don't agree on something.

Allow me to apologize and withdraw from the thread.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 10:15 AM
Yes, I understand you don't see people like Ron Paul as the solution, but if it wasn't for him or the election process, most of you anarch jerk wads wouldn't even be posting on this forum, nor would 90% of the members here even have a clue as to the freedom message.

Wow, you went all ad-hominem. Very disappointed. :(



You are dead wrong in everything you believe... and normally i wouldn't give a fuck, except for the fact that your belief directly effects me in a very negative way.
you might as well be working for the opposition.

Right, because my advocacy of seeking market-based solutions is clearly infringing on your liberties. :rolleyes:

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:16 AM
Wow, you went all ad-hominem. Very disappointed.



Right, because my advocacy of seeking market-based solutions is clearly infringing on your liberties. :rolleyes:

convincing voters in our movement to stay home on election night is acting directly against everything i'm doing. stop it or you or not my friend. you aren't even an associate at that point. you are the fucking enemy.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 10:19 AM
convincing voters in our movement to stay home on election night is acting directly against everything i'm doing. stop it or you or not my friend. you aren't even an associate at that point. you are the fucking enemy.

I feel bad thinking about how angry and in opposition you are to everyone who doesnt see it exactly your way, all of the time. I wish you the best of luck in pursuing democratic solutions for liberty...

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:21 AM
I feel bad thinking about how angry you appear all of the time. I wish you the best of luck in pursuing democratic solutions...

Thank you.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 10:23 AM
Thank you.

Suggestion for the future. Bitching and whining about other people, isn't a convincing tactic.

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:28 AM
Suggestion for the future. Bitching and whining about other people, isn't a convincing tactic.

not using it to convince, using it to convict. difference.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 10:37 AM
not using it to convince, using it to convict. difference.

Regardless, Ad-hominem is not a very convincing way to convict someone.


The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy.


most of you anarch jerk wads wouldn't even be posting on this forum, nor would 90% of the members here even have a clue as to the freedom message.
You are dead wrong in everything you believe...

Carole
05-02-2010, 10:40 AM
How do you think that "unregister and drop out" thingy has worked so far for America?

Quitters never win. :rolleyes: :D

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 10:43 AM
Regardless, Ad-hominem is not a very convincing way to convict someone.

it only appears ad-hominem because instead of taking in the information for what it is- you attribute the cause to something else, which requires a person to repeat the info in a different way hoping that it will eliminate the ignorance.

for instance, i point out we lose by one vote. a normal person thinks- well, one more person shows up, you tie, two more, you win. i tell my friends who refused to go based on "principle". they kicked theirselves in the ass.
You say- "sore loser". I'm not angry we lost, i'm angry my friends didn't show up to vote. You avoided the guilt by shifting the blame. and shifted it in a way that was false.
So i repeated the info. instead of understanding, you claim ad-hominem.

you aren't the first, second, or hundreth person i've had this discussion with... anarchs that don't vote have been holding us back for a lot longer than a decade or two.
my brothers in arms were the anarchs of the LP that fought in the political trenches with me. the ones who stayed home. we spit on them as useless.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 11:04 AM
it only appears ad-hominem because instead of taking in the information for what it is- you attribute the cause to something else, which requires a person to repeat the info in a different way hoping that it will eliminate the ignorance.
for instance, i point out we lose by one vote. a normal person thinks- well, one more person shows up, you tie, two more, you win. i tell my friends who refused to go based on "principle". they kicked theirselves in the ass.


You do more than "tell" them that. You flatout insult them, and get angry about it. Not very convincing.



You say- "sore loser". I'm not angry we lost, i'm angry my friends didn't show up to vote. You avoided the guilt by shifting the blame. and shifted it in a way that was false.
So i repeated the info. instead of understanding, you claim ad-hominem.


You're angry you lost, and you put the blame on other people. The ad-hominem is something else.





you aren't the first, second, or hundreth person i've had this discussion with... anarchs that don't vote have been holding us back for a lot longer than a decade or two.

Right, blame everyone else, but yourself. Also, if they are anarchists on this forum, that means they are probably wrong about everything, right?


most of you anarch jerk wads wouldn't even be posting on this forum, nor would 90% of the members here even have a clue as to the freedom message.
You are dead wrong in everything you believe...

Yea, no ad-hominem there :rolleyes:


Ad-hominem is an attempt to persuade which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.


my brothers in arms were the anarchs of the LP that fought in the political trenches with me. the ones who stayed home. we spit on them as useless.

And how much liberty did your votes achieve? Right right... it's my fault again...

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 11:10 AM
You do more than "tell" them that. You flatout insult them, and get angry about it. Not very convincing.



You're angry you lost, and you put the blame on other people. The ad-hominem is something else.





Right, blame everyone else, but yourself. Also, if they are anarchists on this forum, that means they are probably wrong about everything, right?



Yea, no ad-hominem there :rolleyes:




And how much liberty did your votes achieve? Right right... it's my fault again...

you know what- i don't appreciate you telling me what i feel and why since you dont' fucking know me. i'm pissed off because i couldn't can't on my "friends" showing up to vote. the side effect of that was a lost election. both in 2008 and in 2010. twice let down.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 11:11 AM
you know what- i don't appreciate you telling me what i feel and why since you dont' fucking know me. i'm pissed off because i couldn't can't on my "friends" showing up to vote. the side effect of that was a lost election. both in 2008 and in 2010. twice let down.

And I don't appreciate you blaming anarchists as well as myself, for every political loss you've ever had.

I think we should just call this conversation quits. There's nothing of value being established here. Agreed?

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 11:12 AM
I think we should just call this conversation quits. There's nothing of value being established here. Agreed?

any time any person any where tells people its a good idea not to vote, i will be there to respond.

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 11:14 AM
And I don't appreciate you blaming anarchists as well as myself, for every political loss you've ever had.



um, i've lost two elections personally. not one of them was because of people not voting, it was due to my inabilities. liberty candidates have lost hundreds of elections, not because of a few anarchs, but because a lack of interest in their candidacy.
but the two elections I posted, were in fact lost because of people who share your mentality.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 11:16 AM
any time any person any where tells people its a good idea not to vote, i will be there to respond.

I didn't tell anyone not to vote, so your premise is flawed. I am merely explaining why I personally see no legitimacy in the act, and personally will not vote.

You're just worried that people might start to voluntarily agree with my reasoning, right?

torchbearer
05-02-2010, 11:18 AM
I didn't tell anyone not to vote, so your premise is flawed. I am merely explaining why I personally see no legitimacy in the act, and personally will not vote.

You're just worried that people might start to voluntarily agree with me, right?

no, this board is a competition of ideas. what i write isn't to convince you, it is for everyone else who reads this thread. that is why it is important for me to respond.
you are participating in an action of convincing others to not vote, if the contrary position is not placed, you can convince them to not vote.

ClayTrainor
05-02-2010, 11:23 AM
no, this board is a competition of ideas. what i write isn't to convince you, it is for everyone else who reads this thread. that is why it is important for me to respond.


I never claimed it was to convince me. I think your approach should be appalling to any reasonable individual, even if they agree with your position.

Maybe I'm just bias'd :)



you are participating in an action of convincing others to not vote, if the contrary position is not placed, you can convince them to not vote.

Fair enough. I welcome our discussion on this issue. Anyways, I don't think there's any value in continuing this particular conversation. We've both made our point. Anyone reading knows where we stand, and we can reply to each others opinions all day and not get any further. Anything further is just ego-related, at this point.

Cheers, and have a good day! :)

Akus
05-02-2010, 07:11 PM
Tyrants love elections because it gives them legitimacy.

Even though I just did this, I've felt this way since the primaries of 2008. The fact that Paul got 10% in Iowa's caucus and placed 1st/2nd/3rd in many other caucuses, while getting 3% or 4% in EVERY primary is highly suspicious to say the least. But I have you all know that even though I feel this way about voting, I am not vocal about it and over the past two years I've been spreading the message, it has only come up twice. I figure that if I can just wake people up to the false left-right paradigm, they will naturally want to support liberty candidates, third party candidates, or "fringe candidates" (IE Paul and Kucinich) within the two parties. I am convinced that once an American decides to actively support any candidate who is not anointed by the establishment ("top tier"), they will see through the facade that we live in a free society with honest elections. They will see that the system is broken and that it is almost impossible to see a true statesmen get elected. Once they see this they might decide for themselves to abstain from voting like I do.

Soo.... you stopped pouring water on the fire. Instead, you go around and tell the unaware masses that the house is on fire, in hope that, once they realize this, they will stop pouring buckets of water on it as well....

That's quite a logic you got there.....

Baptist
05-02-2010, 07:26 PM
Soo.... you stopped pouring water on the fire. Instead, you go around and tell the unaware masses that the house is on fire, in hope that, once they realize this, they will stop pouring buckets of water on it as well....

That's quite a logic you got there.....

You all keep pointing to Ron Paul as proof that voting works. So by voting we get one straight guy into office every two hundred years? I don't know if I would classify that as working.

I was mildly optimistic when Schiff and Rand started their campaigns. But then they started calling for denying certain humans "natural" rights and started saying that we should bomb Iran's nuke program.

Akus
05-02-2010, 07:36 PM
You all keep pointing to Ron Paul as proof that voting works. So by voting we words words words more words many words words.......

Baptist, how do you suggest we change the inept corrupt murderous system under which we are currently under. We can't vote because that's "working for the man", so what can we, in your opinion, do?

nobody's_hero
05-03-2010, 05:24 AM
Well, if you ask an anarcho-capitalist what our other options are:

Apparently, we're supposed to wait for the 'market solution' fervor to sweep the land and be adopted by tens of millions of Americans who will suddenly and miraculously receive non-emperical knowledge of individual sovereignty and private property rights, and wholly accept those as viable means of living in harmony without encroaching on the rights of their fellow man.



—I guess we're screwed either way. :p

Imaginos
05-03-2010, 07:45 AM
We should have learned by now that we cannot change the system from outside the system. I sympathize with the idea of rebelling against the system to point out its illegitimacy but half of the voting population is already not voting. That is a path that is fruitless and frankly we are just being run over. Every science of social change states plainly that the system cannot be changed from outside.
+1
The problem is, if people like us (who support liberty/freedom/constitution) decided not to vote all together, the republic'd be even shitter state.

CCTelander
05-03-2010, 09:46 AM
for instance, i point out we lose by one vote. a normal person thinks- well, one more person shows up, you tie, two more, you win. i tell my friends who refused to go based on "principle". they kicked theirselves in the ass.

A rational person might look at the 200+ years that liberty minded individuals have struggled, attempting to use the electoral process to just maintain (let alone RECLAIM) thier liberty, and the abject failure that has resulted, and say, "Maybe, just maybe some other approach is called for. Maybe this just hasn't been working."

An irrational person simply keeps insisting that if we continue doing the same thing, just more and harder, we'll somehow wind up with different, better results.

Krugerrand
05-03-2010, 10:03 AM
If I were to not vote, it would be to protect revealing my true address to the government. I already reveal it, so I may as well vote.

torchbearer
05-03-2010, 08:55 PM
A rational person might look at the 200+ years that liberty minded individuals have struggled, attempting to use the electoral process to just maintain (let alone RECLAIM) thier liberty, and the abject failure that has resulted, and say, "Maybe, just maybe some other approach is called for. Maybe this just hasn't been working."

An irrational person simply keeps insisting that if we continue doing the same thing, just more and harder, we'll somehow wind up with different, better results.

voting is relatively new. your buds want to go back to despotism. no thanks. but if you like, i'm sure there are plenty of places you can go on this planet where there are no polls taken.
why haven't you gotten on that plane ride to somalia yet?

heavenlyboy34
05-03-2010, 09:31 PM
i think everyone should takes clay's advice and stop voting.
tell rand and ron to retire and stop participating.
this world will be so much better. :rolleyes:

(finds happy place while being ass raped by daddy government)

Yes clay, you are right. this is much better now.


You are caught in the "Group Trap". (See "How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World", by Harry Browne, pg 64-67)

*also note that many such advocates for liberty as Browne were/are advocates of non-voting as well.

GunnyFreedom
05-03-2010, 09:43 PM
I won't corral myself for the bastards. If I vote 1 against 49,000 - my opinion will be registered.

torchbearer
05-03-2010, 09:47 PM
You are caught in the "Group Trap". (See "How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World", by Harry Browne, pg 64-67)

*also note that many such advocates for liberty as Browne were/are advocates of non-voting as well.

funny how Browne ran for office, and recieved votes. weird.

heavenlyboy34
05-03-2010, 09:59 PM
funny how Browne ran for office, and recieved votes. weird.

After he ran, he wrote "The War Racket: The Lies, Myths, and Propaganda that Feed the American War Machine" in which he wrote "War, he contended, was just another government program, and was essentially flawed because "government never solves anything."

I wouldn't call him a "fan" of the system from my reading of his work and bio. But, you can believe in the State religion all you like.

Akus
05-04-2010, 01:00 AM
Baptist, how do you suggest we change the inept corrupt murderous system under which we are currently under. We can't vote because that's "working for the man", so what can we, in your opinion, do?

So Baptist, will you answer the question?

Zen82
05-04-2010, 07:59 AM
I'm not begging anyone. I'm building coalitions to infiltrate and take over the ruling mafia. i'm putting fear into the rapist. our OP has become the rape victim who goes to a happy place while they are getting raped. victimized so much that they just lay there and take it, all the while trying to pretend it isn't them getting fucked. the OP has given up and used poor logic to justify it.

what i hate about reponding to you, is that your point I have already answered in this thread. Should I repost all of my responses in this thread in a new post for you or would you mind going back and reading them?

Take over the ruling mafia? So then you, or Ron Paul or Jesus himself, would be in control of the ruling mafia?

It's STILL a ruling mafia. The point is the illegitimacy of the State itself.

Initiating violence is WRONG, morally and ethically in every sense. By definition, The State is a group that has a legal right to initiate violence.

It stands to reason that, no matter who is in control of it, The State is illegitimate, unethical and immoral.

Please, any jumps or fallacies in logic I've made, please point out.

Zen82
05-04-2010, 08:12 AM
Baptist, how do you suggest we change the inept corrupt murderous system under which we are currently under. We can't vote because that's "working for the man", so what can we, in your opinion, do?

That's what you can do, stop. Stop participating, stop obeying, stop acting as if anything the Government does is at all legitimate.

Stop complying. I believe it was your analogy, if I'm wrong just correct me, that one were to stop voting would be to stop pouring water on a fire and etc.

The point is, the fire NEEDS to burn. If you stop where this is going, you'll be left with a burnt out, hollow shell that is dangerous and ready to go back into flames at any moment. Remember the 90's?

Let it burn. This system is killing itself right now. That's what we're witnessing. Let the damn thing burn down. Let it collapse itself under its immense appetite for death, theft and violence.

Just stop complying. It is illegitimate. It is criminal. It is a mafia that TAKES FROM YOU WITH GUNS.

CCTelander
05-04-2010, 09:51 AM
Take over the ruling mafia? So then you, or Ron Paul or Jesus himself, would be in control of the ruling mafia?

It's STILL a ruling mafia. The point is the illegitimacy of the State itself.

Initiating violence is WRONG, morally and ethically in every sense. By definition, The State is a group that has a legal right to initiate violence.

It stands to reason that, no matter who is in control of it, The State is illegitimate, unethical and immoral.

Please, any jumps or fallacies in logic I've made, please point out.

Exactly.

I'm not interested in promises that if I help elect a different bunch of mafioso they won't ass-rape me as hard or for as long. I'm interested in stopping the ass-rape entirely.

LibertyIn08
05-04-2010, 10:10 AM
After he ran, he wrote "The War Racket: The Lies, Myths, and Propaganda that Feed the American War Machine" in which he wrote "War, he contended, was just another government program, and was essentially flawed because "government never solves anything."

I wouldn't call him a "fan" of the system from my reading of his work and bio. But, you can believe in the State religion all you like.

Those running on the ground are at least doing something to change the system.

What have you done lately?

:rolleyes:

Baptist
05-04-2010, 09:38 PM
Baptist, how do you suggest we change the inept corrupt murderous system under which we are currently under. We can't vote because that's "working for the man", so what can we, in your opinion, do?


I will answer this when finals are over.

.Tom
05-04-2010, 10:44 PM
The best thing you can do for the cause of liberty is throw some double ought buckshot at any agent of the State that tries to bust down your door and throw you in a cage and kill you for asserting your natural rights and withdrawing from their coercive racket.

The elephant in the room here is violent self defense. Just look at the American Revolution, they knew what to do when you're being raped, you fight back against your rapist.

t0mmy
07-06-2010, 10:35 AM
If we automatically took voter turn out as a plebiscite on keeping democracy we would be much better off. The problem is not that you do not have enough people voting , it is what the power to vote yourself the property of others is doing to our civilization.

Very well said! Low voter turn out as a plebiscite on keeping democracy- ah haha! This is consistent with - and now added to - the short list of things I have to say about the matter.
'Democracy: The God That Failed' by Hans Herman-Hoppe.