• jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:28 PM
    2 replies | 131 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:25 PM
    Evil genius is still genius. Just saying.
    12 replies | 212 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    12 replies | 212 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:23 PM
    Yes you are. ^That is just simply not true. You can put all of the "walls of text" up that you want. You can falsely claim "Nobody uses the word the other way." It's just NOT true. Most of the time capitalism is state administered capitalism but it doesn't have to be. Most of the time socialism is state administered but it doesn't have to be. In fact it's in some ways easier to have socialism that is not state administered than it is capitalism. Every time I buy something and sell it at a profit I'm supposed to report it to the IRS and collect sales tax. But if I pool resources with people, if I share, if I engage in any type of communal living (other than marriage), there are no government goons breathing down my neck. So no. Nothing you've been saying is even kind of close to true.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:48 PM
    And that's why dictionaries are important. And the dictionary says....you're wrong. But like a typical politician you'll spin the answer. You're being Fauci-like. "I am science." Or "I am the one who gets to decide what the definition is." Nope. Sorry. You don't. Exactly. But I was talking about a group of fellow believers! Which brings us full circle. What was described in Acts 2 id a type of socialism. Glad you finally agree.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:14 PM
    Maybe being so close to Israel he got to see early on the data from Israel showing what a total failure mass vaccination is?
    4 replies | 194 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:04 PM
    Anything can be debated. That said, have you read the book Animal Farm? At the end the "farmers" (capitalists) and the "pigs" (communists) bodies warp until the animals (us peons) looking from one to the other couldn't tell the difference. China is indeed becoming more capitalist as is Russia. America and Western Europe are indeed becoming more socialist. And all of the areas I just mentioned are becoming more statist and authoritarian. Socialism isn't a proxy for statism / tyranny / authoritarianism.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:58 PM
    It's possible to have such a discussion, but 99.999% of the time, when the word "CAPITALISM" is used, what is meant is a State-administered CAPITALISM aka CORPORTISM aka FASCISM. Which is why it's best to choose some other, more descriptive word to avoid confusion. See what I did there? Nope. I am not "all over the map." You just don't want to accept the truth. You said you own your own body. The Bible says you don't. It's not that hard.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:49 AM
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TheTexan again.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:49 AM
    Right. It's not a legal argument. It's a moral argument. And you've just explained voluntary / Christian socialism. You act like you don't understand it, but clearly you do. It's illegal for a 21 year old to sleep with a 16 year old in some states. It's NOT legal in other states. Is in moral? Is it less moral than an 80 year old sleeping with a 18 year old? It's certainly legal for the 80 year old to sleep with the 18 year old. It's now legal for two men or two women to marry in every state in the union. But it's still a criminal offense in most states for one man to marry two women or vice versa even if the marriage is done in a private ceremony with no state involvement. Solomon and David would both have criminal records in modern America. Should a group of people (a church) be able to preach to its members from 1 Corinthians 6:19 and say "You can't be a part of this body of believers if you are out having illicit sex, doing drugs, listening to that bad music?" Should such a group of people (a church) decide not to continue to associate with people who didn't agree with their idea of what God thinks it's okay for Humans to do with His bodies that he lent to said humans for them to complete their spiritual journey own? I can tell you to give to the poor, stop sleeping with male and/or female hookers, don't get your eyelids pierced, and as long as you can tell me to "bugger off" and I can tell you "Well in that case you can't join my group" we still both have freedom.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:38 AM
    Good question. Here's the Biblical answer: 1 Corinthians 6:19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? Is that tyranny? Well....it depends. Do you think God is a tyrant? I don't. But some people do. Now, I don't think the state should be willy nilly enforcing what I believe God says is appropriate or not appropriate to do with one's body on everyone. That means I have to support people's right to make a choice about the body that they do NOT own because they neither created it nor redeemed it! Abortion is a special case because there is another created body inside the body that people think they own. But all the radical feminists shouting at the homes of the SCOTUS "My body my choice" would agree with you. So would the "libsoftiktock", those fun loving purple haired teachers that want to teach your children that they can "choose" whether or not they want to be a boy or a girl. I guess it's only a matter of time before it's acceptable for someone to teach children with body integrity dysphoria that they can "choose" to cut an arm or a leg off to fit with the mental ideal they have of themselves. Mmmmm.....okay. Only if you totally misunderstand the Bible and the nature of God. I get it. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. If you realize that God really owns everything and you're just a steward, and yes that includes your own body, then it's possible for you to live with a group of like minded believers who live for God and not for themselves. But as the Police would sing "We are spirits...in a material world." Or Madonna "We are living in a material world and I am a material girl."
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:00 AM
    Do you consider China socialist? They have billionaires. But you're missing the point of the Ananias and Saphira story. The people around them were VOLUNTARILY giving up private property! That's the point that you refuse to even acknowledge with your circular reasoning. In your mind, as long as someone can have private property, everybody by definition must have private property. That's simply not the case. People can be voluntarily socialist. They can even allow people in their company who aren't voluntarily socialist. Ananaias and Saphira experienced the social pressure to conform to those around them who were selling everything and holding all things in common, by pretending to sell everything and hold all things in common. If things were the way you're trying to pretend they were, there would have been no reason for A & S to pretend.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:55 AM
    Good for you! You never would have joined the fellowship of early Christian believers in Jerusalem. And guess what? That would have been okay! Seriously, it would have. Believers outside of Jerusalem still largely kept whatever wealth they had. In fact, that's how they were able to participate in the "great donation" when Paul collected alms for the church in Jerusalem. Now someone might say "Those lazy Jerusalem Christians! Living off the Christians in Asia Minor!" But there was a very good reason not to be wed to land in Jerusalem. Some forty years after the ascension of Christ, Jerusalem was destroyed! The same Bible that extolled the virtues of each man having "according to his need" (main maxim of socialism) also said the Lord gave to His servants "each according to his ability" (the maxim of free market capitalism). Anyway, the question isn't "Do you want to give up everything you own" but rather "Would you like to participate in something that is collectively owned as opposed to privately owned?" Like....say...cryptocurrency. If you put your money in a traditional "bank" you're putting your trust in something owned by BankOfAmerica or Citibank or Goldman Sachs etc. Who owns the various blockchains? Nobody? Everybody? Oh, but many you're luddite like Anti Federalist. Okay. He's long complained about the ability of "big tech" to censor the private property they own. Like me, he misses the days of USENET. Guess what? USENET was collectively owned. Yeah, the servers were privately owned and each server could control who could log into it and what news groups to participate in, but other than that it was a free for all. (It still kind of sort of exists). Which brings us to Web 3.0, which is shaping up to be a compilation of crypto and USENET. Steemit (I think I learned about this from danno), is (was?) a blogging platform on a blockchain. It actually suffered a 51% attack (I think). So the faithful "steemit injuns" moved on to greener pastures and created https://hive.io. It's more resilient to a 51% attack, boosts two different video sharing platforms, several different blogging platforms, some games, decentralized finance etc. All without a central authority or "owner."
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:38 AM
    :rolleyes: Wiki? Really? From the freaking dictionary. Definition of socialism 1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:36 AM
    You're allowed to be wrong. Right. And there's more than one usage for the word "socialism" just like there's more than one usage for the word "capitalism." By the way, the game you and B4L are playing is the same game I see socialists play with the world "capitalism." I define capitalism as anything other than the current crony corporate capitalism and they are quick to say "But that's not capitalism." Ummm.....yes it is. And what the early church did in Acts 2 was a form of socialism whether you are willing to admit it or not. It also has an established meaning that is EXACTLY the way I'm using it.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:55 AM
    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=how+media+coverage+causes+more+shootings&t=raspberrypi&ia=web https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5296697/ Abstract Mass shootings are a particular problem in the United States, with one mass shooting occurring approximately every 12.5 days. Recently a “contagion” effect has been suggested wherein the occurrence of one mass shooting increases the likelihood of another mass shooting occurring in the near future. Although contagion is a convenient metaphor used to describe the temporal spread of a behavior, it does not explain how the behavior spreads. Generalized imitation is proposed as a better model to explain how one person’s behavior can influence another person to engage in similar behavior. Here we provide an overview of generalized imitation and discuss how the way in which the media report a mass shooting can increase the likelihood of another shooting event. Also, we propose media reporting guidelines to minimize imitation and further decrease the likelihood of a mass shooting.
    52 replies | 953 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:42 AM
    Jordan Peterson had a pretty long discussion about this. While he agree with your point about "living up to one's potential causes income inequality", he went on to say that in a healthy society there is some way to balance that out. And that way doesn't have to be statist. For example he mentioned the native Canadian tribes ancient tradition of the "pot latch" where chiefs who had accumulated lots of stuff where honored by how much they gave away. the-uncomfortable-truth-behind-economic/2efb0363d6cc3b8e9c12babce4154c66f4c0c01d The Hebrew religion also had something to balance out income inequality. It was the Year of Jubilee. That year all family land that to be returned to the original owner, debts were cancelled, and Hebrew slaves were freed. (See: https://insight.bibliotech.us/jubilee-forgiveness-of-debt/) Interestingly enough, the Lord Himself claimed ownership of the land and that's why it couldn't be permanently sold, except for houses inside walled cities. (Leviticus 25:23 The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me.) Instead, we have a society where the government ultimately owns the land. Don't pay your taxes? Lose your land. Make a bad business deal? You can lose your land. One of your cousins twice removed decides he wants to sell his 2 acre share in the family 2,000 acre plot because he wants to buy his trophy wife that boob job and butt lift she wants? You guessed it, you can lose your land. There are some aspects of the Hebrew religion still in our law such as debt forgiveness through filing for bankruptcy and prohibitions on usury...with loopholes where people still charge usury anyway.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:19 AM
    Uhhhh....nope. Not even kind of true. They got wiped out because they had no immunity to European disease and hadn't invented gun powder. Even the "civilized" tribes like the Aztecs and Incas who had European style feudalism got wiped out.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:11 AM
    Because....that's what it actually is. Why does the accurate label bother you? And why do you describe a voluntary agreement as "temporary?" Just because people can voluntarily leave something doesn't mean they must. But, technically, everything is "temporary" even empires. There is no reason a group of people cannot indefinitely share resources. This entire planet "shares" the ocean. I recall that not too long ago people on this forum where vehemently arguing against the "L.O.S.T." treaty as statist overreach. Do you think billionaires like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates should be able to buy up the ocean?
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:05 AM
    Tell that to all of the Indian tribes who banded together and fought to defend their collective happy hunting grounds. In fact a strong argument can be made that there's more incentive for a group of warriors to band together to defend they land they own together than to band together the defend they land they all own individually.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-24-2022, 10:54 PM
    Are you sure about that? http://www.mutualist.org/ Mutualism, as a variety of anarchism, goes back to P.J. Proudhon in France and Josiah Warren in the U.S. It favors, to the extent possible, an evolutionary approach to creating a new society. It emphasizes the importance of peaceful activity in building alternative social institutions within the existing society, and strengthening those institutions until they finally replace the existing statist system. As Paul Goodman put it, "A free society cannot be the substitution of a 'new order' for the old order; it is the extension of spheres of free action until they make up most of the social life." Other anarchist subgroups, and the libertarian left generally, share these ideas to some extent. Whether known as "dual power" or "social counterpower," or "counter-economics," alternative social institutions are part of our common vision. But they are especially central to mutualists' evolutionary understanding. Mutualists belong to a non-collectivist segment of anarchists. Although we favor democratic control when collective action is required by the nature of production and other cooperative endeavors, we do not favor collectivism as an ideal in itself. We are not opposed to money or exchange. We believe in private property, so long as it is based on personal occupancy and use. We favor a society in which all relationships and transactions are non-coercive, and based on voluntary cooperation, free exchange, or mutual aid. The "market," in the sense of exchanges of labor between producers, is a profoundly humanizing and liberating concept. What we oppose is the conventional understanding of markets, as the idea has been coopted and corrupted by state capitalism.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-24-2022, 10:43 PM
    Correct. Incorrect. The early church in Jerusalem was a kind of "libertarian socialism." Acts 2:44-45 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
    51 replies | 361 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-24-2022, 11:36 AM
    No....because I never took the first shot.
    4 replies | 103 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-24-2022, 10:13 AM
    Very informative on so many levels. I wonder how many kids not only get pushed into being trans because their parents freak out about them playing with the wrong gender toys, but also get pushed into being gay? Maybe play should just be looked at as play. In general dysphorias are correctly looked at as mental conditions. For example body integrity dysphoria where someone things he or she should be an amputee. People with B.I.D. report feeling "whole" after cutting off a limb. https://academicjournals.org/journal/IJPC/article-full-text-pdf/B8D4DF467776#:~:text=The%20term%20body%20integrity%20dysphoria%20%28BID%29%20describes%20a,desire%20of%20the%20affected%20person%20to%20have%20a But nobody would suggest amputation as a "treatment."
    2 replies | 80 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-24-2022, 09:27 AM
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Globalist again.
    5 replies | 198 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-24-2022, 09:24 AM
    Bumpfire stock ban through executive order, red flag law proposals and pushing for assault weapons bans before and during his presidency were all moves in the WRONG direction. But I do appreciate the money for the HBCUs, the First Step Act, and Trump's attempt at reparations with the Platinum Plan. So he wasn't all bad.
    26 replies | 852 view(s)
  • Dr.3D's Avatar
    05-23-2022, 07:26 PM
    So is the Jif peanut butter recall part of the plan?
    7 replies | 146 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-23-2022, 10:48 AM
    Yes. But President Zelinsky is Jewish. Therefore if you oppose the neo Nazis that he's supporting you must be antisemitic.
    7 replies | 146 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-23-2022, 10:43 AM
    Obama brought home troops and deployed troops. Trump brought home troops and deployed troops. Obama did more drone bombings than Bush. Trump did more drone bombings then Obama. Using your same argument someone logically could ask the question "Do you miss Obama." The truth is they all suck.
    26 replies | 852 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    05-23-2022, 10:39 AM
    Thank you for the infographic. I think I'll turn this into a sticker for gas stations. It's much more informative than the "I did that" stickers.
    24 replies | 845 view(s)
More Activity

3 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    thanks man!
  2. View Conversation
    Please help! I'm counting on RPF! http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=251175
  3. View Conversation
    Well she reads the blog.

    Also I'm trying to understand why she thinks Rand is pro-choice.

    Why not talk about it?
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 3 of 3
About John Taylor

Basic Information

Political Campaign Skills
Campaign Workers:
Fund Raiser

Signature


The evils of the protecting-duty, may undoubtedly be graduated by compromises, like those of every other species of tyranny, but the folly of letting in some tyranny has in all ages been fatal to liberty. A succession of wedges, though apparently small, finally splits the strongest timber. ~John Taylor of Caroline, Tyranny Unmasked

We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box. ~Congressman Larry McDonald.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,909
Posts Per Day
0.87
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
3
Most Recent Message
07-04-2010 06:24 PM
General Information
Last Activity
03-05-2015 01:18 PM
Join Date
02-06-2010
Referrals
0

14 Friends

  1. Acala Acala is offline

    Member

    Acala
  2. BamaFanNKy BamaFanNKy is offline

    Member

    BamaFanNKy
  3. BlackTerrel BlackTerrel is offline

    Member

    BlackTerrel
  4. Brett Brett is offline

    Member

    Brett
  5. Deborah K Deborah K is offline

    Member

    Deborah K
  6. Dr.3D Dr.3D is offline

    Member

    Dr.3D
  7. FrankRep FrankRep is offline

    Member

    FrankRep
  8. jmdrake jmdrake is offline

    Member

    jmdrake
  9. Kregisen Kregisen is offline

    Member

    Kregisen
  10. pahs1994 pahs1994 is offline

    Member

    pahs1994
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 14
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...