Tab Content
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-20-2017, 12:08 PM
    It isn't a dictatorship in waiting. It is a dictatorship.
    4 replies | 875 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 12:53 PM
    LE has been one for a while now. You know what makes someone a useful idiot? Believing in the Left-Right divide.
    410 replies | 7155 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-19-2017, 10:02 AM
    I don't think so. Christianity spread in its first 300 years despite Rome, not because of it. Arianism was highly popular in two place, North Africa and the Germanic tribes. It would probably have remained so without Roman armies to actively suppress it. Other forms of Christianity spread through Europe and Asia. You would probably have ended up with something more akin to the Orthodox Church being the major denomination of Christianity.
    9 replies | 194 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-18-2017, 05:26 PM
    Without Rome, Christianity would've spread even more easily across Europe. It isn't like Christianity only spread because Rome welcomed Christianity with open arms. Indeed, the "barbarians" that eventually defeated the Western Empire were in fact Christians already. The big difference would be that there wouldn't be any Roman Catholicism. Whether that is good or bad depends on your view.
    9 replies | 194 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-17-2017, 02:13 PM
    Responses in bold Just the opposite. Tribe place huge limitations on the power of chiefs. For example, chiefs could not compel you to obey them. They had to prove they were worth following by first bestowing some gift upon the family. In order to act they had to have the approval of the tribal elders, who in turn had to have the approval of the clans. If individuals in a clan did not wish to follow the elder or chief they did not have to do so. Even in war a war chief could not compel you to serve them nor punish you for not doing so. They had to win soldiers by distributing gifts and presenting their strategy, convincing others it would be successful. If you want to talk about societies where those in authority have the power to beat, torture, and murder you for refusing to obey them, you're talking about a Statist society. You're talking about Presidents, Kings, and Generals. I can think of no better illustration than this: In war if you try to leave a European army the general could have you shot for "cowardice" or "treason." In a Native war band you could not be compelled to stay. You could certainly lose face for backing out of the fight after committing, but you would not be harmed by the War Chief for doing so.
    111 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-17-2017, 01:40 PM
    Why settle for "freest"? 'Tis a bit like saying, "Which one of these scoops of ice cream would you like, the one with a handful of dog shit in it, the one with a marble sized amount of dog shit in it, or this one with a pebble size amount of dog shit in it?" You all are arguing over how much shit is too much shit when the correct answer is you shouldn't be eating shit at all.
    111 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-17-2017, 01:37 PM
    Concepts and ideas are the only things that matter. If the 21st century has lost it, there is no greater time to rebirth it. And liberty is the antithesis of tribalism. Whereas tribalism demands all wills bend to the demands of the collective, liberty demands individualism. You can have community with tribalism and society without collectivism.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    70 replies | 2107 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-17-2017, 11:49 AM
    Technology has nothing to do with being more tribal or less tribal or even more free and less free. China is one of the most technologically advanced nations on the planet. Singapore is one of the richest. Neither rank anywhere near the freest. Further, it doesn't matter how big or small you are if the conqueror has far superior technology if your only method of resistance is violence. You're going to lose. It doesn't matter if you're a state or not. Being a state in fact grants no great possibility of success or failure in warfare. The Inca and Aztec both were highly developed states with more well-trained men, more organization, and a greater knowledge of the territory than their Spanish conquerors. Yet the Inca and Aztec still lost. Sometimes in insanely lopsided battles. At the Battle of Cajamarca, for example, around 180 Spanish soldier defeated anywhere between 3,000-8,000 highly trained Incan warriors. Why? Cannons and steel. It has nothing to do with Anarchy vs. the State and everything to do with technology. In fact, if you want to compare, the Native Americans of the US and Canada, even though they were smaller groups, more anarchic groups, were able to put off total domination by their more advanced invaders by hundreds of years. Whereas the highly statists Aztecs and Incans fell in a matter of years, it took centuries for the English and Americans to totally pacify the Natives. You still have isolated Native resistance as late as 1924 in America! So, being a state has nothing to do with success or failure at war. But if we look at which groups are able to continue fighting the longest, even against technologically superior foes with greater numbers, it seems the more anarchic the better. Anarchy proves superior.
    111 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-16-2017, 05:02 PM
    Exactly. Just look at the arguments. Statists argue that anarchy will lead to warlordism as local warlords seize power. Let us assume this is true. Small time warlords with small time armies either must give the people they rule great benefits or they will be overwhelmed by the much larger population. At the very least people will have more power over their lives and who rules them. On the other hand, the State is warlordism taken to the Nth degree. Your local mayor? Nothing but a warlord who uses the local military force -the police- to maintain power. And if you ever threaten the warlord's state the warlord can call in greater and overwhelming force from an even more powerful warlord above them -the Governor and state National Guard- unlike in anarchy where there would be no greater power and no ability to overwhelm the people with brute might. And if that fails, your local warlord and his boss warlord can call in their master -the Head of State, the President in the USA- who will declare your local demands for justice and liberty to be a "rebellion" and send in the might of the national military to devastate and dominate you, murdering you into submission. Can anarchy get bad? Absolutely. But even at its worst anarchy is a far better system than the State at its best. Anarchist societies have less violence, less war, less destruction, whereas the State can only exist by and through those things.
    111 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-16-2017, 04:55 PM
    There is no such thing as a good State. The very basic foundation of any and all States is tyranny. And they will only become more and more tyrannical. Ther eis not a single State in all of history that has ever reduced tyranny. Anarchy is the absence of all tyranny. It is possible that violence and bloodshed could happen in an anarchist society. But this is so in all forms of human organization. Anarchists realize though that anarchy gives the least bloodshed and causes the least harm for the most people. It is not perfect, nothing is perfect. But it is better in every realistic case and example you can conjure than the State, any type of State.
    111 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-16-2017, 04:51 PM
    If you cannot distinguish between someTHING and someONE then you've got a serious problem.
    111 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 03:50 PM
    You should perhaps quote him in the entirety so as to not miss his point, that no one can "claim" to have authority over you. But the State is the absolute definition of might makes right. That is what the "law" is all about. If you oppose teh idea of might makes right then you're halfway to being an anarchist.
    111 replies | 1948 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 03:48 PM
    So, what are the odds Trump will drag us into two more wars to go along with the three we're already fighting?
    9 replies | 209 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 03:43 PM
    I disagree with Swordsmyth quite a bit. He or she fails to understand the Constitution, fails to understand Liberty, fails to understand "Western Civilizations" greatest philosophical developments -individualism and free markets- and embraces barbaric ideas like "blood and soil;" but, the one thing he or she is not. And that is a coward.
    157 replies | 4194 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 03:32 PM
    I think you should make them work for life personally. Killing them doesn't really bring justice, justice being the idea that you restore what you took. At least by making them work in some capacity and funneling the money to the family of the victim you can go some distance towards replacing the economic opportunity taken by the murder. As a Christian, I also believe in extending the opportunity for repentance and change, even for the most evil of people.
    157 replies | 4194 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 09:51 AM
    He really made the rounds yesterday, didn't he?
    1 replies | 139 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 09:48 AM
    Because how we address the ideas of Liberty will determine how we go forward. Philosophy is the central motivation for why and how we act.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 09:47 AM
    Every culture has articulated the ideas of freedom at one point or another, so this is simply not true. Tribalism -"blood and soil"- is hostile to freedom because freedom frees people from the mental, economic, and political dependence upon the tribal lords.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 09:41 AM
    Pictured: The "Whites" Who Built America As for the usage of violence against peaceful people to protect your "ideas:" "Japan" is an imaginary collective. At that matters are individuals. Japan has no rights, it isn't a person. Therefore it has no rights to anything. Only human individuals have rights. And you have the right to decide who can and cannot enter property you privately own. But you have no right to regulate property you do not privately own in any way. You cannot decide who your neighbor has on their property. These ideas are called individualism and property rights and they are the core philosophical developments of "Western Civilization." Rejecting them and embracing barbaric "blood and soil" racial identity politics is to reject "Western Civilization" for the failed traditions of the past.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-13-2017, 09:24 AM
    You do not need a place to be free. You are born free. It is funny you talk about imprisonment and then suggest building walls around you will make you free. What is imprisonment other than being locked behind walls you will not or cannot exit? Your walls are a prison, the opposite of Liberty. Further, your comments that freedom has struggled in ever culture is a telling truth. This suggests that no culture has ever been truly free, therefore freedom is not a culture. Not early America nor now. Indeed, insisting upon an enforced dominate culture is the opposite of freedom. Freedom is the power to think, act, and live in ways that your society opposes without them using violence against you to force you into conformity. Enforced culture demands that those who would be free are attacked, punished, even killed for using their freedom differently that what the cultural norms are. Yet, Liberty can exist in all cultures. Indeed, you cannot be truly said to be living "your culture" unless you have the freedom not to do so. A Mexican can embrace his cultural heritage right next to a Chinese person living theirs. Indeed, freedom allows for all cultures to exist and grow, competing in the marketplace of ideas to demonstrate that they benefit others the most and therefore drawing more voluntarily into their practices. What the Lefties call "cultural appropriation" is merely a function of a free market of ideas.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-12-2017, 04:18 PM
    Freedom doesn't need a territory. As an idea, or set of ideas, it transcends such petty ideas as territory. Indeed, if you think freedom has any culture then you don't understand freedom or culture. The Internet has made it possible to use a currency completely unregulated by the State, Bitcoin, engage in free market capitalism across the world with the touch of a button without government tax interference, has given unparalleled power to the practice of the freedoms of speech, expression, religion, etc. The ideas of liberty are spreading wider than they ever have at one time in all of history. It is a great moment in the history of freedom. Certainly we still live with many of the hallmarks of the State that have always existed -taxation, imprisonment, etc.- but more than ever we are able to circumvent those if we truly wish.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-12-2017, 04:13 PM
    The President doesn't even have the power to issue such orders in the Constitution. Further, using executive authority to circumvent and nullify the law is a violation of the Constitution. In regards to the law the President has three powers: to veto a proposed law, to pardon convicted violators of the law, and to enforce the current law. Only Congress has the power to create or alter the law. When the President engages in such activity it is unconstitutional as he is assuming the powers held by Congress. This order allows for insurance companies to form and operate that are currently illegal under the ACA. This means Trump is essentially creating a new law by fiat order, nullifying previous law by fiat order, and then using his position to force that law into action. In this he usurps Congressional power to create and alter law along with the Judicial power to abolish law. Whatever you think of the ACA, and I despise it, this is nothing but another blatant violation of the US Constitution and further expansion of the centralized power of the Presidency. No constitutionalist could applaud this, but like all other Progressives you are a constitutionalist only when it is convenient. When it isn't you violate it and ignore it.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-12-2017, 04:00 PM
    I suppose you would know a lot about barbarians rejecting freedom as that is what you champion. But no, it isn't because it has been overwhelmed by the "hordes of humanity." Rather it is because liberty is a new idea every time. And people are uneducated in it and afraid. They would rather grasp onto their ancient tribalism ("blood") and territorial isolation ("soil") than embrace the dangers and blessings of being free. The great march of history though is towards greater and greater liberty, and you can see its progress etched across the whole of human history even as it has floundered in some areas. As civilization grows the tribal barbarisms of the past become obsolete.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • PierzStyx's Avatar
    10-12-2017, 03:54 PM
    Is that "progressive friend" really just your reflection? Because defending a President using unconstitutional executive power to circumvent Congress in order to create laws to make things the way you think they should be -you know, what you're defending now- is the very essence of Progressivism. Meaning you are a Progressive. Oh, and in case you missed it, you aren't free. When you depend on teh whim of those in power you're a slave, not a man.
    58 replies | 1036 view(s)
More Activity

9 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    I see you like avatar. When do you think the next avatar season is coming out?
  2. View Conversation
    I'll certainly post the article!
  3. View Conversation
  4. View Conversation
    A Liberty candidate needs your help!

    Donate today to Thomas Massie with $20.12 or something bigger! http://www.thomasmassie.com/

    For Liberty!
  5. View Conversation
    People have the capacity to reason. You don't need to always show them the whole thing. A strong statement telling them that they are wrong is often all you need to do. Then they do the rest, at least when the other person can think.

    If they're feeling like idiots, they will feel bad. Feeling bad makes people try to do something different to feel better. So they might just go ahead and think and stop being idiots.
  6. View Conversation
    Damnit. I'm trying to keep people from getting banned here, including you. And no, you're wrong. Being attacked in a forum is part of being a part of it. Get thicker skin.
  7. View Conversation
    If you can't "let it pass" then that is your problem. You should resolve it through private messages. When you use public threads you make it everyone else's problem. Just use your head is all.
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 9 of 9
About PierzStyx

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you do not support Trump or Hillary.:
No Trump. No Hillary. (This will add a "None of the Above" badge by your name in all posts.)

Signature


“Maybe I forgot to mention something to you: I don’t believe in queens. You think freedom is something you can give and take on a whim. But to your people, freedom is as essential as air. And without it, there is no life. There is only darkness.” -Zaheer

"A man chooses. A slave obeys."-Andrew Ryan

"There are three things the parasite hates: free markets, free will, and free men."-Andrew Ryan

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,576
Posts Per Day
2.05
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
9
Most Recent Message
09-15-2017 02:58 PM
General Information
Last Activity
10-20-2017 01:27 PM
Join Date
09-10-2011
Referrals
0

5 Friends

  1. Lamp Lamp is online now

    Member

    Lamp
  2. TER TER is offline

    Member

    TER
  3. The Rebel Poet The Rebel Poet is offline

    Member

    The Rebel Poet
  4. uncharted uncharted is offline

    Member

    uncharted
  5. Voluntary Man Voluntary Man is offline

    Member

    Voluntary Man
Showing Friends 1 to 5 of 5
View PierzStyx's Blog

Recent Entries

Libertarian arguement for open borders

by PierzStyx on 10-09-2017 at 03:59 PM
Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
Ron: What the country does need, he said, is "a much better immigration service" fed by more resources. Not that he'd "vote for extra money." But he does, he told the crowd, have a plan.
And what is his proposition for a "much better immigration service" exactly?

The solution to really addressing the problem of illegal immigration, drug smuggling, and the threat of cross-border terrorism is clear: remove the welfare magnet that attracts

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Links To Libertarian and Anarchist Reading Material Part III

by PierzStyx on 09-25-2017 at 12:19 PM
PART III


Miscellaneous/Philosophy

Living in a State-Run World by Murray Rothbard
May a Libertarian Take Money From the Government? by Walter Block
Is there a Human Right to Medical Insurance by Walter Block
Hobbes, Minarchism, and Anarchy by Stephen Krogh (short audio, 12 mins)
Anarchy and Democracy by Stefan Molyneux (video)
Taking Care of the Poor in a Free Society by Stefan Molyneux (video)
Mises Panel Discussion

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

LInks To Libertarian and Anarchist Reading Material Part I

by PierzStyx on 09-25-2017 at 12:17 PM
[QUOTE=heavenlyboy34;6528947]
Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
That might make you equal to Krug IF you provided links to the people you claim can counter the arguments he linked to, go ahead enlighten us.
Meh, Krug is weaksauce like you. This subject has been covered many times since '08. I sometimes forget y'all are n00bs here, sorry.

This was complied by our friend Wesker back in 2011. You should have read it long ago. (other people like Conza have compiled lists too, I just can't find them ATM)

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Excellent Quotes From Lincoln And Others About Civil War causes

by PierzStyx on 09-18-2017 at 05:09 PM
Quote Originally Posted by 1stvermont View Post

Preserving the Union

“The war now prosecuted on part of the federal government is a war for the union”
-Secretary of war Simon Cameron August 8 1861


"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

10-17-2017


10-15-2017


10-04-2017


10-03-2017


09-07-2017


08-04-2017


07-26-2017


05-21-2017


05-13-2017


03-29-2017


11-30-2016


11-18-2016


11-10-2016

  • 07:18 PM - Hidden

09-21-2016


Page 1 of 47 12311 ... LastLast

10-20-2017

  • 05:29 PM - Hidden
  • 01:59 PM - Hidden
  • 01:19 PM - Hidden
  • 11:29 AM - Hidden

10-19-2017


10-18-2017


10-17-2017


10-16-2017


10-15-2017


10-13-2017



Page 1 of 47 12311 ... LastLast