Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 52

Thread: No More Marches on DC

  1. #1

    No More Marches on DC

    Lew Rockwell is exactly right: "DC is one nasty place. So why would anyone concerned about the state and its power “march on Washington”? Such events only dissipate energy, and fool people into thinking that their time and money have accomplished something, as the regime laughs up its sleeve. Indeed, that is the purpose. So stay home. Read, write, work, organize, and avoid DC like the plague it is." Read it all please: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...ves/35963.html

    Thank you very much.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Lew Rockwell is starting to piss me off! Even Dr. Paul said to march. That is why I poured my heart into organizing the Revolution March last summer!
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  4. #3
    You left out the best part:
    For many years, pro-lifers have expended vast time, energy, and money “marching on Washington” every January, to exactly zero effect. Worse, they hark back to pro-redistribution events. And always, as with the latest 9/12 extravaganza headed by red-state fascists, the marchers assemble on the “National Mall,” the government grass that extends from Lincoln’s Roman temple — where he sits enthroned like Jupiter, fasces and all — to George Washington’s obelisk, an Eqyptian monument to the god Amon Re. In the distance is the capitol, whose dome copies the Roman Pantheon, temple to all the gods. In the top of the dome is a painting of Washington being assumed, like the divinized Julius Caesar, into Heaven upon his death. Even Jefferson is portrayed as a god in a Roman temple. Not far away is the the Greek temple where the nine supremes hand down the “law.” Then there is the vast executive apparatus, headed by a living god, and dedicated to killing, spying, taxing, redistributing, inflating, and controlling.

  5. #4
    We need both. With the age of youtube, it is important for people to see the size of the disenfrachised, so that this myth of small government types only being a small minority can be dispelled. In that very large crowd, perhaps a small minority will now be inspired to affect change at the local level, that may have been to intimidated before. It's a numbers game.
    "It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. "
    George Washington

    "Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations"
    James Madison

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    Lew Rockwell is starting to piss me off! Even Dr. Paul said to march. That is why I poured my heart into organizing the Revolution March last summer!
    From the anarchist perspective, trying to restore the Constitution, and constitutional government, is a distraction from the true objective.

    Just as with "Neocons" and mainstream Republicans, working together where interests coincide is a good plan, and low key efforts to educate about the importance of liberty presents an opportunity to gain more strength.

    Only conversing with the "pure" is a sure way for the libertarian philosophy to remain in the wilderness it has for the last 30+ years.
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    From the anarchist perspective, trying to restore the Constitution, and constitutional government, is a distraction from the true objective.

    Just as with "Neocons" and mainstream Republicans, working together where interests coincide is a good plan, and low key efforts to educate about the importance of liberty presents an opportunity to gain more strength.

    Only conversing with the "pure" is a sure way for the libertarian philosophy to remain in the wilderness it has for the last 30+ years.
    With all due respect to your anarchist position, I find it to be impractical and only worthy in theory. It relies too heavily on the good will of men. Edit: misread your last sentence.
    Last edited by Deborah K; 09-14-2009 at 09:46 AM.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    It relies too heavily of [sic] the good will of men.
    Couldn't you say that about government?

  9. #8
    Looks like we are going to have little debate.

    I think Lew Rockwell's reasons for owning guns applies to having marches.

    "A right exercised is a right retained."

    The fact that we are organizing marches and are there is starting to change the dynamic.

    " The simple act of having a gun is its own best use. Like a battleship parked off the coast its mere presence changes the dynamic of the situation without having to fire a single shot. By having a gun you become too dangerous to your predators. Criminals interviewed in jail say they don’t want anything to do with an armed civilian. That change in my human predators is exactly what I want to accomplish."



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    Lew Rockwell is starting to piss me off! Even Dr. Paul said to march. That is why I poured my heart into organizing the Revolution March last summer!
    What pisses me off is the lack of any strategy from the Austrian wing.

    Do not think liberty lovers that liberty comes from intellect. It is our compassion for our brothers and sisters, or our fear of them that brings us together and unites us under these ideals, not our ability to be clever, witty, or logical. These things are only useful for defending our ideals, rarely for spreading them. To spread them we must act in such a way that others see those ideals through our actions.

    This is the primary reason Ron Paul gained support ( via his voting record ), and ONLY Ron Paul could have ganed so much traction within the liberty movement.

    We should start on the offensive towards our cherished intellectuals, to see what high-minded strategies they can come up with.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by MRoCkEd View Post
    Couldn't you say that about government?
    Exactly. And you put that assumption of good will on a very small subset of the population; those who are willing to dedicate their careers to the manipulation and coercion of others. The scariest possible people to hold the reins of a society, assuming somebody has to be in control.

    I agree with L. Neil:
    Quote Originally Posted by L. Neil Smith
    The pursuit of coercive power over others will someday be universally recognized as a symptom of profound mental illness.
    Follow my blog at http://tirelessagorist.blogspot.com/
    Current commentary from a libertarian/voluntaryist/agorist perspective.

    Consistent Candidate - with Chainspell

    2007
    Ron Paul Landslide by Jake Kellen - Constitution Mix

    The vision of the helpful and protective state is the most pervasive and counter-productive ideology in the world today.

  13. #11
    I agree with paulitics and New York for Paul, and I think Rockwell is partially missing the point. Although he's correct that a march will not directly affect policy, a sufficiently gigantic march (like Saturday's) can and will awaken disenfranchised people to the fact that many, many others exist, and it also gets people accustomed to the idea of mass demonstrations (which is good for the safety of future participants). It's good for morale and working up the energy to get involved.
    Last edited by Mini-Me; 09-14-2009 at 09:49 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by President John F. Kennedy
    And we must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. That we are only 6% of the world's population, and that we cannot impose our will upon the other 94% of mankind. That we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity, and that therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem.
    I need an education in US history, from the ground up. Can you help point me to a comprehensive, unbiased, scholarly resource?

  14. #12
    I'd be all for boycotting all forms of commerce in Washington DC. A march on Washington brings millions of people who need to purchase food and water while they're there...what a great boon the the local economy.

    I'd rather DC be a ghost town of people needing to leave thanks to those a$$holes in the big white dome.
    Definition of political insanity: Voting for the same people expecting different results.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by MRoCkEd View Post
    Couldn't you say that about government?
    (fixed the typo - thanx)

    Yes, you can say that about our current government. But the country was founded using the rule of law, not the rule of men. I don't see how a lawless society will promote freedom, based on the good will of men. Human nature dictates otherwise. And if I have to spend all day protecting my property against those people who lack good will, how does that make me free?
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Elwar View Post
    I'd be all for boycotting all forms of commerce in Washington DC. A march on Washington brings millions of people who need to purchase food and water while they're there...what a great boon the the local economy.

    I'd rather DC be a ghost town of people needing to leave thanks to those a$$holes in the big white dome.
    Realistically though, DC isn't going to be a ghost town until a tax revolt happens...and mass demonstrations and a show of numbers may be the only way to embolden people to take such a step.
    Quote Originally Posted by President John F. Kennedy
    And we must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. That we are only 6% of the world's population, and that we cannot impose our will upon the other 94% of mankind. That we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity, and that therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem.
    I need an education in US history, from the ground up. Can you help point me to a comprehensive, unbiased, scholarly resource?

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Mini-Me View Post
    Realistically though, DC isn't going to be a ghost town until a tax revolt happens...and mass demonstrations and a show of numbers may be the only way to embolden people to take such a step.
    I don't have the wherewithall to initiate a tax revolt, but I will tell you this....the minute I detect that a good number of fed-up Americans are ready to stop paying their taxes, I will go full force with all of my organizational abilities. I have been longing for a tax revolt for almost three years now.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    (fixed the typo - thanx)

    Yes, you can say that about our current government. But the country was founded using the rule of law, not the rule of men. I don't see how a lawless society will promote freedom, based on the good will of men. Human nature dictates otherwise. And if I have to spend all day protecting my property against those people who lack good will, how does that make me free?
    See post #10. By its nature, government puts the foxes in charge of the hen house. As Spock would say, "This does not compute."
    Follow my blog at http://tirelessagorist.blogspot.com/
    Current commentary from a libertarian/voluntaryist/agorist perspective.

    Consistent Candidate - with Chainspell

    2007
    Ron Paul Landslide by Jake Kellen - Constitution Mix

    The vision of the helpful and protective state is the most pervasive and counter-productive ideology in the world today.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by FreeTraveler View Post
    See post #10. By its nature, government puts the foxes in charge of the hen house. As Spock would say, "This does not compute."
    edit: I'm skimmimg everything, and making mistakes, sorry. You were responding to post 13. I am for limited gov't that is overseen by the people it represents. This concept breaks down when the people become complacent. It's the same concept as when you own a company. Do your employees control you, or do you control your employees. We the people, have allowed our employees to control us.
    Last edited by Deborah K; 09-14-2009 at 10:06 AM.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    With all due respect to your anarchist position, I find it to be impractical and only worthy in theory. It relies too heavily on the good will of men. Edit: misread your last sentence.
    I think a careful reading of my posts show disagreement with the anarchist position as logically inconsistent and not well thought out, despite the constant reference to articles to read that would surely convince me of the anarchist position if I only had the intellectual capacity to understand them.

    The problem is that I do understand them, with your reaction taken by me as some evidence of that.
    Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.

    Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    edit: I'm skimmimg everything, and making mistakes, sorry. You were responding to post 13. I am for limited gov't that is overseen by the people it represents. This concept breaks down when the people become complacent. It's the same concept as when you own a company. Do your employees control you, or do you control your employees. We the people, have allowed our employees to control us.
    The general point, though, is that until minarchists can demonstrate a government that actually functions that way, it's a bit of pot-kettle to claim that the anarchists aren't being realistic.

    Don't get me wrong; all minarchists are fellow travelers as far as I'm concerned. When we get government down to 10% of what it steals now, we can discuss the rest.
    Follow my blog at http://tirelessagorist.blogspot.com/
    Current commentary from a libertarian/voluntaryist/agorist perspective.

    Consistent Candidate - with Chainspell

    2007
    Ron Paul Landslide by Jake Kellen - Constitution Mix

    The vision of the helpful and protective state is the most pervasive and counter-productive ideology in the world today.

  23. #20
    Lew Rockwell is at best a closeted stormfronter who wants to return to a feudal political system with the Catholic church having the same level of power that it had during the middle ages. I stopped reading LRC back in 2004 when I realized what he and many of his close followers are really about. He thinks he can accomplish this by hijacking the liberty movement. Every time I read the word "paleolibertarian" I could puke.

    At worst he's a plant, and a very effective one due to the damage he's caused:

    http://www.reason.com/news/show/124426.html

    http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/...y-newsletters/

    This is why it is so important that some of our liberty candidates win in 2010. Dr. Paul can be easily smeared by this scandal whenever the MSM and their handlers deem necessary.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Pericles View Post
    I think a careful reading of my posts show disagreement with the anarchist position as logically inconsistent and not well thought out, despite the constant reference to articles to read that would surely convince me of the anarchist position if I only had the intellectual capacity to understand them.

    The problem is that I do understand them, with your reaction taken by me as some evidence of that.

    As I said, I am down with the concept of anarchy. It's trying to put it into practice that concerns me. And if you can't put a concept into practice then what is the point?

    I know enough to know that anarchy is part of the cycle of government: Liberty; Complacency; Dependence; Tyranny; Revolution. Anarchy usually occurs during and after revolution. But, as the Articles of Confederation have shown us, it can't last.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  25. #22
    Do Marches matter?

    Here are some answers.

    Measuring success entails more than body counts, which every organizer
    inevitably inflates.

    We have brought people together who have never met. Groups have sprung up in cities, more conservatives are running for office,

    http://www.randpaul2010.com/

    "When marches are successful, it's because they serve a community
    mobilizing function that lasts beyond the event and leads to something down
    the line," said John D'Emilio, a history professor at the University of
    Illinois at Chicago"

    The marches on Washington have tended (it is in part inferred in the
    article) to be most successful when they focus on one issue--such as gun
    control. MLK's march was backed up by local actions across the country and
    had specific remedies for the discrimination.

    We are doing local actions.


    "I think the cultural impact that such events can have and the impact they can
    have on participants should not be overlooked, even though legislators and others
    often down play the impact social movements and organizations have on them."

    "I am, like the writer, fairly short term and legislation victory results
    oriented, but the results that diffuse impacts on culture can have are
    worth considering".

    "Also, the argument that resources mobilized for one activity are deducted from how many resources
    can be mobilized for another event implies some kind of zero-sum relationship between giving patterns
    from the entire public. I think the research shows this isn't likely true, or at least, not that simple."

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by MRoCkEd View Post
    Couldn't you say that about government?
    Bingo. There will always be evil, power hungry men and women, who want to rule the lives of others. Why create a power structure ready made for them to do so?
    “If you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.” -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by wizardwatson View Post
    What pisses me off is the lack of any strategy from the Austrian wing.

    Do not think liberty lovers that liberty comes from intellect. It is our compassion for our brothers and sisters, or our fear of them that brings us together and unites us under these ideals, not our ability to be clever, witty, or logical. These things are only useful for defending our ideals, rarely for spreading them. To spread them we must act in such a way that others see those ideals through our actions. [...]
    Thanks for the excellent post.

    This is worth exploring. In general, what type of endeavors could we engage in that would be beneficial to our communities while providing an example of our ideals in action?



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    As I said, I am down with the concept of anarchy. It's trying to put it into practice that concerns me. And if you can't put a concept into practice then what is the point?

    I know enough to know that anarchy is part of the cycle of government: Liberty; Complacency; Dependence; Tyranny; Revolution. Anarchy usually occurs during and after revolution. But, as the Articles of Confederation have shown us, it can't last.
    How do you believe the Articles of Confederation show this? Also, don't you think there is a difference between the temporary lack of a government in a trasitional period, with a population supportive in general of the idea of coersive government, and a lack of government caused by a populace the majority of which by principle refuse to use or tolerate agressive force?
    “If you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.” -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by tremendoustie View Post
    Bingo. There will always be evil, power hungry men and women, who want to rule the lives of others. Why create a power structure ready made for them to do so?
    And I suppose anarchy will make evil, power hungry men and women NOT want to rule the lives of others???? Anarchy relies too heavily on good will. Love the concept though.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by tremendoustie View Post
    How do you believe the Articles of Confederation show this? Also, don't you think there is a difference between the temporary lack of a government in a trasitional period, with a population supportive in general of the idea of coersive government, and a lack of government caused by a populace the majority of which by principle refuse to use or tolerate agressive force?
    Because the Articles of Confederation were as close to anarchy as we ever got. Even George Washington said that the near disaster at Valley Forge was due to the constitutional weakness of the Articles of Confederation.

    As I stated before, I am for limited government overseen by the people it represents. When it goes wrong, it is due to complacency. The Constitution dictates that elected officials in in the employment of the people. It's the same concept as when you own a business. If you don't hold your employees accountable, they will take over.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    And I suppose anarchy will make evil, power hungry men and women NOT want to rule the lives of others???? Anarchy relies too heavily on good will. Love the concept though.
    Well, again, I do not support aggressively coercive government, but I do support order and peace, so I'd prefer the term "voluntaryist" or "free society" if you don't mind.

    In a free society, then, how will power hungry men and women be dealt with? I suppose the answer depends on how those power hungry people seek it. If they attempt to use force against their neighbors -- a traditional gang type of approach, they will be stopped by protection agencies, which would serve a similar function to that of police now. We know that they would not be as powerful as these protection agencies, because the economic power of one madman cannot come close to matching that of people who just want to be left in peace. It's the same reason the government is more powerful than street gangs now -- the government has the economic power of average people behind it.

    Now, perhaps the crafty, power hungry individual will seek to rise to power in one of these protection agencies or other organization, and then use it for evil. A number of things prevent them:

    1. Competition. There will be many competing protection agencies, which would quickly band together against the rogue. Also, people could easily and swiftly switch to a competitor, draining the rogue protection agency of resources, and bolstering the opposition.

    This advantage does not exist with government -- government does not allow competition in protection services, nor does it obtain funding voluntarily, so there is no alternative ready to challenge a government should it become oppressive, and there is no way for people to "vote with their wallets" and remove support if the government starts to go out of control. If our power hungry individual takes over the government, they are far less easily opposed.

    Monopolies always provide worse services and are far less accountable -- for forced monopolies, rather than natural ones, this is especially so.

    2. No illusion of legitimacy. In a free society, no action would be considered legitimate if it uses aggressive force. By contrast, in our current situation, people believe government -- or the majority -- has the right to do what they will with the finances and lives of others. Many people who would never break into a neighbor's house, steal their TV, sell it, and use the money to help the poor, for example, will nonetheless support welfare, because of this false idea that government is somehow exempt from the moral code. This same false idea causes those with moral opposition to a government action, for example, to believe that they still must fund it with their taxes. After all, "majority rules". This illusion of legitimacy would also not exist in their "troops". Their personnel would likely desert them after their attempted takeover. There would be no "don't think, just obey orders" propaganda as there is for the military, police, etc.

    3. No ready made power structure. In order to obtain taxes, government must create the necessary structure, including information on whatever is to be taxed -- trade, income, etc, and the means to enforce tax collection. In a free society, protection agencies and other services would send you a bill at the end of the month, and might eventually refuse service if the bills are not paid, but they do not have the ability to obtain information on income, etc. A potential tyrant would have to create the entire tax structure from scratch, as well as any other power structures he/she wished to obtain -- no easy feat.

    This limitation does not exist in government, where the necessary structures are already in place for tyranny -- ready made for the tyrant's use, including at least taxation, but also usually secret agencies, tools for domestic espionage, border control, military, fiscal and trade controls, etc. Couple this with a populace taught that normal morality does not apply to government -- that government (police, FBI, IRS, etc) must always be obeyed, and the enforced ban on all competition, and you have a recipe for disaster. One which has occurred repeatedly through history, and continues to occur today.


    This book has some good ideas regarding free market justice, although I don't necessarily agree with everything in it: http://mises.org/books/marketforliberty.pdf
    Last edited by tremendoustie; 09-14-2009 at 12:34 PM.
    “If you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.” -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    Because the Articles of Confederation were as close to anarchy as we ever got. Even George Washington said that the near disaster at Valley Forge was due to the constitutional weakness of the Articles of Confederation.
    A valid solution to lack of funding is not to start extorting money from people. Nor is an appropriate response to desertion to hang people who choose to leave. In reality, the revolution would have been far more effective had Washington not focused on regulars so much, and had there been more of an emphasis on sabotage assassinations, and surprise attacks. It was citizens and volunteers with rifles, causing chaos for the British, who won the war.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    As I stated before, I am for limited government overseen by the people it represents. When it goes wrong, it is due to complacency. The Constitution dictates that elected officials in in the employment of the people. It's the same concept as when you own a business. If you don't hold your employees accountable, they will take over.
    Yes, and when you own a business, can you threaten to throw people in cages if they do not subscribe to your service?
    “If you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.” -CS Lewis

    The use of force to impose morality is itself immoral, and generosity with others' money is still theft.

    If our society were a forum, congress would be the illiterate troll that somehow got a hold of the only ban hammer.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by paulitics View Post
    We need both. With the age of youtube, it is important for people to see the size of the disenfrachised, so that this myth of small government types only being a small minority can be dispelled. In that very large crowd, perhaps a small minority will now be inspired to affect change at the local level, that may have been to intimidated before. It's a numbers game.
    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by New York For Paul View Post
    Looks like we are going to have little debate.

    I think Lew Rockwell's reasons for owning guns applies to having marches.

    "A right exercised is a right retained."

    The fact that we are organizing marches and are there is starting to change the dynamic.

    " The simple act of having a gun is its own best use. Like a battleship parked off the coast its mere presence changes the dynamic of the situation without having to fire a single shot. By having a gun you become too dangerous to your predators. Criminals interviewed in jail say they don’t want anything to do with an armed civilian. That change in my human predators is exactly what I want to accomplish."
    ^ This.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mini-Me View Post
    I agree with paulitics and New York for Paul, and I think Rockwell is partially missing the point. Although he's correct that a march will not directly affect policy, a sufficiently gigantic march (like Saturday's) can and will awaken disenfranchised people to the fact that many, many others exist, and it also gets people accustomed to the idea of mass demonstrations (which is good for the safety of future participants). It's good for morale and working up the energy to get involved.
    Absolutely correct, imho.
    Courage ~ Strength ~ Integrity
    RON PAUL 2012
    ----------------------
    Visit Planet ToLive
    ----------------------
    It's Thirteen O'Clock
    ----------------------
    "I am surprised at the suddenness, as well as the greatness of this revolution. Is not the change we have seen astonishing? What man, two years ago, would have thought it possible?"
    - John Adams, July 3, 1776

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Marches Against MonSanto
    By BetterCallSaul in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-14-2013, 11:42 AM
  2. Marches Against MonSanto
    By BetterCallSaul in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-14-2013, 11:42 AM
  3. Will there be marches in cities other than DC?
    By rossl in forum March on Washington
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-15-2008, 10:30 AM
  4. How many marches?
    By spunkel in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-13-2008, 05:10 PM
  5. Feb 1st Marches: What's happening??
    By raiha in forum News About The Official Campaign
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-01-2008, 01:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •