Freedom has no hope...

[osan]

Unless one of two things occur:

1. The "movement" becomes sufficiently organized, or
2. A "reset event" occurs.

Addressing point the second, firstly: If worldwide plague, a large meteor strike, Jesus popping back in from wherever, aliens landing on the South Lawn, or something similar occurs, the utter disruption of the status quo would open the door to freedom enough such that if enough want it, we would have it. Many possible resets, however, are not the sorts of things anyone with the least shred of rational sanity would want. I'm not even sure about the Jesus thing, given the talk about him being a mite pissed with us.

That leaves option one as the most likely, however currently unlikely, path forward.

Why do we think the "left" is so successful?

Organization, plain and simple. They are motivated, have sufficient common ground - the destruction of the status quo - and actually show up.

Regarding that common ground - consider the advantages they hold per that bit. It is a single issue. It is simplicity itself - simplistic, in fact. As with everything "left", it has the ease of entropy on its side. Destruction is ALWAYS easier than creation. The "left" may one day rue its victory of bringing down the status quo, that is if the longer term vision is to live as something better than cavemen. Destruction is very easy. With a single match I can destroy a mansion in no time. With a large and capable construction crew, building one takes weeks or months. Entropy is easy if you are willing to live with the results.

Now consider the "right's" task load - a common base view of what it means to be free, and having the will and decency to live by it. Creation of an order that supports freedom. The list goes on, but I will not bother you with lists at this time.

The workload of those seeking freedom is at least two full orders of magnitude greater than that of the far-left "progressive" statists who seek at this time naught but the destruction of that which currently is.

WRT the destruction issue, it is my suspicion that the left has no plan for life after the revolution - at least not the common man. The leaders may, but I wonder how well they have worked out the details. I further suspect that they have not worked them out much at all. Currently, Theye rely on hard-working middle-class people to provide all the "free" stuff to themselves and their constituents. When they win, who will provide for them in the wake of the destruction? That is a huge and very open question.

Will the same people be around to do as they have done since the beginning? I believe they will, mostly, but will they continue to be willing? If not, what then? Slave labor camps? And if they are not around, who among the hordes of non-adept "lefties" are going to undertake the tasks that lie beyond the abilities required to ask "would you like fries with that?" The "left" has a huge problem of which they are either unaware, or stand in deep denial. Those who comprise their constituency are not only ill-bred, undisciplined, cowardly, weak, and proudly ignorant. They are, by virtue of those qualities that they chose to uphold as virtues wholly incapable of learning that which is needed in order to continue humanity's technological civilization. Worse yet, for them at least, they have neither the wherewithal nor the guts and will to survive in a more primitive idiom.

In a word, the so-called "left" is begging to commit suicide. I don't care if they all died in the coming five minutes. I would gladly work on a crew to dispose of the bodies in huge burning piles just to be rid of their stupid selves. They will, however, take the rest of us with them if they are allowed to go much farther than they have come to date.

All this will not likely alter the course of the "left" because they do not possess the mental capacity required to see it - a capacity that your average squirrel has in abundance. That is how blindly stoopid those people really are. If they win in the manner they so clearly desire, it will literally be the end of human civilization; a regression back to the tenth century, if the survivors are even to be that lucky.

It is to this to which we have to look forward, given the stated goals of those claiming to be "progressive" - a return to medieval life.

Now, if we assume the masters of the progressive household are not quite that stupid, it would mean that Theye intend on preserving the current class of people who do the actual heavy lifting in terms of making this technological civilization possible, both physically and intellectually. Given this, it would appear Theye have still miscalculated in some disastrous manner in that the order which they appear to want to foist upon the doers is one that the true makers of this world, the intellects and ethical laborers, will not much like. In fact I suspect the real New Order will be of such a nature that a great plurality of those who would have otherwise been out there, busting their humps to "make it", will throw up their hands and decide that since nothing they create is theirs, according to the Masters, there is no point in creation. Those people will give up and become just another raft of takers, expecting someone else to provide the basics.

At some point, there will be insufficient means of sustaining the parasite class and Theye will be faced with a very fundamental decision: step off and let people be and do what they are and will, or press your non-adept serfs into service. We already know how that is going to work out. But if we assume it doesn't quite come flying apart, and if there is in Theire minds even the least aspiration to something better, even if just for themselves, Theye will need "muscle" mental as well as physical, to make it happen. The only way to get it will be a system of rewards, and once Theye go there, they have abandoned their own vision of absolute, dull, uniform equality and taken a step toward that which they campaigned and upon which they rained destruction.

Theye are, in a word, $#@!s. Theye are some of the most impossibly blind and willfully stupid people ever born, as they lovingly labor to hate and destroy that which made Themme possible. The truth there is a Gordian Knot of idiocy so perfect as to defy all credulity. And Theye will never see it coming because even when it stares them in the puss, Theye will deny it. It's what Theye do.

Despite all this, Theye have determination on their side, and plenty of money and organization. Those who proclaim freedom, do not. The "right" (just to be conversational) is fragmented. The task load for liberty is, as stated above, a hundred times more difficult because it entails creation, vis-à-vis destruction. This all requires stout training, common and proper vision, self-control, discipline, resolution, ethics, decency, charity, and love. All the lefties need is hate and a will to destroy, both of which they hold in vast reserve.

The "right" is a disaster area in terms of philosophical underpinnings. There is no unifying principle underlying the "liberty movement". Spouting "liberty!" is not it. Without full and rigorous definition, cries of "liberty!!" get us nowhere.

Just look at the divisions - the stupid abortion debate is perhaps the poster child of this idiocy. It doesn't matter a whit whether one is "pro-" or "anti-". Neither side of the issue has the sense to table it until the greater war is won, at which time if they want to go at it, I will personally pass out the pistols and ammo.

It is this small-minded quality that drives the wedges between people who are supposed to be on the same team. This is idiocy nonpareil. Look at how the "left" deals with this potential: they institute "PC" such that no matter what the one may think, he shuts it and sticks to the simplistic talking points, which are few. "Kick out the jams!" and nonsense like that - stuff to which ALL lefty fools cleave as starving infants to their mothers' nipples. This has served the inestimably great value of keeping the lefties off of each other's throats and at those of "the enemy". Meanwhile, the religious righties are damning the agnostic agorists to eternity in hell, and so forth down a drearily long list of items that are not supposed to be issues for lovers of freedom. They forget the very precepts they claim to hold as their guiding lights, such as the Golden Rule: Live. Let Live. IOW, STFU and MYOB. But no. The one calls for the damnation and imprisonment of those who say that MAYBE a woman is within her rights to abort a pregnancy in its first twelve hours, or that some tatt00-laden stooge is entitled to burn a spliff on the courthouse steps, and so forth.

This is the primary reason that evil is going to prevail. We are too busy with our bull$#@!, while the evil is drilled and ready to rock.

Laugh at it. Dismiss it. Call me "village idiot", if it makes you happy. It will make no matter in the end because unless "we" organize and get a single and common structure under our feet, we will see nothing of victory for liberty. And no, Trump's moves in the less-evil direction don't count for that much because we still labor under a framework of tyranny, if a smarter and kinder variety.

OK, I guess I've said too much.

[Working Poor]

As far as "freedom" goes the only freedom I know I can have is that of my spirit. I live my life as free as I can and encourage others to do so as well. I spread anarchy where ever I can. The only way to stop government is to show people that it is not needed. My spirit is free and I will drag my body along as far as it will go.

[timosman]

This is depressing.

[Swordsmyth]

The only hope for peaceful improvement is CALExit followed by as any other LIBExits as possible, that is why I have said provoking CALExit is the best thing DJTvsg might do in office, other possible chance for improvement is civil war, a civil war that would be so bloody and destructive that it would set new records in the history books and which we would not be guaranteed to win.

The insane left has become too large and too insane, until they are gone one way or the other there will be no possibility of creating an organized liberty movement with the power to compete in national politics, right now any and every idiot, fascist or fairly normal corrupt person who is scared of the insane left piles into the Swampublican party and keeps us from taking it over while preventing any successful launch of a 3rd party because "you have to vote Swampublican to stop the Demoncrats".
If we were rid of the insane left the factions of the Swampublican party would split and we could either take it over or compete with the divided remnants.

[euphemia]

The "movement" becomes sufficiently organized.

This. We will never be organized because we cannot agree on five key talking points. We are not an inclusive movement, and unless that changes, we will never be organized enough to get a real, electable liberty candidate.

[georgiaboy]

Oh ye of little faith.

[DamianTV]

Watch carefully for "Controlled Opposition".

First thing I notice is the terms Left and Right. Opinions of both can be expressed to be very different, but BOTH can also be Controlled. Biggest trouble with the Left and Right paradigm is the association with bigger and smaller govt. Each side thinks that their own intention is for "better" govt. Trouble is that the actual associations with the terms Left and Right are not always for "better" govt, since "better" is a very subjective term. Another typical association is that "better" also means "smaller" govt, yet what both sides actually end up achieving is BOTH Left and Right calling for BIGGER govt in the long run. In order to move forward, people need to have a very clear understanding of what those associations truly result in as opposed to what they "think" it means.

"Its not what you dont know that gets you into trouble, its what you absolutely know that simply aint so."
- Mark Twain

Every collective group typically has a leader, and the opinions of the people are typically given to the people instead of the other way around. Democracy is not about who has the best or most efficient or moral ideas, but the ideas of the person who can shout the loudest. Thing is, usually only one voice is put in front of everyone, and the easiest way to make sure that persons voice is heard over all other truly good ideas is to fund the person with the ideas that suit the Status Quo. This is how both the Left and Right can be controlled. Democrats and Republicans are two wings of the same bird that together, or in a bipartisan effort, continues to $#@! right on the windshield of Freedom. Once either side has been assigned a leader of either group, those leaders are then expected to assign their belief system to all other members of that group. This allows for those groups to be easily dismantled when they are no longer useful. Look at what happened to the whole "Occupy" movement. They were given a voice thru MSM recognition, then quickly dismantled after their respective elections. This happens over and over again, but always results in bigger govt, despite the people expressing Doublethink, where both sides say they want "better" or "smaller" govt and end up with "bigger" and "worse" govt.

One of the biggest reason both the Left and Right continue to fail to achieve their goals is that they are both born of the idea that "Power comes from a Collective". It is this very Collective Mindset that allows people to be spoonfed their opinions and told what to think. The only real way to effectively resist a Collective Govt is to recognize that Collective People will always result in the same outcome. It is the Collective itself that people need to free themselves from, which means walking away from both Collective Govt and Collective Resistance. People need to retain their Individuality and dismiss any and all of the Collectivist ideas that created this current paradigm. In short, do not let others, even me, tell you what to think or how to think. Think for yourself, draw your own conclusions. Question everything.

The next problem is that some form of government is a necessary force. Govt is a dangerous servant and as a master, a force to be absolutely terrified of. There are those in our society that will always cause harm to others. The idea of govt comes from the result of the recognition of these types of people, and our desire to either hold them accountable for their actions, or exclude them from a society of free individuals. Without any form of government at all, those harmful individuals are just as free to rob, steal, and cause harm to everyone as much as the individual is free to live the rest of their lives as they see fit. Without some form of government, the free individual is actually less free because they are not free to leave their homes and must spend their time and resources defending what they have. Too little government makes us just as less free as too much government.

"The Essence of Freedom is the PROPER Limitation of Government."



People will never be free so long as they support the paradigm of Collectivism that is not in balance with the true freedom of the individual. Today, we have a society that only concerns itself with the wellbeing of the society as a whole and has little to no regard for the individual to be free to both succeed and fail by their own will. Corporations have taken control of our Group Think by using our own minds against us and have effectively privatized their profits and subsidized their losses to be incurred by everyone else. Those large organized groups are the same as our resistance minded collective groups and have found it easier to create wealth for themselves by destroying what we survive on. This can only lead to the death of society as a whole, and in the end, the few people that are left may slowly regain their sanity by once again recognizing their own individuality and abandoning the collectivist mentality that has enslaved us all in some form.

[osan]

Oh ye of little faith.

Not a matter of faith, but of objective conclusions based on the standard of thousands of years of human history where the behavior is so predictable, one can set his watch by it and never err.

[devil21]

This. We will never be organized because we cannot agree on five key talking points. We are not an inclusive movement, and unless that changes, we will never be organized enough to get a real, electable liberty candidate.

Actually, it's that Liberty minded people have a need to make sense, think critically and form own opinions. Most Americans don't care about any of that. Listen to a segment of CSPAN callers and you'll see quickly why intelligent people are not who politicians talk to.

[osan]

First thing I notice is the terms Left and Right.

But also notice that in every usage, the terms are enclosed in quotes, which I do very purposefully. I do not like the left/right paradigm, but use it for the sake of being more readily conversational. Otherwise, I spend 3x again as much text explaining and defining precise meanings. That is appropriate for a philosophical treatise, and even for many far more casual discussions, but I sometimes I just don't want to explain the same thing for the 5001st time. People generally understand "left" and "right" and I decided to let it go at that. Loosely goosey, but good enough for the present purposes.

Just wanted to be clear on that point.

[DamianTV]

But also notice that in every usage, the terms are enclosed in quotes, which I do very purposefully. I do not like the left/right paradigm, but use it for the sake of being more readily conversational. Otherwise, I spend 3x again as much text explaining and defining precise meanings. That is appropriate for a philosophical treatise, and even for many far more casual discussions, but I sometimes I just don't want to explain the same thing for the 5001st time. People generally understand "left" and "right" and I decided to let it go at that. Loosely goosey, but good enough for the present purposes.

Just wanted to be clear on that point.

No worries. I typically avoid the terms just to also quickly clarify as both left and right can be bent and manipulated to want bigger govt, so I just describe it as the people that want bigger govt or the people that want smaller govt. Easiest way I can think of, like you said, so we dont overexplain again and again...

... and again

... and yet again

... and again

... are we there yet

... I have to pee

... and again

[osan]

"The Essence of Freedom is the PROPER Limitation of Government."

I must depart here. The essence of freedom is freedom.

It was doing well until it came to describing anarchy. Pretty big FAIL there. "Without Law there can be no freedom" is cited of the Greeks, the implication being that only government brings Law. This is nonsense. For an aeon the man of this world lived anarchically and freely and with Law. Natural Law. The Law that is obvious to any man whose thoughts and soul have not been polluted by fouling notions such as "the state", "government", "the people", "collective rights", "king", and so forth; all of which are the products of the single most destructive of all human inventions: Empire.

"Some about of governMENT is a necessary force in any civilized, orderly society." FAIL^FAIL. GovernANCE is the proper word here, for it makes no assumption about how, exactly, governance is to be carried forth into practice. GovernMENT implies facts not in evidence, and as human history shows with virtual universality, those assumptions always bring misery, poverty, disease, death, and destruction to people. Words are important.

It then goes on to imply the misery of anarchy where everyone must expend energy guarding life, limb, and property. GovernMENT is once again peddled as the solution for those too lazy to look after their own interests. "Oh, but people should not have to live in fear of their fellows just to keep from being mugged by them...": that is the dreary, clapped-out rejoinder of those corrupts who clamor for governMENT; those who want to pimp off their individual responsibilities to themselves onto the shoulders of others. How often do they consider that nothing has changed, save the particular of the societal order in that now they have to worry about being mugged by governMENT.

Words are important^2.

"The proper AMOUNT of governMENT MAKES everyone FREER." FAIL^4. Quality over quantity. The right KIND of goverNANCE KEEPS everyone FREE.

There are no degrees of freedom, but only of servitude. One is either free, or is something else. One doesn't MAKE another free; we are born that way. One can only RESTORE the freedom that was violated by others.

Words are important^3

"Anarchy isn't a stable form of government". Yeah, because it is not a form of governMENT at all.

Words are important ^4

"[Anarchy] is a temporary condition". Oy... ALL conditions are temporary. That aside, and if we dial back our thinking to more conventional norms, anarchy stood as the ONLY form of governance for the existences of entire peoples. Doesn't seem so temporary to me. Most of human history, so far as anyone can tell, saw anarchy as the nearly universal means of living among one's fellows. It was not until people began to conglomerate into larger groups that Empire arose and the wholesale destruction of freedom began.

Beyond this, the video is good.

The issue is not who discharges the duties of governance, but what those duties are and how they are discharged. GovernMENT is the worst possible instrument of goverNANCE. It is never sufficient because it is by its nature tyrannical, and that because of the subtle nature of the term and the often tacit notions to which it gives rise; false notions that have lead men into servitude in every case to date. This is because governMENT does not exist, in sé. It is a phony balony term used to describe that which has no reality of its own, but the nature of which implies falsehoods as truths and, being nonexistent, allows men with designs upon the freedoms of their fellows to paint whatever picture they may to the edges of the tolerance of those same fellows. This brand of flim-flammery is one of the greatest works of evil genius to ever issue and find endless reuse from and by the befouled souls of rotten men.

Words matter. If we are serious about ending slavery, we'd better get a handle on words, their use, and all the consequences of it.

[wizardwatson]

The pragmatic path forward is economic, not political or philosophical.

What does every politician claim he excels at?

Economics.

The weakness is showing people better economic RESULTS.

That in turn builds your political base, which reinforces your philosophical ideas.

[wizardwatson]

You say the left is "organized".

In what respect?

Well, in their economic philosophy. But you cannot attack the philosophical juggernaut socialist thinking has become on any kind of national or political level. But show some liberals on the local level how real economics can improve their neighborhood, and you've converted them. It won't matter how young or socialist they thought they were.

The real war is related to economics. And economics is related to land and capital. Left and right are united in that, as a community, they control very little of either.

[ChristianAnarchist]

We had a saying when I was young and it really put liberty into something even children could understand. It went something like this:
"Who made you the boss of me?"

[VIDEODROME]

What would a victory for your Freedom look like in everyday life? How would you describe what you want to achieve in a specific way to people so its not abstract?

I think many on the Left see problems with government corruption or cronyism to, but they think they can fix government to accomplish accomplish specific things while looking to working models in other countries for these projects.

Otherwise, I think its awkward to run for office within a system you declare you want to dismantle. Also if some in the movement are pushing for Anarchy, I don't see that going anywhere.

[timosman]

Actually, it's that Liberty minded people have a need to make sense, think critically and form own opinions. Most Americans don't care about any of that. Listen to a segment of CSPAN callers and you'll see quickly why intelligent people are not who politicians talk to.

Reasonable people are to be avoided like a plague.

[wizardwatson]

What would a victory for your Freedom look like in everyday life? How would you describe what you want to achieve in a specific way to people so its not abstract?

I think many on the Left see problems with government corruption or cronyism to, but they think they can fix government to accomplish accomplish specific things while looking to working models in other countries for these projects.

Otherwise, I think its awkward to run for office within a system you declare you want to dismantle. Also if some in the movement are pushing for Anarchy, I don't see that going anywhere.

"Freedom" in the everyman's world means not being a slave. It means being part of a economically autonomous unit, free from injustice and not participating in injustice.

This is obviously far away. But much like being part of "the Ron Paul movement", the vision and hope of the future, seeing it in motion is what propels you from inaction to being on the path.

[timosman]

"Freedom" in the everyman's world means not being a slave. It means being part of a economically autonomous unit, free from injustice and not participating in injustice.

This is obviously far away. But much like being part of "the Ron Paul movement", the vision and hope of the future, seeing it in motion is what propels you from inaction to being on the path.

The definition can be stretched. Most of the people would not consider themselves not to be free even if they spend a significant time slaving off. It just a cost of living well on this planet. Why do you need to be such an absolutist? You give some and you take some. Cost benefit analysis and some such.

[wizardwatson]

The definition can be stretched. Most of the people would not consider themselves not to be free even if they spend a significant time slaving off. It just a cost of living well on this planet. Why do you need to be such an absolutist? You give some and you take some. Cost benefit analysis and some such.

I'm not an absolutist. I typically write in order to get to the point of action in the fewest amount of words.

Forums aren't exactly "action oriented". But then few places are.

"Doing stuff" makes people uncomfortable. It's measurable, requires effort and accountability, consumes resources.

Pontificating, typing words, and imagining how awesome we are between jerk-off sessions is much more relaxing and cathartic.

I'm a warrior for "action".

Or I try to be anyway, between jerk-off sessions.

[osan]

You say the left is "organized".

In what respect?

They have money backing, for one. I wrote in the OP the another major way: they show up. Re-read the OP - it's all in there... or enough, anyway.

Well, in their economic philosophy. But you cannot attack the philosophical juggernaut socialist thinking has become on any kind of national or political level. But show some liberals on the local level how real economics can improve their neighborhood, and you've converted them. It won't matter how young or socialist they thought they were.

I cannot concur. Point your eyeballs and behold what is now happening almost daily in places like Portland. Observe the blind intransigence of the people seeking the destruction of that which has enabled their ability to spew their stupidities. There is no amount of real world, factual, damning evidence that will convince them of anything that departs with the notions to which they have welded themselves. You are assuming the least modicum of individual integrity and rational capacity. That is a deep error. The number of "lefties" of sufficient intellect and honesty to be converted is, proportionally speaking, vanishingly small. Hatred drives them first and foremost, thereby blinding them to any objective truth they may encounter, said hatred coming reflexively to the fore in categorical and violent rejection of facts that stand before their very eyes.

The real war is related to economics.

Perhaps, but it is waged through perception and action pursuant thereto.

Organization remains one of the Regressives' central advantages. They are sufficiently one in mind, the goal binding them being the simplistic notion of destruction of the status quo. This single goal frees them from having to think beyond the level of an amoeba. Entropy over orderliness. The easy intensity of raging hatred over the laborious requirements of love and reason. These organizationally architectural elements leave the Regressives in a state of far higher efficiency and resulting effectiveness. That is why they are edging their way inexorably toward their simpleton's goal and we have thus far proven incapable of so much as slowing them down, much less stopping them.

[osan]

What would a victory for your Freedom look like in everyday life? How would you describe what you want to achieve in a specific way to people so its not abstract?

First major goal: restoration of the properly administered Constitutional Republic. Once achieved, we rest a beat as life normalizes and we examine what we have on hand such that we may then decide how to proceed from there.

Under such a republic, people come and go as they please, associate as they please, hire and fire as the please, arm as they please, acquire hold and dispose of as they please, have sex as they please with whom they please, all without the butting noses of government in their bootholes. Commensurately, they are held full accountable for the results of their actions not just or even primarily by government, but by their fellows. When one freely chooses to enter the home of another without permission to rob or steal, no risk would befall the man removing from the book of life he who so chose to violate the sacred right of his fellow man. In other words, the statements and deeds of each man would carry very real and possibly very immediate consequences. Once acclimated to this, you would witness a very sudden and extreme increase in the apparent IQ of people who today appear as functional imbeciles.

There would be no welfare state. There would be no police as we currently know them to exist. Government would have but one function: the protection and guaranty of every man's equal claims to life. That role would be made functionally manifest through the means of common defense and the courts. The armed forces would be all of the people. The courts would adjudicate matters of equity, tort, and crime for which the people were unable to settle by other valid means. That would be it. 99.9% of all so-called "Law" would be scrubbed from existence. No more drug laws, firearms laws, those falsely criminalizing prostitution or doing business on Sundays, etc.

If we retained legal standing for corporate entities, great examination and possible rearchitecting of the statutes pertaining thereto would be in order. I am tempted to go with elimination, but supporting corporate entities does hold several useful and valid practical advantages - but that could be an issue for another day.

I would also retain for the time being the USPTO, its role and validity also to be revisited later on.

What would remain that is clearly problematic would be the powers to tax and to issue legal tender fiat. Those would be the first orders of re-assessment, once the Republic was reestablished in proper accord with strict constructionist specification.

I think many on the Left see problems with government corruption or cronyism to, but they think they can fix government to accomplish accomplish specific things while looking to working models in other countries for these projects.

They see only myopically. The same can be said of the "right", if marginally less egregiously.

Their intentions count for nothing in the wake of the rotten results they have consistently produced. This applies to one and all, left, right, pink or purple.

[wizardwatson]

I cannot concur. Point your eyeballs and behold what is now happening almost daily in places like Portland. Observe the blind intransigence of the people seeking the destruction of that which has enabled their ability to spew their stupidities. There is no amount of real world, factual, damning evidence that will convince them of anything that departs with the notions to which they have welded themselves. You are assuming the least modicum of individual integrity and rational capacity. That is a deep error. The number of "lefties" of sufficient intellect and honesty to be converted is, proportionally speaking, vanishingly small. Hatred drives them first and foremost, thereby blinding them to any objective truth they may encounter, said hatred coming reflexively to the fore in categorical and violent rejection of facts that stand before their very eyes.

Well, certainly the brown-shirt hate zombies are going to be out of reach. They are consummate followers pretending they are leaders.

I mean to say that actual economic action: Bringing jobs to their neighborhood, improving a local park, reducing crime, creating investment vehicles that puts outside capital into local business....

....those kinds of things transcend the political drama we waste time on, which typically is nothing but "wag the dog" scenarios because everyone's eyes are glued to their closest fancy touchscreen pandora's box of propaganda.

I'm saying if we spent more time actually looking at solutions to socio-economic problems instead of the reactionary ideologies they engender, THAT is how we build bridges.

We cannot win an ideological war with the left with our "No true Scotsman" take on our version of the right. True libertarianism, Ron Paul libertarianism, is a peaceful "middle" path, not really inside the reactionary paradigm of right/left.

So my point is, throw away the "education" related to law, rights, blah blah blah. Those things "go without saying". We have to go local and figure out how to innovate "economically" in our local communities. There are methods on the shelf. But until the BUILDERS change tactics, instead of beating their heads against the wall of an ideology that is a SYMPTOM, NOT A CAUSE of the socio-economic situation, we aren't going to organize.

This doesn't mean we have to "go local" everywhere all at once. Already we are seeing things happen with sound money in Wyoming and Arizona. Build a movement on the economic benefits of "freedom", and then you naturally encourage the freedom ideology in more intellectual spheres.

[osan]

Well, certainly the brown-shirt hate zombies are going to be out of reach. They are consummate followers pretending they are leaders.

And they are an enormous minority and growing.

I mean to say that actual economic action: Bringing jobs to their neighborhood, improving a local park, reducing crime, creating investment vehicles that puts outside capital into local business....

That can never hurt, but always bear in mind the hordes of such people who want nothing to do with work. They say one thing and do something very different.

....those kinds of things transcend the political drama we waste time on, which typically is nothing but "wag the dog" scenarios because everyone's eyes are glued to their closest fancy touchscreen pandora's box of propaganda.

There is certainly truth in this, but there's more to the picture.

For one thing, solutions that work are often criminalized. Consider all the people in places like NYC who have met with jail or threats thereof for feeding the poor.

When I was a teacher, I got very irritated with the circumstance of working in ghetto schools. I was watching a generation going down the tube. Every time I tried a new approach and it began to yield fruit, my $#@! AP, a little douche named Harvey Kay, would order me to cease and desist. When asked why, his only response ever was "it's illegal". Needless to say, I would shed no tear to find out dear Harvey had been exercised to death in his boothole by lonely and very large men.

I snuck one past him. When he saw the 60 foot long suspension bridge my seniors designed and built sub rosa right under his hooked nose in the lobby of the school, he pitched a fit for the books. Needless to say, I was at another school the following year and it was worth it just to see him come within an epsilon of bursting an artery in his head. He was the worst sort of human. Sub-human, I would call him... but I digress.

I'm saying if we spent more time actually looking at solutions to socio-economic problems instead of the reactionary ideologies they engender, THAT is how we build bridges.

Nice idea, but a bit naive. Bear in mind false criminalization. The last thing Theye want is for any of us to mend fences and turn eyes to the common enemy. Look at how perfectly they have made manifest in the SJW/snowflake brigade. Those people are impossible to deal with. One cannot even speak with them.

I agree to keep trying and accept the little victories, but reality should always temper one's expectations a mite.

We cannot win an ideological war with the left with our "No true Scotsman" take on our version of the right. True libertarianism, Ron Paul libertarianism, is a peaceful "middle" path, not really inside the reactionary paradigm of right/left.

You cannot deal with ideologues who understand and communicate in only those terms. Those willing to be persuaded are few and far between, that population shrinking by the minute.

Lets face it, it's a lot more satisfying to vast hordes of people to bitch, whine, and wreck stuff than it is to face reality with a modicum of courage and a will to work.

So my point is, throw away the "education" related to law, rights, blah blah blah. Those things "go without saying". We have to go local and figure out how to innovate "economically" in our local communities. There are methods on the shelf. But until the BUILDERS change tactics, instead of beating their heads against the wall of an ideology that is a SYMPTOM, NOT A CAUSE of the socio-economic situation, we aren't going to organize.

Today, nothing goes without saying. We are living in strange times and leaving anything unsaid in this quagmire of dishonest chicanery is to tempt fate at the hands of bounders and scoundrels.

Not trying to be Debbie Downer, but only to remind everyone just how steep is the uphill path we tread. The world is awash in thieves.

This doesn't mean we have to "go local" everywhere all at once. Already we are seeing things happen with sound money in Wyoming and Arizona. Build a movement on the economic benefits of "freedom", and then you naturally encourage the freedom ideology in more intellectual spheres.

Keep poking at the monster. At some point it forces the hand into either violence or taking a step down from its imperious position.

[LibertyRevolution]

It is hopeless. The indoctrination of the sheeple has gone on too long.
This country is doomed, move to the middle of nowhere and refind your apathy.

[wizardwatson]

And they are an enormous minority and growing.

That can never hurt, but always bear in mind the hordes of such people who want nothing to do with work. They say one thing and do something very different.

There is certainly truth in this, but there's more to the picture.

For one thing, solutions that work are often criminalized. Consider all the people in places like NYC who have met with jail or threats thereof for feeding the poor.

When I was a teacher, I got very irritated with the circumstance of working in ghetto schools. I was watching a generation going down the tube. Every time I tried a new approach and it began to yield fruit, my $#@! AP, a little douche named Harvey Kay, would order me to cease and desist. When asked why, his only response ever was "it's illegal". Needless to say, I would shed no tear to find out dear Harvey had been exercised to death in his boothole by lonely and very large men.

I snuck one past him. When he saw the 60 foot long suspension bridge my seniors designed and built sub rosa right under his hooked nose in the lobby of the school, he pitched a fit for the books. Needless to say, I was at another school the following year and it was worth it just to see him come within an epsilon of bursting an artery in his head. He was the worst sort of human. Sub-human, I would call him... but I digress.

Nice idea, but a bit naive. Bear in mind false criminalization. The last thing Theye want is for any of us to mend fences and turn eyes to the common enemy. Look at how perfectly they have made manifest in the SJW/snowflake brigade. Those people are impossible to deal with. One cannot even speak with them.

I agree to keep trying and accept the little victories, but reality should always temper one's expectations a mite.

You cannot deal with ideologues who understand and communicate in only those terms. Those willing to be persuaded are few and far between, that population shrinking by the minute.

Lets face it, it's a lot more satisfying to vast hordes of people to bitch, whine, and wreck stuff than it is to face reality with a modicum of courage and a will to work.

Today, nothing goes without saying. We are living in strange times and leaving anything unsaid in this quagmire of dishonest chicanery is to tempt fate at the hands of bounders and scoundrels.

Not trying to be Debbie Downer, but only to remind everyone just how steep is the uphill path we tread. The world is awash in thieves.

Keep poking at the monster. At some point it forces the hand into either violence or taking a step down from its imperious position.

You know...as much as I hate how much time is wasted in this medium, I do like that people's words are there for me to quote.

You call me naive (or "a bit" naive) but ultimately say what I'm saying. People don't have courage and don't want to actually do anything, but instead bitch and whine and make excuses.

So overall, how am I naive? Granted, I'm taking that quote a little out of context, but your entire theme here is that you have some unique grasp on the state of the movement. You don't. You have the same intellectual position of I would say MOST of the movement. "I'm burnt out, let me justify my lack of motivation philosophically."

The fact is, I"m trying to instill hope, show that WE are the problem not the imagined boogeymen of the "state" and the zombie left.

You are the one who started a thread called "Freedom has no hope" and telling the above guy he is "naive".

So what am I not understanding here?

[osan]

You call me naive

No, I called the idea naive and I referred to the example in the previous paragraph regarding false criminalization. There are interests in this nation that are working overtime to make sure we do not build bridges. Don't take what I expressed personally because I don't waste time with that sort of thing. You also appear to ignore that I also characterized it as a "nice idea", and later delivered the bottom-line message about tempering one's expectations in the face of the harsh realities Theye impose upon us.

So overall, how am I naive?

See above.

Granted, I'm taking that quote a little out of context, but your entire theme here is that you have some unique grasp on the state of the movement. You don't. You have the same intellectual position of I would say MOST of the movement. "I'm burnt out, let me justify my lack of motivation philosophically."

No idea where you get these ideas. You have grossly misperceived my positions and personality if this is how you read me. Perhaps I've not written with sufficient clarity and thoughtfulness.

The fact is, I"m trying to instill hope, show that WE are the problem not the imagined boogeymen of the "state" and the zombie left.

All well and good, so far as you go. The problem is that you did not cover the broader circumstance. I fully agree with you on this - press on regardless and try to mend fences rather than go to war. The forces working against this with very clear and deliberate intent, however, are vast. Just look at how these poor, dull-witted "millennials" have been wrapped around the great Progressive Finger. As I wrote previously, there is no talking to a vast plurality of them. If you're not on your knees, ready to service their whinging little willies, the only treatment you can expect from them is blind hatred and, if they think they can get away with it, violence.

You are the one who started a thread called "Freedom has no hope" and telling the above guy he is "naive".

No, the title is "Freedom Has No Hope..." The ellipsis is a semantically significant modifier. You seem to be implying that I am saying that freedom has no hope as an unqualified statement, which is obviously not the case. It has no hope UNLESS <condition 1>, <condition 2>, ... <condition n>

Once again, I did not label you as naive, but only the notion expressed as being so because it ignored several key elements of reality that to date appear to have been very successful in maintaining and even widening the chasms between the various ID-politics subdivisions. If only we could get those hormonally poisoned† gamma-males from antifa to calm themselves long enough to get a few choice words in edgewise. But generally we cannot because they don't want dialog and understanding: they was YOUR head on a pig-pole, America to burn to the waterline, and the death of every white individual in the land. I truly believe that the great majority of those people would be assessed as mildly-to-severely psychotic, were they to be examined by competent clinicians, so wide is the variance between their perceptions and reality.

† Estrogen levels enough for three women, testosterone barely measurable. It this what is meant by "soy boy"?

[wizardwatson]

No, I called the idea naive and I referred to the example in the previous paragraph regarding false criminalization. There are interests in this nation that are working overtime to make sure we do not build bridges. Don't take what I expressed personally because I don't waste time with that sort of thing. You also appear to ignore that I also characterized it as a "nice idea", and later delivered the bottom-line message about tempering one's expectations in the face of the harsh realities Theye impose upon us.



See above.



No idea where you get these ideas. You have grossly misperceived my positions and personality if this is how you read me. Perhaps I've not written with sufficient clarity and thoughtfulness.



All well and good, so far as you go. The problem is that you did not cover the broader circumstance. I fully agree with you on this - press on regardless and try to mend fences rather than go to war. The forces working against this with very clear and deliberate intent, however, are vast. Just look at how these poor, dull-witted "millennials" have been wrapped around the great Progressive Finger. As I wrote previously, there is no talking to a vast plurality of them. If you're not on your knees, ready to service their whinging little willies, the only treatment you can expect from them is blind hatred and, if they think they can get away with it, violence.



No, the title is "Freedom Has No Hope..." The ellipsis is a semantically significant modifier. You seem to be implying that I am saying that freedom has no hope as an unqualified statement, which is obviously not the case. It has no hope UNLESS <condition 1>, <condition 2>, ... <condition n>

Once again, I did not label you as naive, but only the notion expressed as being so because it ignored several key elements of reality that to date appear to have been very successful in maintaining and even widening the chasms between the various ID-politics subdivisions. If only we could get those hormonally poisoned† gamma-males from antifa to calm themselves long enough to get a few choice words in edgewise. But generally we cannot because they don't want dialog and understanding: they was YOUR head on a pig-pole, America to burn to the waterline, and the death of every white individual in the land. I truly believe that the great majority of those people would be assessed as mildly-to-severely psychotic, were they to be examined by competent clinicians, so wide is the variance between their perceptions and reality.

† Estrogen levels enough for three women, testosterone barely measurable. It this what is meant by "soy boy"?

Reset, then.

Do you have any plans or ideas how to organize? Because it seems to me that you obsess and despair about the strength and numbers of the perceived enemy.

The real enemy is our apathy and lethargy, as your click-bait titled thread is a witness to.

If we don't overcome that, we'll never know whether the enemy is even as real as we imagine because we've never had a decent plan to organize and roll call, much less go on a mission.

[wizardwatson]

Unless one of two things occur:

1. The "movement" becomes sufficiently organized, or
2. A "reset event" occurs.

Actually, this reminds me of a thought I had a few times over the years that I will likely incorporate into my plan this year.

We do need a reset event. If we want to jumpstart organization, the first thing we need to do when organizing is universally agree that:
1) We are going to have some small modicum of transparent identity.
2) All apathy, trolling, fighting, and otherwise useless post history and online shenanigans will be forgiven. Reset point going forward.

#2 is the real reset we need. I feel like so many people over the years feel the need to justify themselves since they have such a post history. Why? Your online history is the skid mark on the underwear of life. Throw it out and get some new underwear. Nobody cares and nobody is going to read it. If people try to drudge up your crap instead of focusing on real actions and accountability going forward we ding THEM for violating #2.

Anyway, I've always liked that idea. 2nd chance for everyone but the price is some kind of real world presence. No point in giving 2nd chances to people we aren't even sure are real.

[osan]

Reset, then.

Do you have any plans or ideas how to organize? Because it seems to me that you obsess and despair about the strength and numbers of the perceived enemy.

I obsess over my civil engineering project, which is the expansion of this house single-handedly from what is now about 2800 sq, ft. to just under 10K. As for the rest of the world - feh... I have better things with which to occupy my bigger concerns. As is all too common, you have read into my words that which is not there. We all do it, so no big deal - just setting you straight.

We all have our moments.

The real enemy is our apathy and lethargy, as your click-bait titled thread is a witness to.

Click-bait? And in what manner have I profited from posting this thread? Is the objective of click-bait not to profit, usually monetarily?

If nothing, I ran into the red with this. Your accusation makes no sense.

If we don't overcome that, we'll never know whether the enemy is even as real as we imagine because we've never had a decent plan to organize and roll call, much less go on a mission.

This is agreeable. Now for the observation: nothing much is happening, save for the left-phagues marching, wrecking, beating, and so on. Thus far, there is little basis for optimism. But things can change in a heartbeat, so who can say what things will be like in ten years or even one?