The neocons (intellectuals) are already in Obama’s camp. If you mean ideologically retarded rank and file Republicans, they have no idea how to riot. I wouldn’t be surprised if the US government confiscated all guns by September and not one shot was fired in opposition.
Max Keiser I think it was, made a great point about the American people. They get a gun, and think that is their defense of liberty. Not education, not activism or organization. As Stranger recently noted in a thread, being organized for resistance with shovels and furnace pokers is a lot more useful than a bunch of disorganized guys with rifles.
Also, I wouldn’t say that microsoft, which thrives on IP and delivers second rate products is on the same level as Intel, which is one the most sophisticated engineering companies on earth.
If this happens or the effort starts, then I guess we’ll see how whipped and beaten this dog called the American people really is. I think the statists usually do test runs first to find out if the water is too hot or too cold to perform their agenda. I’m waiting for a testing of the waters first. If this effort is true, then I would look for propaganda to come out and test the waters. If not much of a reaction, then I wouldn’t doubt the State ramps up their voice on the issue that further beats the dog and scares it into a corner even more. The State needs to do a lot more scaring if they want to pull this off. Unless the State wants violence to ensue, which is a real possibility.
P.S. LS, I was thinking about the money issue. I think its a good socialist move on their part. It’s not about getting money back that the State lost, that’s impossible. It’s a big power and propaganda move. Thus, property has everything to do with this. Glad you brought that up.
My apologies, I was using neo-con to describe the prevailing popular belief of “ideologically retarded rank and file Republicans” rather than it’s strict definition.
I disagree that there wouldn’t be riots, but since it’s gross speculation I have nothing to back up that assertion. The logic behind my original statement was really a product of timing, if the government slowly eroded private gun ownership over time I’d think you’d be right, but I think trying to get the whole country disarmed by September would really get ugly.
I agree, similar to how the administration handled the proposed Obama Youth Corps with mandatory community service. They tested the waters first and after alot of people freaked out, they backed off and now it’s voluntary, for the time being anyway.
I don’t know when it was, but in the last year, I have come to realize that the power elite are completely evil. They aren’t dumb. They aren’t mistakenly driving towards authoritarian fascism or socialism. It is deliberate, gradual march.
Wealth is meaningless because they control the mechanism for titling property, just as they don’t care about democracy because they choose the choices and count the ballots. It’s all about power all the time. So yes, the money is irrelevant. What is important, is making sure there exist no jurisdictions where they do not control the money. How they sell that to Boobus Americans or Boobus Canadianus is through the timeless levers of greed, envy, resentment and laziness. There is a reason why libertarians are generally smart people, not dumb people or in equal distribution. Because libertarianism is a rational revolt against emotional manipulation.
Nah, back to schools sales and the never ending Bret Favre drama should keep Boobus significantly distracted long enough to disarm him. If there is any friction, the government could always invade some small polynesian islands and hand out free vi-a-gra at the shopping mall.
What is at issue though is how this society works. It’s a huge compromise society. You gave an excellent example of how a compromise emerges out of a testing of the waters, which thankfully didn’t include “mandatory” as you said. People in this country compromise on most issues. Partisan politics I think is a lie. Bi-partisan, non-principled agreements come and go often as the State makes compromises daily. It’s a win-win for the State for the State gains power either way a compromise is settled. This is why a principled people is in need now. No compromising. Draw the line in the sand on each issue that comes up. Just like Ron P. does.
Good point on the jurisdiction. That is huge for the State. And the coordination on the part of the EU, U.S., and Australia. Lots going on in that country with Rudd as I visit a website hosted by an Australian so I see Rudd is trying to be a good servant it looks like of the U.S. and EU. What’s interesting is Australia is a time lag on some issues. Right now their economy is doing pretty good, but Rudd is implementing economic moves in the housing sector that will create a housing bubble just like the one that burst here in the U.S. and Europe. Rudd is following the same plan that the U.S. and Europe followed to create that housing bubble. He has their game plan. Being so close to China I can see Australia being a future economic bomb that could go off and disrupt China and other Eastern Asia countries economies even more. It’s amazing. He’s following the same exact housing bubble agenda. They are deliberate.
What helps the State when their actions against large corporations take place is they still use cover to continue with their power scheme. The State doesn’t come out and just tell the truth of their total actions that’s left to a moral perspective to figure out. What helps provide that legitimate role by the State on these money issues is a large socialist populist that thinks it’s good that the State does this. Thereby the actions by the State are shed into political issues that the parties can squabble about in any up-coming elections. The party squabble is helpful for the State. Releases any conflict that is stirring in the masses. Without the voting process the State would have revolts on its hands more often. Voting is actually one of the most powerful tools in the State’s toolbox to deflect a State from being overthrown. Voters and the politicians tell each other and tell the non-voters, if you don’t like it, then vote on it in the next election. The more I think about it, voting is one of the most powerful evil tools ever devised by the State. Not that voting could be good if in a more ideal situation, but voting is a judo move by the State. The State uses the energy of the populist to counter their own actions - pure judo. Cause if you don’t like what’s going on you can just make a vote, study the issues, if that’s not enough people tell you, then you should run for office and do something about it. There’s always a release valve for the State to divert any counter-energies emerging from the people. Where dictators have to use might, democracies and republics can be more subtle and smile while they take the freedoms away from the people. Like a sadistic murderer - like the Joker from Batman.
There is this notion that people will rise up when it gets bad enough, but people today already put up with way more than their ancestors did. Gradualism is training us not to revolt, not to get excited. Sorta like how porn diminishes libido or violent video games are safe outlets for beta males (keeping the alphas on top).
So much work to do. Pushing back on leviathan is not going to come quick or easy.
I see this particularly happening with college students. They are being taught that they have “a voice”; that they must excersice their “democratic” rights; that they have a right to education, to healthcare, to financial aid, to censure “hate speech”, the right to protest on private property, the right to free speech anywhere and everywhere (except against Obama), and so on. In effect, colleges teach students to become dependent on the state to survive; afterall, what will they without an education or health?: they will be dumb and die young. I see no hope in the vast majority of college students. I have yet to find a libertarian or an-cap at my school.
I explain to fellow students why and how Obama’s economic plans won’t work; but they maintain that the government must “do something”. They maintain that “we” must “do something”; anything as long as it’s not what Bush did. Yet, what Obama is doing is what Bush did and what Bush would have done had he stayed. Furthermore, the porfessors are no help. They depend on the state for survival as well. Their salaries and lifestyles are supported by the state; how dare they denounce their sugga daddy.
Lastly, this country (USA) won’t revert to a libertarian oriented society until we experience fullblown socialism. We will collapse like all socialist countries have. If anything, the fact that the Europeans are most socialistic than we are signinfies that they are ahead of us in moving towards total collapse and libertarian society. What’s more, China is decades ahead of everyone else, they already experienced communism and trying capitalism. As Jim Rogers has said, the 20th century was that of the United States, and the 21st century will the that of China’s.
This stems from the belief that the government now represents “the people”. After Obama’s election, there was a new found faith in the State. The State now represents us and Obama is its spokeperson. Thus, the FDA is “our” commitee staffed by scientists for the purpose of keeping us safe from the State-protected corporations who want kill us. Nevermid the corruption and the incompetence; Obama is now their boss and will set them straight. Obama will end all wars; that is, after he nukes Iran and Pakistan, and “finishes the job” in Afghanistan. And don’t worry about the economy; Obama will do what is best; afterall, he is a lawyer from Harvard. Sure, he might make mistakes (and destroy the entire economy in the process), but we need to give him time. He won’t perform any economic miracles, but he is getting us on the right track; that is, on the track right down toward socialism. Socialism, via fascism, is that economic system where no one will starve and no one will go home without their need and wants met; nevermind communist China, the Soviet Union, socialist Eastern Europe, socialist Africa, and socialist South America because we simply didn’t have the “right” people in place to command us towards prosperity.
Which it is very unwise to attack Obama as the whiny Republicans are now doing, with Hannity and Rush cheerleading.
It is important to highlight every government failure. It might backfire and maybe people will ask for better leaders and better planners, but I think that it will be very hard for Obama to retire from office with the same nostalgia and charm that Bill Clinton enjoys. The blogs and YouTube videos are very punishing with more and more people getting informed and communicating socially online. As the economy worsens people are going to have a lot more time to mock the masters.
God, I hate Eurocrats. According to British MEP Hannan, the majority of regulations and laws imposed on the majority of EU members is from the oh-so-august organisation itself.
Everytime time I point out Obama’s failures to fellow students, the typical responses I receive are: “You have to give Obama time (to do whatever right)”; “you have no faith in Obama?”; “are you a republican?”; “are you a fascist?”; and so on. One concern I have is that people make the connection that Obama is a fascist, and in the nect election, they elect a socialist (I’m ignoring the arguement/fact that are basically the same thing).
Every time I talk to someone about Obama, I get a negative response unless they are a brainless neocon moron. Then they start frothing at the mouth and blaming the end of America on his first 100 days in office.
Instead, I totally skip the right-left paradigm, and go right to all of the bi-partisan failures of government, then point out how RP is for peace and justice and transparency and civil liberties.
I don’t expect people to give up St. Obama, I want them to second guess their religion.
I think playing the back and forth bi-partisan game hurts libertarianism. I think left oriented and right oriented libertarianism is counter productive. The notion that one has more in common with a particular sort of statist over another is pretty outrageous when they all believe in nationalism and the power of the gun for their personal, ideological gain. I think RP has proven you can attract just as many people on the right as the LLs claim they attract on the left, but it’s not because left and right can be co-opted but that there are people on both sides of the ideological spectrum who aren’t true believers and are looking for something to reconcile their doubts and concerns.
Rothbard must have looked foolish bouncing between left and right, Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan. He should have stuck to his ideological guns and went after the low hanging independent or non-voter fruit. It’s imperative we learn the lessons of past efforts.
I think it is best to leave the entire left right spectrum behind. It is a ridiculous scale which shows absolutely nothing. The real thing to be concerned with is personal freedom vs government coercion. When you point this out to people, they almost always will side with personal freedom. (except for some marxists and hardcore statists, but even then, a little conversation, and they’ll come around!)
I disagree with the fundamental use of the gun, therefor I must oppose the coercive state on the left, and on the right. If you prefer communism, join a commune (I like to call them Voluntary Governments so people can wrap their heads around it easier), if you prefer socialism, join a co-operative. If you prefer a theocracy, join a religious order. If you love to follow whatever the majority believes, feel free to join a majority deciding law group (or whatever strange term they may be called).
You can then hammer on with the argument of the fact that communism can work great if everyone under it gives their consent. Forcing people to live under it only further causes the free rider problem and will lead to very unsatisfactory conditions. Plus, the morality of forcing someone to be under it is dispicable! Let loose with some moral condemnation.