Anarcho-capitalism aka voluntaryism.
No compromises. "A little bit of theft" is still immoral. No voting. 99 people have no right to decide what one person should do / for what one should pay.
Topic: Political Standing (yours) (Read 2346 times)
Individual.
hey myrkul have you ever seen this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
I remember hearing briefly about it, probably in a Neal Stephenson book, but this is the first I'd actually looked closely at it.
its so beautiful... and ugly... and beautiful. The physical manifestation of anarchy. That picture fills me with so many emotions.
Any information on whether or not the Triads did any racketeering, or were they just concerned with their drugs and sex?
Sorry im not any sort of an expert, i just think its fascinating. I can also assume it must not have been that bad of a place to live or people wouldnt have bothered to build so far up into the sky, they would have instead chosen the much cheaper option of building out.
Yeah, it looks like most of the violent crime was between members of the triads, not to the public.
hey myrkul have you ever seen this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
I remember hearing briefly about it, probably in a Neal Stephenson book, but this is the first I'd actually looked closely at it.
its so beautiful... and ugly... and beautiful. The physical manifestation of anarchy. That picture fills me with so many emotions.
Any information on whether or not the Triads did any racketeering, or were they just concerned with their drugs and sex?
Sorry im not any sort of an expert, i just think its fascinating. I can also assume it must not have been that bad of a place to live or people wouldnt have bothered to build so far up into the sky, they would have instead chosen the much cheaper option of building out.
hey myrkul have you ever seen this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
I remember hearing briefly about it, probably in a Neal Stephenson book, but this is the first I'd actually looked closely at it.
its so beautiful... and ugly... and beautiful. The physical manifestation of anarchy. That picture fills me with so many emotions.
Any information on whether or not the Triads did any racketeering, or were they just concerned with their drugs and sex?
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
So, how many people does it take to decide how much of your money they should take? Everyone but you? 99%? 51%?Good question. Every society sets the bar differently. There are some that don't. A good example is Somalia.
For some reason, those societies rarely feature on any list of good places to live.
Its a very bad example if you are attempting to portray a society with out taxation in a negative light. It certainly doesnt make sense to compare somolia to Finland or Sweden or w/e is supposed to be a socialist utopia since Somalia has little capital accumulation. You should instead compare Somalia today to Somalia 10 years ago if you want a meaningful point of reference and conditions in Somalia have been rapidly improving ever since the fall of their state.
Best cell reception north of Johannesburg, or so I am given to understand.
hey myrkul have you ever seen this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
I remember hearing briefly about it, probably in a Neal Stephenson book, but this is the first I'd actually looked closely at it.
its so beautiful... and ugly... and beautiful. The physical manifestation of anarchy. That picture fills me with so many emotions.
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
So, how many people does it take to decide how much of your money they should take? Everyone but you? 99%? 51%?Good question. Every society sets the bar differently. There are some that don't. A good example is Somalia.
For some reason, those societies rarely feature on any list of good places to live.
Its a very bad example if you are attempting to portray a society with out taxation in a negative light. It certainly doesnt make sense to compare somolia to Finland or Sweden or w/e is supposed to be a socialist utopia since Somalia has little capital accumulation. You should instead compare Somalia today to Somalia 10 years ago if you want a meaningful point of reference and conditions in Somalia have been rapidly improving ever since the fall of their state.
Best cell reception north of Johannesburg, or so I am given to understand.
hey myrkul have you ever seen this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
I remember hearing briefly about it, probably in a Neal Stephenson book, but this is the first I'd actually looked closely at it.
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
So, how many people does it take to decide how much of your money they should take? Everyone but you? 99%? 51%?Good question. Every society sets the bar differently. There are some that don't. A good example is Somalia.
For some reason, those societies rarely feature on any list of good places to live.
Its a very bad example if you are attempting to portray a society with out taxation in a negative light. It certainly doesnt make sense to compare somolia to Finland or Sweden or w/e is supposed to be a socialist utopia since Somalia has little capital accumulation. You should instead compare Somalia today to Somalia 10 years ago if you want a meaningful point of reference and conditions in Somalia have been rapidly improving ever since the fall of their state.
Best cell reception north of Johannesburg, or so I am given to understand.
hey myrkul have you ever seen this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kowloon_Walled_City
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
So, how many people does it take to decide how much of your money they should take? Everyone but you? 99%? 51%?Good question. Every society sets the bar differently. There are some that don't. A good example is Somalia.
For some reason, those societies rarely feature on any list of good places to live.
Its a very bad example if you are attempting to portray a society with out taxation in a negative light. It certainly doesnt make sense to compare somolia to Finland or Sweden or w/e is supposed to be a socialist utopia since Somalia has little capital accumulation. You should instead compare Somalia today to Somalia 10 years ago if you want a meaningful point of reference and conditions in Somalia have been rapidly improving ever since the fall of their state.
Best cell reception north of Johannesburg, or so I am given to understand.
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
So, how many people does it take to decide how much of your money they should take? Everyone but you? 99%? 51%?Good question. Every society sets the bar differently. There are some that don't. A good example is Somalia.
For some reason, those societies rarely feature on any list of good places to live.
Its a very bad example if you are attempting to portray a society with out taxation in a negative light. It certainly doesnt make sense to compare somolia to Finland or Sweden or w/e is supposed to be a socialist utopia since Somalia has little capital accumulation. You should instead compare Somalia today to Somalia 10 years ago if you want a meaningful point of reference and conditions in Somalia have been rapidly improving ever since the fall of their state.
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
So, how many people does it take to decide how much of your money they should take? Everyone but you? 99%? 51%?Good question. Every society sets the bar differently. There are some that don't. A good example is Somalia.
For some reason, those societies rarely feature on any list of good places to live.
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
So, how many people does it take to decide how much of your money they should take? Everyone but you? 99%? 51%?
Libertarian socialist, though I voted for Ron Paul in 1988. I do think there should be a social safety net, but it shouldn't cost too much or be too comfortable for the lazy. I have to admit to voting mostly for Democrats, even though they are increasingly disgusting.
I think philosophy may be more useful an indicator than politics, because politics, at least in America, is absolutely fucked right now. I'm a preference utilitarian in the mold of Jeremy Bentham or, more recently, Peter Singer. The best social policies are those which leave people alone as much as possible, so that they can satisfy their personal preferences. It shouldn't be up to the state to decide what preferences are "good" or to make moral decisions or protect people from themselves.
So, for instance, if a drug addict wants to shoot smack until he dies, he should be allowed to do so, though it might be useful for society to offer some kind of voluntary rehab at no or low cost, because losing a potentially useful person is inefficient. Spending enormous amounts of money to throw such people in prison is completely useless.
Similarly, qualified people should get no or low cost education, at least in something useful, because that's efficient. Even if 9 out of 10 people go on to some undistinguished work in a field like math or science, it's a total waste for a potential Einstein to end up as a pizza delivery guy for lack of education at the right time. The kind of discoveries scientists and engineers make justify spending other people's money to make sure we don't waste an Einstein.
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
I think philosophy may be more useful an indicator than politics, because politics, at least in America, is absolutely fucked right now. I'm a preference utilitarian in the mold of Jeremy Bentham or, more recently, Peter Singer. The best social policies are those which leave people alone as much as possible, so that they can satisfy their personal preferences. It shouldn't be up to the state to decide what preferences are "good" or to make moral decisions or protect people from themselves.
So, for instance, if a drug addict wants to shoot smack until he dies, he should be allowed to do so, though it might be useful for society to offer some kind of voluntary rehab at no or low cost, because losing a potentially useful person is inefficient. Spending enormous amounts of money to throw such people in prison is completely useless.
Similarly, qualified people should get no or low cost education, at least in something useful, because that's efficient. Even if 9 out of 10 people go on to some undistinguished work in a field like math or science, it's a total waste for a potential Einstein to end up as a pizza delivery guy for lack of education at the right time. The kind of discoveries scientists and engineers make justify spending other people's money to make sure we don't waste an Einstein.
I do agree with the libertarian idea that taxation is ultimately coercive and a use of force to take something from people who would probably not voluntarily give it. But I don't agree that this means it should never be done. It should be done, but only in a democratic process and only when the bang is worth the buck. Governments currently take too much and provide too little.
If u aren't conservative you just haven't grown up yet.
How do Bitcoin fit in that view?
Fascism appeals to me more than any thing else.
my standing is that zionism is anything but helpful ... to say the least.
Libertarian, in the anarcho-capitalist sense of the word.
If u aren't conservative you just haven't grown up yet.
How do Bitcoin fit in that view?
If u aren't conservative you just haven't grown up yet.
Also left-right is relative to country. From European viewpoint USA seems to be right-far right on the scale.
More exact labels would be good, but in some ways they might be rather far from real politics and misunderstood.
More exact labels would be good, but in some ways they might be rather far from real politics and misunderstood.
The only real politics are the politics that take place outside the farm.
Also left-right is relative to country. From European viewpoint USA seems to be right-far right on the scale.
More exact labels would be good, but in some ways they might be rather far from real politics and misunderstood.
More exact labels would be good, but in some ways they might be rather far from real politics and misunderstood.
Anarcho capitalism or Voluntaryism
http://www.theadvocates.org/images/bd/quiz/red_dots/100_100.gif?1364251919
http://www.theadvocates.org/images/bd/quiz/red_dots/100_100.gif?1364251919
It will be an interesting mess 
The days of 'left' or 'right' will be over in days/months/(probably a few years).
'left or right' has turned into a farce these last decades, corruption rife, with either side just being the same pawns of the banksters, they will be discarded and thrown out in time to come. In the UK these last few years we have seen an unprecendented about of by-elections (meaning that MP's have either stood down, been forced to retire, and a few actually locked up), this is due to their corruption and it being found and shown (in some cases they've been the 'fall-out' man/woman for the higher powers coughcameroncoughroyalfamilycough).
Considering this .. what is your view on the new 'political scale'? Will there be one? How will it be measured? Will it be measured? Or will new divisions and categories be created?
My thoughts is that new categories will be created, the left and right thrown out. I have thoughts on this, but I am curious as to others thoughts without putting my own down first (which may or may not influence others thoughts).
'left or right' has turned into a farce these last decades, corruption rife, with either side just being the same pawns of the banksters, they will be discarded and thrown out in time to come. In the UK these last few years we have seen an unprecendented about of by-elections (meaning that MP's have either stood down, been forced to retire, and a few actually locked up), this is due to their corruption and it being found and shown (in some cases they've been the 'fall-out' man/woman for the higher powers coughcameroncoughroyalfamilycough).
Considering this .. what is your view on the new 'political scale'? Will there be one? How will it be measured? Will it be measured? Or will new divisions and categories be created?
My thoughts is that new categories will be created, the left and right thrown out. I have thoughts on this, but I am curious as to others thoughts without putting my own down first (which may or may not influence others thoughts).
this dichotomy will begin to be cast more and more in its true light. Left and right is a cover for the real dichotomy here, individualism vs collectivism. People will begin to shed the titles of left and right and more accurately label what they have always been attempting to articulate as collectivism and individualism.
The days of 'left' or 'right' will be over in days/months/(probably a few years).
'left or right' has turned into a farce these last decades, corruption rife, with either side just being the same pawns of the banksters, they will be discarded and thrown out in time to come. In the UK these last few years we have seen an unprecendented about of by-elections (meaning that MP's have either stood down, been forced to retire, and a few actually locked up), this is due to their corruption and it being found and shown (in some cases they've been the 'fall-out' man/woman for the higher powers coughcameroncoughroyalfamilycough).
Considering this .. what is your view on the new 'political scale'? Will there be one? How will it be measured? Will it be measured? Or will new divisions and categories be created?
My thoughts is that new categories will be created, the left and right thrown out. I have thoughts on this, but I am curious as to others thoughts without putting my own down first (which may or may not influence others thoughts).
'left or right' has turned into a farce these last decades, corruption rife, with either side just being the same pawns of the banksters, they will be discarded and thrown out in time to come. In the UK these last few years we have seen an unprecendented about of by-elections (meaning that MP's have either stood down, been forced to retire, and a few actually locked up), this is due to their corruption and it being found and shown (in some cases they've been the 'fall-out' man/woman for the higher powers coughcameroncoughroyalfamilycough).
Considering this .. what is your view on the new 'political scale'? Will there be one? How will it be measured? Will it be measured? Or will new divisions and categories be created?
My thoughts is that new categories will be created, the left and right thrown out. I have thoughts on this, but I am curious as to others thoughts without putting my own down first (which may or may not influence others thoughts).
this dichotomy will begin to be cast more and more in its true light. Left and right is a cover for the real dichotomy here, individualism vs collectivism. People will begin to shed the titles of left and right and more accurately label what they have always been attempting to articulate as collectivism and individualism.
whats up with all the tea party here
Tea party? Just another distraction. I don't identify with them, mostly because they fall prey to the "left-right" methodology, and they're kinda nutty.
I'd prefer there not be another war :p
And anyway, it's only ever really been 1 war, and we're still fighting it.
And anyway, it's only ever really been 1 war, and we're still fighting it.
what you think of those fellas from the Near East:
http://www.picturehost.eu/uploads/a03cd6150981e8658bab53f971218e8b_swast2.jpg
http://www.picturehost.eu/uploads/a03cd6150981e8658bab53f971218e8b_swast2.jpg
And I totally agree with this
It is extremely shocking what they're blatantly getting away with.. but ye, gotta take away their poweryeah! let's support Iran in the upcoming WW III !
whats up with all the tea party here
Ok. I made 15 records to my KGB notebook. See you soon gentlemen.
I really dont like this left-right "duopoly", but on this chart I'd have to say Libertarian. As far as a Libertarian goes, I've always flirted along the line between Minarchy and Anarchy, so I wouldn't know how I feel about that yet.
My opinion:
Liberals: crazy
Statists: crazy
Right-wing: crazy
Centrist: Understandable
Libertarian: Me
what you think of those fellas from the Near East:
And I totally agree with this
It is extremely shocking what they're blatantly getting away with.. but ye, gotta take away their power
This is what I mean, the whole left-right thing is just so muddled now, and really when you look at it from the outside.. it's all the bloody same.
This stuff didn't exist before monarchy, and other things before that, left-right is creation of government and the modern fiat-controlled world to impress upon people that they have a choice. Maybe, probably it had the best intentions when it was created, but unfortunately not anymore. And just like how gold was replaced by fiat, and fiat will be replaced by bitcoin, what would replace the current form of corrupt government and this mentality of left-right?
This stuff didn't exist before monarchy, and other things before that, left-right is creation of government and the modern fiat-controlled world to impress upon people that they have a choice. Maybe, probably it had the best intentions when it was created, but unfortunately not anymore. And just like how gold was replaced by fiat, and fiat will be replaced by bitcoin, what would replace the current form of corrupt government and this mentality of left-right?
Me the name I call myself...generally referred to as libertarian. Though to be honest it's hard to distinguish the normal libertarians from the nutty ones. For example, the 9/11 conspiracy theorists, the ones who believe the NWO/Illuminati are out to get them, etc...they just piss me off.
Yeah I agree, the official conspiracy theory seems pretty lame.
Me the name I call myself...generally referred to as libertarian. Though to be honest it's hard to distinguish the normal libertarians from the nutty ones. For example, the 9/11 conspiracy theorists, the ones who believe the NWO/Illuminati are out to get them, etc...they just piss me off.
Of course I believe in some nutty things as well. Such as, I've yet to see any beneficial purpose of a tariff other than for the purpose of granting a monopoly to a labor union in a particular industry, which has the result of making goods cost more in both that market and adjacent ones, costing more jobs than it actually saves.
I also believe in nutty things such as based on my own experience with firearms, I think pistols are more dangerous than assault rifles in most situations other than open combat in a warzone (carbines, such as an M4, being more effective in urban warfare.) Also I believe that full auto or even burst fire is only useful for suppressive fire, and is otherwise just a waste of ammunition, which is why the Army removed it from all standard issue small arms. So that said, I don't understand why we ban either of them.
And the final nutty thing I believe is that in general, political labels suck. They encourage voters to treat their decision much in the same way that say Cowboys fans view Packers fans, or something similar. They don't really care about the man they are voting for, rather they just want to see their letter win.
Of course I believe in some nutty things as well. Such as, I've yet to see any beneficial purpose of a tariff other than for the purpose of granting a monopoly to a labor union in a particular industry, which has the result of making goods cost more in both that market and adjacent ones, costing more jobs than it actually saves.
I also believe in nutty things such as based on my own experience with firearms, I think pistols are more dangerous than assault rifles in most situations other than open combat in a warzone (carbines, such as an M4, being more effective in urban warfare.) Also I believe that full auto or even burst fire is only useful for suppressive fire, and is otherwise just a waste of ammunition, which is why the Army removed it from all standard issue small arms. So that said, I don't understand why we ban either of them.
And the final nutty thing I believe is that in general, political labels suck. They encourage voters to treat their decision much in the same way that say Cowboys fans view Packers fans, or something similar. They don't really care about the man they are voting for, rather they just want to see their letter win.
Libertarian.
Generally libertarian, although I don't agree with their entire platform. I do think we need to fund education and have somewhat of a social safety net (just take better measures to make sure it is not abused.)
I disagree. The problem with funding education and SS is that it requires tax. If state-offered education was voluntary, and funded voluntarily, why would we need state-education? In this case, it would make more sense for all schools to simply be private. On SS, same issue; it's not voluntary. If both those things were privately run and completely up to the individual to participate in, I would be perfectly a-okay with them.
Generally libertarian, although I don't agree with their entire platform. I do think we need to fund education and have somewhat of a social safety net (just take better measures to make sure it is not abused.)
I never really had one, until I found this site. I believe the correct term is libertarian. But hopefully, in the future, people won't consider a political role to have an effect on an entire populace. Much like religion is nothing like a person's name, a political standing should be nothing like a person's gender. They're abstractions; rules you have to play with in a statist society who values such things as division of the masses. Maybe one day we'll all just be people; not libertarian, or American, or rich or poor, but people.
Anarchist leaning Libertarian
I think ever since the internet was created the whole left/right thing has been thrown out really.
I think ever since the internet was created the whole left/right thing has been thrown out really.
what you think of those fellas from the Near East:
http://www.picturehost.eu/uploads/a03cd6150981e8658bab53f971218e8b_swast2.jpg
http://www.picturehost.eu/uploads/a03cd6150981e8658bab53f971218e8b_swast2.jpg
Fascism appeals to me more than any thing else.
The days of 'left' or 'right' will be over in days/months/(probably a few years).
'left or right' has turned into a farce these last decades, corruption rife, with either side just being the same pawns of the banksters, they will be discarded and thrown out in time to come. In the UK these last few years we have seen an unprecendented about of by-elections (meaning that MP's have either stood down, been forced to retire, and a few actually locked up), this is due to their corruption and it being found and shown (in some cases they've been the 'fall-out' man/woman for the higher powers coughcameroncoughroyalfamilycough).
Considering this .. what is your view on the new 'political scale'? Will there be one? How will it be measured? Will it be measured? Or will new divisions and categories be created?
My thoughts is that new categories will be created, the left and right thrown out. I have thoughts on this, but I am curious as to others thoughts without putting my own down first (which may or may not influence others thoughts).
'left or right' has turned into a farce these last decades, corruption rife, with either side just being the same pawns of the banksters, they will be discarded and thrown out in time to come. In the UK these last few years we have seen an unprecendented about of by-elections (meaning that MP's have either stood down, been forced to retire, and a few actually locked up), this is due to their corruption and it being found and shown (in some cases they've been the 'fall-out' man/woman for the higher powers coughcameroncoughroyalfamilycough).
Considering this .. what is your view on the new 'political scale'? Will there be one? How will it be measured? Will it be measured? Or will new divisions and categories be created?
My thoughts is that new categories will be created, the left and right thrown out. I have thoughts on this, but I am curious as to others thoughts without putting my own down first (which may or may not influence others thoughts).
Jump to: