0
   

We will be way better of without a government!

 
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Fri 26 Jun, 2020 12:55 am
Robert Reich: Trump's Brand is Ayn Rand

0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2020 05:08 pm
@Palandre,
Hay dummy, with Trump and a republican senate were three quarters the way to no government. To go all the way to no government elect the crooked president for a second term.
Palandre
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 27 Jul, 2020 11:52 am
@RABEL222,
well, maybe it is bad with no government, but it is certainly worse with a 'government'.
Palandre
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 28 Jul, 2020 08:38 am
Maybe this makes it more clear what 'government' really is:

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcSS31GvJn1XBxH7aEDsvn7fybJ1JvGF-hc6og&usqp=CAU

it is scickening what the psycho's in 'government' do!
justaguy2
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Jul, 2020 11:00 am
@Palandre,
This has got to be one of the funniest threads I've ever seen anywhere!

Palandre wrote:
well, maybe it is bad with no government, but it is certainly worse with a 'government'.


Hmmmmmmmmmmm, I honestly have to wonder if you're just taking the piss here. But again, got to be one of the funniest responses I've ever seen from anyone. It could be a comedy routine in itself: "who needs basic services? Just let people do whatever the hell they want and the one-bit rednecks will sort it out for everyone's benefit! Somalia worked out great... well except if you disagreed with Al-Shabaab. And/or you ever stole anything, let alone if you were a woman and you ever cheated on your husband, etc, etc, and ended up in an islamic court" Laughing

You've honestly got to be taking the piss if you think any of the above is better.

Palandre wrote:
it is scickening what the psycho's in 'government' do!


Imagine "the psycho's" outside of government then, that don't follow any "rules" and make up their own as they go along if you think "government psycho's" are bad...

Honestly, if this thread was not serious, it would be absolutely comical...
Palandre
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 28 Jul, 2020 12:48 pm
@justaguy2,
Quote:
Imagine "the psycho's" outside of government then, that don't follow any "rules" and make up their own as they go along if you think "government psycho's" are bad...


There have been MORE people killed and so on by 'government' then by any psycho's outside of 'government'! that is a fact. And here is the kicker, people were killed etc by 'government' BECAUSE PEOPLE FOLLOWED THE RULES!
(think soldiers, police and other psycho's.)
The deep problem here is the BELIEF in authority. Of course there can't be any authority. It is a logical impossiblity.
InfraBlue
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 Jul, 2020 12:59 pm
@Palandre,
That is not the etymology of the word "government".
Palandre
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 28 Jul, 2020 08:28 pm
@InfraBlue,
it sure is.
InfraBlue
 
  3  
Reply Tue 28 Jul, 2020 11:28 pm
@Palandre,
No it isn't.
Palandre
 
  0  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 02:36 am
@InfraBlue,
Well then, explain what is wrong with my explanation?
vikorr
 
  5  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 05:22 am
@Palandre,
Quote:
The deep problem here is the BELIEF in authority. Of course there can't be any authority. It is a logical impossibility.
Right here is something that could show understanding of pure logic (eg mathematics), but definitely shows very little understanding of human beings.

It seems to me that one would need to possess an inability to comprehend others emotions to come to such a conclusion. Emotions in this instant, would also involve peoples differing drives, the need to come together as a society, the need to have a functioning society, as well as the contrary drives to take apart society, or simply to take and take and take from society.

People believe in authority for very good reason (not that it is ever in any way perfect, with some authorities better, and some authorities worse than others), or fear authority for very good reason.
Palandre
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 06:54 am
@vikorr,
Quote:
Right here is something that could show understanding of pure logic (eg mathematics), but definitely shows very little understanding of human beings.

It seems to me that one would need to possess an inability to comprehend others emotions to come to such a conclusion. Emotions in this instant, would also involve peoples differing drives, the need to come together as a society, the need to have a functioning society, as well as the contrary drives to take apart society, or simply to take and take and take from society.

People believe in authority for very good reason (not that it is ever in any way perfect, with some authorities better, and some authorities worse than others), or fear authority for very good reason.


lol, you clearly don't understand what I am wrtiting. People can indeed belief in authority, but actually it is illogical.
justaguy2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 07:24 am
@Palandre,
I'm still struggling whether or not to take you seriously, the only problem is... I think you are serious. In all honestly, and all jokes aside, I'm not sure if I should worry about your very misguided understanding [lack of] of "logic" more, or the fact you seem to be serious about your "idea" more. This is one of those rare occasions where I'm torn between which one of those things I should be more concerned about - it's tough.

But, and while I'm likely wasting my time in even saying it... any group of people making decisions that affect others are in fact "governing" something. Therefore a group of village elders conducting the affairs of a small village in the middle of nowhere could be considered a "local government". Therefore, and the point is: even in places where there is no "central government" still have some form of government, be that a set of disparate groups controlling small areas of a particular geographical area, or a "state government" controlling a part of a particular country.

Given the current state of human nature and particularly those that have no respect for others/other people's beliefs/lifestyles, and unless that changes (which seems very remote at best), or you live out the middle of nowhere with nothing and nobody within any close proximity to you, and you are completely self-sufficient, then there is no other alternative at the present time and the foreseeable future for populated areas in particular (especially large urban areas).

In any case, I think you'll find people like yourself unfortunately necessitate the need for some form of organized "government", I'm sorry to say.

If this thread proves anything, it's that you don't need to be what people would refer to as "far-right" to be in need of mental health care, and a very sad indictment of the human race that people can't just treat others with the same respect they'd want for themselves...
Palandre
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 07:48 am
@justaguy2,
maybe I shoukd explain more, A group that is organizing itself is not by definition 'government' we speak of 'government' when real force can be used against people. Like extortion, robbery, kidnapping and murder.So you example is not 'government'.
A 'government' does extremely immoral things. But because it is 'government' people 'listen' and 'obey'. Good people do that and think they are doing 'good'.
authority is essential permission for bad behaviour.
justaguy2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 07:57 am
@Palandre,
I think you need to actually read my post, because if you did, you clearly didn't understand it.

Think about the following quote, which may help you with your understanding of my point:

Quote:
...any group of people making decisions that affect others are in fact "governing" something. Therefore a group of village elders conducting the affairs of a small village in the middle of nowhere could be considered a "local government". Therefore, and the point is: even in places where there is no "central government" still have some form of government, be that a set of disparate groups controlling small areas of a particular geographical area, or a "state government" controlling a part of a particular country.
...


Pay particular attention to what's in bold font, as that's why you're very misguided about your definition of what the word "government" means and implies.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/government?s=t
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/government
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/government.html
Palandre
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 08:05 am
@justaguy2,
Quote:
Pay particular attention to what's in bold font, as that's why you're very misguided about your definition of what the word "government" means and implies.


Nope. you are very wrong here.

And 'government=slavery' there really is no way around it.
and 'government'= authority.
Are you aware of some experiments regarding 'authority'?
Didn't a few million people ( or maybe even more) 'listen' to their 'government' and killed millions (if not more) people. All legal/lawfull.

A question then.
When you have to choose between 'moral' behaviour and 'legal/lawfull' behaviour, when those two are in conflict, which one will you choose?
Palandre
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 08:12 am
It is so sad to see how deeply people are brainwashed in believing 'government' is any good. Hmm, brainwashed by whom? ah! The 'government'.

As I have written before, 'government' really can't use the power they think they have, because they don't have that power. I ask again, where is the so called power coming from?
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  2  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 08:13 am
@Palandre,
Quote:
When you have to choose between 'moral' behaviour and 'legal/lawfull' behaviour, when those two are in conflict, which one will you choose?

That which is just.
Palandre
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 08:16 am
here a very good lecture about it all. He sure does a much better job then I can. But the message is crystal clear:


The State Is Too Dangerous to Tolerate

0 Replies
 
Palandre
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2020 08:17 am
@Glennn,
ok, which is the moral one I assume?
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/27/2020 at 08:48:33