Juan:Did you join the military, and if not, why not?
No I did not join the military because I do not do well with collectivist group think. Would I join the military if the United States was directly attacked (armed invasion), yes. I support only a volunteer military for direct defense of the country.
"Anarchism misunderstands the real nature of man. It would be practicable only in a world of angels and saints" - Ludwig von Mises
Jacob Bloom: I already have a feeling given what I've read, but I'm still curious.
I already have a feeling given what I've read, but I'm still curious.
Israel is a Rothschild clan/family nation
Poptech:No I did not join the military because I do not do well with collectivist group think.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
What can I say? I am no ex-neomarxist,
Please stop lying about Jacob as he made no endorsement of murder.
Juan: Being an ex-marxist is not a necessary condition for being a neocon. On the other hand being a biased supporter of the israeli army gets you a lot of points in the neocon 'value system',
No you are correct simply disagreeing with you makes anyone a neocon. I have a hard time lying about the IDF despite your lack of information on the subject.
No you are correct simply disagreeing with you makes anyone a neocon.
Juan: Yes, disagreeing with me and agreeing with neocons makes you a neocon. Is that hard to grasp ?
That actually makes no sense. If neo-cons "support" free markets and I do too, does that make me a neo-con? What is hard to grasp is your relentless attempts to smear others by fabricating labels for them or making implications based on things they never said.
Jacob Bloom:3. I think they are. Lol, you're entitled to your opinion.
What is the most popular ice cream flavor in the country? Suppose it's vanilla. Now, if market economies were democratic, there would be one ice cream flavor - vanilla. That's how majority rule works. Markets, as you might observe at the store, don't work that way. There are all kinds of products catering to niche markets - such as super fudge ripple chip.
To stay in business, a company need not appeal to the majority of the market. All it needs to do (admittedly, this is quite a bit) is transform raw materials into finished products with enough of a difference in value to enough people to make a better return than the owners know how to do in other ways. Democracy, on the other hand, does require appealing to either a majority or a plurality. If you wish, markets are the extreme of representational democracy, only they react immediately.
Jacob Bloom:I would say that his actions indicate a desire to kill. He'll probably do it again and as such it's in our individual as well as collective interests to catch that man. It's not about right and wrong, it's about what works. Letting people go around murdering just doesn't work. I would say he shouldn't do that, not because I thought it was a moral issue, but because his actions basically separate him from a functioning society so he can no longer be allowed near me, my family or anyone I know. He would have to be put down. It's obvious that morality isn't necessary to see how murder isn't in the interests of the group nor the individuals that make up the group. Yes?
So he was not wrong to do it? Why would he "have" to be put down? You've apparently changed the story in your response since I clearly said he got away with it - i.e. he wasn't caught. He can't be put down because he hasn't been found. I'm not talking about what to do with him, just asking if he was behaving well or not.
Jacob Bloom:3. You are much more knowledgeable than I am, but I also think that you...are so judgmental about violence. What did the Amalekites do to make the Jews so angry? Surely there was a reason for the action.
I won't respond to most of your message, because our exchange on Friday left me with limited vision in my left eye (blood pressure issue.) However, I'll respond to this one. The story, as told from the Jewish perspective, is that as the Jews left Egypt, they were attacked by a band of Amalekites and emerged victorious (since Amalek, like modern day Israel, feared losing their land to a conquest, there was, in your opinion, nothing wrong with this attack.) Somehow, this is supposed to justify a war hundreds of years later against the descendents of the Amalekites. I know, I know, "justify" is the wrong word because there's no such thing as morality.
Jacob Bloom:4. I have no desire to take anything from you or your family, nor do I bear any malice towards you personally or anyone else on this forum. I'm just trying to show you that any human being can do whatever they want to do unless they feel they have some reason not to. And morality isn't enough of a deterrent. We need laws. We need courts. And I think they're better operated if operated by the state, which I see as a necessary albeit dangerous thing.
You've been stating your desire to take our property to build a military. Nonetheless, do you think food is best provided by a coercive monopoly? Is that how you get the highest quality at the best price? Haircuts? Anything? Only, apparently, courts and laws - but wait, neither of those explain why you need a band of thugs to go around the globe intervening in centuries-old conflicts, do they?
nirgrahamUK: why are you focused on israeli jews and not israeli arabs or israeli christians or israeli atheists or israeli agnostics? is this cover for antisemitism or was it just a loose choice of words in furtherance of sounding controversial?
why are you focused on israeli jews and not israeli arabs or israeli christians or israeli atheists or israeli agnostics?
is this cover for antisemitism or was it just a loose choice of words in furtherance of sounding controversial?
I imagine it was to distinguish the colonials, who happen to be jews, from the local jews.
JonBostwick: nirgrahamUK: the same could be said for those seeking a palestinian state, they are arguably more intolerant on issues of race/ethnicity. The Palestinians are more intolerant than the Israelis? Nonsense! All the locals, Arab, Christian, and Jew, are much more tolerant than Israel's European Colonizers. They lived in peace for a long time before this current conflict; which by the way, has nothing to do race, or religion, or location, it has occured wherever colonization has.
nirgrahamUK: the same could be said for those seeking a palestinian state, they are arguably more intolerant on issues of race/ethnicity.
the same could be said for those seeking a palestinian state, they are arguably more intolerant on issues of race/ethnicity.
The Palestinians are more intolerant than the Israelis? Nonsense!
All the locals, Arab, Christian, and Jew, are much more tolerant than Israel's European Colonizers. They lived in peace for a long time before this current conflict; which by the way, has nothing to do race, or religion, or location, it has occured wherever colonization has.
Jacob Bloom:However, since there are no anarchist...regions and since most people seem to prefer having some sort of state and a military and all the rest
I have the patience of the grave young man....
But, with the prevelalence of "most people" to vote for what we have today, I do not think I have much longer to wait, the system is already falling apart, and continuing the motions like the government is, it will destroy itself, then it is only a matter of retaining my sovereigny after the fact, I have an 800 yd eye and plenty of family. You do not have to prove anything to me, because all you will prove is what will eventually result in what we have today, and I do not have to prove anything to you because, simply, I do not care if you want or will have freedom, it is not my concern. What is my concern is that you intend on using your government to coerce me because of the geographical location of the property I own and the ficticious jurisdiction it decides it has...
Jacob Bloom: I am afraid that unless you change your message to something that actually...would seem to work or unless you can just show people that it DOES WORK,
Well, I could reflect this on to you, it is obvious the best shot of your desires was tried and failed, limited government is a fallacy, all you are saying is that the free market will fail to support the wants of the population and a monopoly needs to be instilled in its place...
Jacob Bloom:then you'll be on this site forever complaining about how no one listens and you're a victim of the tyranny of rotten statism.
Which one of us was crying about being disheartened? Which one of us was worried that others might think something of him? How much complaining of how a victim of statism I am? I stated my case as per your request, and you retorted by complaining, being disheartened and concerned about how people would think of you if they knew there are (GOD AWFUL) anarchists that believe that AE is valid...
In closing...
It was the limited government that you so cherish that is the root of the issues tackled by AE...
I used to be like you, it was unfathomable to me that anarchy could work, it was what I learned here because I was open to learn all things, not just things that agree with my preconceived notions, that made me realize, government will not stop being tyrannical and free people can interact voluntarily without government...
Don't believe me, ask Liberty Student, he will tell you all about it....
It sounds like the ocean, smells like fresh mountain air, and tastes like the union of peanut butter and chocolate. ~Liberty Student
nirgrahamUK:i have walked the streets of israel....
Most people don't know what they talk about, when talking about "Apartheid"?
nirgrahamUK:if Bishop Tutu calls the system under which israeli arabs live 'apartheid', he is either misinformed or playing down the distinguishing features of apartheid. If you are consider palestinians/arabs outside the borders of israel who do not have citizenship and are under occupations, then whilst they are unjustly occupied they are still not racially segregated in an apartheid fashion, since there is not 'another' seperate but different class residing in the territory. if you put that aside and consider citizens of israel, there is not segregation of the african kind.
Just a few points:
earthmoving
look, i've only been trying to introduce a little subtlety, a little 'care in speech' vis-a-vis classifying whole swathes of heterogenous people as 'criminals'.
if you guys want to say 'israeli jews' are evil, and you arent willing to qualify, whilst simultaneously you demonstrate a fine capacity for discrimination when you recognise that the ethical standing of the group of 'palestinians' is not uniform. that tells me something.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
For those interested in this type of discussion, I recommend reviewing this informative and amusing post on zionist hasbara:
http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-to-make-case-for-israel-and-win.html
nirgrahamUK: look, i've only been trying to introduce a little subtlety, a little 'care in speech' vis-a-vis classifying whole swathes of heterogenous people as 'criminals'. if you guys want to say 'israeli jews' are evil, and you arent willing to qualify, whilst simultaneously you demonstrate a fine capacity for discrimination when you recognise that the ethical standing of the group of 'palestinians' is not uniform. that tells me something.
Heterogeneous in what sense? I'm not attacking their ethnicity, for there are exceptions for Jews - however, to be an Israeli, you require a certain kind of culture, which is a choice, not a condition.
existence is elsewhere
i dont understand what you say, to be a citizen under the authority of a state government you require a certain kind of culture?
nirgrahamUK: i dont understand what you say, to be a citizen under the authority of a state government you require a certain kind of culture?
Under the Israeli state, pretty much. If you are not a zionist in Israel, you are effectively not a citizen in terms of the de facto law of the land. This is part of the apartheid nature of zionist culture. There was recently a movement to require an oath for citizenship. That seemed too openly racist, but the death of the bill is not the death of the sentiment.
The state of Israel is a zionist state, anyone with allegiance to it is a zionist.
Wilmot of Rochester: nirgrahamUK: i dont understand what you say, to be a citizen under the authority of a state government you require a certain kind of culture? Under the Israeli state, pretty much. If you are not a zionist in Israel, you are effectively not a citizen in terms of the de facto law of the land. This is part of the apartheid nature of zionist culture. There was recently a movement to require an oath for citizenship. That seemed too openly racist, but the death of the bill is not the death of the sentiment. The state of Israel is a zionist state, anyone with allegiance to it is a zionist.
Can you perhaps so these laws?
'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition
JAlanKatz: I won't respond to most of your message, because our exchange on Friday left me with limited vision in my left eye (blood pressure issue.) However, I'll respond to this one. The story, as told from the Jewish perspective, is that as the Jews left Egypt, they were attacked by a band of Amalekites and emerged victorious (since Amalek, like modern day Israel, feared losing their land to a conquest, there was, in your opinion, nothing wrong with this attack.) Somehow, this is supposed to justify a war hundreds of years later against the descendents of the Amalekites. I know, I know, "justify" is the wrong word because there's no such thing as morality. You've been stating your desire to take our property to build a military. Nonetheless, do you think food is best provided by a coercive monopoly? Is that how you get the highest quality at the best price? Haircuts? Anything? Only, apparently, courts and laws - but wait, neither of those explain why you need a band of thugs to go around the globe intervening in centuries-old conflicts, do they?
1. I understand that some people believe there is such a thing as morality. I'm not sure. Because that doesn't seem to be a force that holds this world together. I think there is reason. So...was there sufficient reason to attack that group of people? I don't know. Obviously, the Jews thought so. I'm sure they thought it through and decided it was necessary, Therefore, I see nothing...wrong with it. I need a better word than "wrong" but I can't think of one.
2. I've actually been trying to tell you why you should want a military. Again, I think the forces that govern a market are not the ones that govern war and laws. Because markets are subjective and laws and wars are supposed to be objective. So...you can't just let everyone go around doing whatever they think is right except in markets. Besides, armies protect the markets, it's a small price to pay to have that kind of protection, in my opinion.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap