 
|
This board is closed to new users and new posts. Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years. Details here.
|
|
The Free Talk Live BBS
Profile of Ylisium
Show Posts Messages
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
1
General / Mercatus: Freedom in the 50 States
« on: March 07, 2015, 05:20:45 PM »
Does anyone know when Mercatus will come up with their 2015 update. Yes, I have googled, to no avail.
3
General / Re: Is Islam more scientific than Xianity?
« on: April 24, 2014, 06:14:02 PM »Quote
I can be impatient when people substitute feelz for logic, reason, and science
This.
and, if...
Quote
ut the "feelz" sometimes have a biological basis.
is indicative of a real physiological circumstance, I'm fine with that.
It's the former that really drives me insane.
4
General / Re: Chaos is the only sensible answer. Cthulhu is awake!!!
« on: April 24, 2014, 05:41:30 PM »
5
General / Re: Don't initiate violence?
« on: April 24, 2014, 05:35:09 PM »Yes killing your master does not violate the NAP. A direct frontal assault on the government would be suicide though. I believe we in the liberty movement need to concintrate on long turm statogies. Since I can not go underground for a while, I am working more on infrastructure. I recommend the Bad Quaker's beyond civil disobedience series. I need not reinvent the wheel on a thread that pretty much is a simple documentation on one man's journey.I know the goals of liberty can not come from violence, but to be honest I don't think I could just stand there and watch some thugs taze a 7 month pregnant chick.Adam Kokesh proved that even feining aggression towards the state will lead to bad things. Be simpathetic, polite and practice damage control when in a conflict with a state employee. That is your best bet to help everybody young man. I also think you were confused. Defense doesn't violate the NAP, with that said it is never moral to initiate aggression.
Am I just old fashion and wrong? Or is there a line when one can honorably start retaliating the hard way?
When can one initiate violence?
You'll have to define, "initiate aggression".
If I am a slave, do I have the right to attack my owners in their sleep if it's the only way to freedom?
The state is the state because it has the monopoly on violence.
It's the threat of violence that ultimately keeps people from infringing on your freedoms. We've turned over so much of that threat to the state, we have what we have cow. It's almost a perfect ratio.
As the populace's ability to make violence decreases, the states ability to oppress grows.
Beliving that you're some kind of Glenn Beck Ghandi and that's going to solve all the problems of the state is ridiculous.
I'll check out this Bad Quaker thing.
But yeah, right on. Suicide to think that my militia is going to go into WA DC to wage war and win.
6
General / Re: Don't initiate violence?
« on: April 24, 2014, 05:33:53 PM »Ya know, as much shit as I give military guys for being assholes in general, just for signing up in the first place, I have to say I feel pretty confident that if there were some kind of civil unrest scenario, the large majority of them would never fire on the people of their own country.The ones that did would be so outnumbered they'd have to give it up.
Now, if they would only take that same stance on the citizens of other countries, I might even show a little respect for them.
Meh,
I run into this self-righteous attitude a lot towards military in the liberty movement. I would hazard to guess that most libertarian minded folk, unless they grew up in this way, didn't really solidify the way they feel until later in their early adulthood. But it's okay for them to be asshole statists when they were young dumb and full of cum, but not for the poor bastards that actually think they are doing something to help out other people.
I was in the Marines for almost seven years. I didn't have a blood thirsty desire to go out and murder babies, and I never did. Military join for a wide variety of reasons, but most also share the same young, naive and impressionable traits that most young people around the world do. It's cool, they like weapons, they want a challenge, some adventure, travel, college benefits, serve something larger than themselves, it's a family tradition, defend the nation, to be a warrior, nothing better to do, to gain some life skills, learn personal discipline / grow-up...all kinds. Never heard, "Because I wanted to be part of the statist warmongering machine that seeks to murder and opress anyone that stands in the way of globalist hegemonic corporate interests!" Which is what it sounds like coming out of the mouth of a lot of self-righteous libertarians.
When you spend 13 or more years in the government propaganda machine, reinforced by your family, friends, culture and entertainment, I don't know how I can expect you to, at 17 - 18 - 19, have an original thought of your own. Let alone a self-original all encompassing philosophy.
When I was in, I genuinely wanted to help people. There was no politics about it. Just be helpful, and most of my fellow Marines were the same way. When you think you're doing good and helping people, there's almost no more rewarding feeling in the world. That's about as political as it gets for most of us who were in.
But, yeah, go and malign a whole group of people because it's the puritanical and popular thing to do.
On your other point.
if there is civil unrest. I wouldn't count the military as an effective fighting force at all.
My guess is that 1/4 will look for any excuse just to get away because military life really does suck that bad.
1/4 will desert because family is more important (remember, kids just out of the house, most of them)
1/4 will fight against the government
1/4 will remain government stooges.
By no means a scientific guestimate, just going off of experience of knowing folks.
7
General / Re: Is Islam more scientific than Xianity?
« on: April 24, 2014, 04:59:20 PM »
Ah you mean how the media went nuts a few years ago because a "man" was having a baby. When, in reality, it was a F > M TG.
I don't see the point of it on a census because it's more of an emotional state of being. If I'm looking for hard data then I don't want feels mixed up in my information.
And honestly, no one has ever said it to me, the way you just did. Usually it comes across as a "I think, therefore I am" statement of fact. Which, it isn't. Unless we can change that troublesome chromosome, even the new lab grown vaginas wont change your biological sex.
No issues with the transgendered, just the way bio-sex appears to be asserted as fact.
However, I'm willing to be wrong on the way I'm receiving.
I don't see the point of it on a census because it's more of an emotional state of being. If I'm looking for hard data then I don't want feels mixed up in my information.
And honestly, no one has ever said it to me, the way you just did. Usually it comes across as a "I think, therefore I am" statement of fact. Which, it isn't. Unless we can change that troublesome chromosome, even the new lab grown vaginas wont change your biological sex.
No issues with the transgendered, just the way bio-sex appears to be asserted as fact.
However, I'm willing to be wrong on the way I'm receiving.
10
General / Re: Is Islam more scientific than Xianity?
« on: April 20, 2014, 11:19:25 PM »
Just from a scientific point of view.
The idea of a third gender, unless it's hermaphrodite, is silly.
It's funny how people hate on Christians because of their unscientific ways, but when you point out the fallicy in their idea of an optional "third gender" based on feels, you're an asshole.
The idea of a third gender, unless it's hermaphrodite, is silly.
It's funny how people hate on Christians because of their unscientific ways, but when you point out the fallicy in their idea of an optional "third gender" based on feels, you're an asshole.
11
General / Re: Don't initiate violence?
« on: April 20, 2014, 11:11:18 PM »I know the goals of liberty can not come from violence, but to be honest I don't think I could just stand there and watch some thugs taze a 7 month pregnant chick.Adam Kokesh proved that even feining aggression towards the state will lead to bad things. Be simpathetic, polite and practice damage control when in a conflict with a state employee. That is your best bet to help everybody young man. I also think you were confused. Defense doesn't violate the NAP, with that said it is never moral to initiate aggression.
Am I just old fashion and wrong? Or is there a line when one can honorably start retaliating the hard way?
When can one initiate violence?
You'll have to define, "initiate aggression".
If I am a slave, do I have the right to attack my owners in their sleep if it's the only way to freedom?
The state is the state because it has the monopoly on violence.
It's the threat of violence that ultimately keeps people from infringing on your freedoms. We've turned over so much of that threat to the state, we have what we have now. It's almost a perfect ratio.
As the populace's ability to make violence decreases, the states ability to oppress grows.
Beliving that you're some kind of Glenn Beck Ghandi and that's going to solve all the problems of the state is ridiculous.
12
General / Re: "I really just want to be an artist"
« on: April 20, 2014, 11:06:16 PM »
No one should have to work for "money".
If you want, you could work for payment in goods and services. However, if you want something, you should have to give something for it, at some point along the line. Weather it's your time, services, goods or sweat equity.
If you want, you could work for payment in goods and services. However, if you want something, you should have to give something for it, at some point along the line. Weather it's your time, services, goods or sweat equity.
13
General / There has to be more than 20,000...
« on: April 20, 2014, 11:04:01 PM »
Reading Cantwell's message had me think about something I think about often.
The FSP can't be the only option for liberty in our lifetime.
All the childish personality driven drama aside...
I don't want to live in New Hampshire.
I grew up half in Connecticut and half in upstate NY (Mooers Forks), and of all the states in the region, New Hampshire is the least appealing to me. Why not free Clinton county NY project, or FSP Maine, or even Vermont which is the most beautiful state in NE IMHO? Rhetorical question.
I know there are other projects out there, that don't seem to have the steam that the FSP has, I get that. But, whenever FSP alternatives are brought up on the radio show, at least one of the hosts grows indignant. As if to talk about competition in this particular marketplace of ideas is heresy. I find this disappointing. Oddly, same thing happens with Bitcoin and it's alternatives.
There are far more than 20,000 liberty lovers in North America. Knowing this, why after more than a decade the FSP is still only at 80% of it's goal? And of those 20K who will actually move if that goal is ever met? The small town of Bend, Or grew by more than 30K in less than ten years and 60K in 20. If an isolated, high-desert town could do it...
I don't think that it's the profound success it's claimed to be. More than a decade later, there's less than 2K "early movers". In that region of the US, there should be much more. There are libertarians all over Maine, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut and RI. Moving to NH, for these people, from their oppressive regimes, should be a no brainier and relatively easy to do.
Political migrations aren't anything new and they are occurring all the time. The idea of "American Redoubt" for example (not backed by an actual organization like the FSP). The western region of the United States (eastern Washington, eastern Oregon, Idaho, Montana, etc..) has seen an actual growth, in only a few short years, that the FSP can't even accomplish on paper.
I think that the idea of New Hampshire is simply unpalatable for many people, and the feeble promise of "liberty in our lifetime...eventually" isn't reason enough to pick up one's life and trek halfway across the continent. Especially if the idea's creator took more than a decade himself to move. Why should I or anyone else?
Most, people need more than just the feeble promise of "Liberty in our lifetime...eventually", to uproot their lives and make the move. We have families, jobs, friends and lives. Many of us have regional, geographical, climate and cultural preferences, too. I know I personally, don't want to live anywhere near the NYC - NJ - DC metroplex. I live out west now and have gotten used to having space. But, I miss the culture of the east coast. Would consider the move, if I could live in Maine, VT or NY, but not New Hampshire. There's very little economic opportunity, cost of living is high, taxes are high, government liquor stores, slip from number one to number four in the feedom index (despite the FSP early movers) etc...
I'm sure there are folks in the SW region of the US, that love their "dry heat", desert landscapes, jobs and family. Why should they have to uproot and move all the way to the humid and frozen climes of NH? Same for Northwesteners who love their cool, wet, dank climate, Microbreweries and vinyards. How about southerners that just can't abide by the frozen northern culture? There has to be options for people. Trying to shoehorn everyone into one all great and powerful Free State Project makes about as much sense as the one size fits all Federal Government we all have an equal amount of disgust for.
I'd love to see a kind of network that works to promote all these projects, happily. Promote, and draw in those people, groups, organizations or businesses who can develop opportunity for those seeking the chance to be free. A real free state project. Not just some idea developed in academia that really isn't doing a whole lot for the millions of liberty lovers around the world. If I knew how to start it, I would. I'd at least like to see the hosts of FTL not dog the alternatives...
Discuss.
The FSP can't be the only option for liberty in our lifetime.
All the childish personality driven drama aside...
I don't want to live in New Hampshire.
I grew up half in Connecticut and half in upstate NY (Mooers Forks), and of all the states in the region, New Hampshire is the least appealing to me. Why not free Clinton county NY project, or FSP Maine, or even Vermont which is the most beautiful state in NE IMHO? Rhetorical question.
I know there are other projects out there, that don't seem to have the steam that the FSP has, I get that. But, whenever FSP alternatives are brought up on the radio show, at least one of the hosts grows indignant. As if to talk about competition in this particular marketplace of ideas is heresy. I find this disappointing. Oddly, same thing happens with Bitcoin and it's alternatives.
There are far more than 20,000 liberty lovers in North America. Knowing this, why after more than a decade the FSP is still only at 80% of it's goal? And of those 20K who will actually move if that goal is ever met? The small town of Bend, Or grew by more than 30K in less than ten years and 60K in 20. If an isolated, high-desert town could do it...
I don't think that it's the profound success it's claimed to be. More than a decade later, there's less than 2K "early movers". In that region of the US, there should be much more. There are libertarians all over Maine, Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut and RI. Moving to NH, for these people, from their oppressive regimes, should be a no brainier and relatively easy to do.
Political migrations aren't anything new and they are occurring all the time. The idea of "American Redoubt" for example (not backed by an actual organization like the FSP). The western region of the United States (eastern Washington, eastern Oregon, Idaho, Montana, etc..) has seen an actual growth, in only a few short years, that the FSP can't even accomplish on paper.
I think that the idea of New Hampshire is simply unpalatable for many people, and the feeble promise of "liberty in our lifetime...eventually" isn't reason enough to pick up one's life and trek halfway across the continent. Especially if the idea's creator took more than a decade himself to move. Why should I or anyone else?
Most, people need more than just the feeble promise of "Liberty in our lifetime...eventually", to uproot their lives and make the move. We have families, jobs, friends and lives. Many of us have regional, geographical, climate and cultural preferences, too. I know I personally, don't want to live anywhere near the NYC - NJ - DC metroplex. I live out west now and have gotten used to having space. But, I miss the culture of the east coast. Would consider the move, if I could live in Maine, VT or NY, but not New Hampshire. There's very little economic opportunity, cost of living is high, taxes are high, government liquor stores, slip from number one to number four in the feedom index (despite the FSP early movers) etc...
I'm sure there are folks in the SW region of the US, that love their "dry heat", desert landscapes, jobs and family. Why should they have to uproot and move all the way to the humid and frozen climes of NH? Same for Northwesteners who love their cool, wet, dank climate, Microbreweries and vinyards. How about southerners that just can't abide by the frozen northern culture? There has to be options for people. Trying to shoehorn everyone into one all great and powerful Free State Project makes about as much sense as the one size fits all Federal Government we all have an equal amount of disgust for.
I'd love to see a kind of network that works to promote all these projects, happily. Promote, and draw in those people, groups, organizations or businesses who can develop opportunity for those seeking the chance to be free. A real free state project. Not just some idea developed in academia that really isn't doing a whole lot for the millions of liberty lovers around the world. If I knew how to start it, I would. I'd at least like to see the hosts of FTL not dog the alternatives...
Discuss.
14
General / Re: Christopher Cantwell's Open Letter to the Free State Project Board
« on: April 20, 2014, 08:54:01 PM »Seems like both sides are a bit full of themselves. Since the FSP does not own Roger's and would presumably NOT involve the Police (this could well be a false assumption) how would they enforce the ban? Use of force? Sure they could get some to shun him but I have the idea that those that would shun are people he doesn't care to be with anyway.
As for the "People drive drunk at Porcfest all the time" defense. FUCK YOU asshole. Sounds like a good reason to NOT attend. As someone who was an EMT for years let me tell you I am not willing to play Russian Roulette with my life just because some asshole thinks they still have the coordination to operate a motor vehicle while drunk or high. This is from someone that is for full de-crim. Your driving should have been seen as an act of aggression and you should have been defended against with extreme prejudice.
HA!
There there's a poster on here (forget his name) that will call you an idiot because:
Drinking causes impairment.
Impaired driving causes accidents.
But, driving while intoxicated does not cause cause accidents.
LOL
