The Enemy Is the State

[free_man 0]

http://www.strike-the-root.com/4/weebies/weebies3.html

The Enemy Is the State

by weebies

The quadrennial farce known as the US presidential election has come and gone again. While many people, both in the US and the international community, are moaning the results of the selection of Bush over Kerry, people who are truly anti-state, anti-war, and pro-market realize there was no difference in either selection. Whenever there are elections, the state always wins--people who value freedom, peace, and the free market always lose.

A quick recap of the two candidates’ similarities should dispel the myth that there was a choice that would make a difference. Bush was the top lackey of the state, and wanted at least four more years, to advance the Imperial agenda of Rome on the Potomac . Kerry was the faithful sub lackey of the state, who fully supported all the state mischief and mayhem, and thought that he deserved the top lackey spot. Kerry’s whole campaign was run on the idea that he could better carry out the state’s acts of terrorism, both domestically and internationally, better than Bush, and fool more people, both in the US and the international community, into supporting the crimes of the US state empire.

While many complain that Bush stole the election again, true lovers of freedom and the free market realize that all elections are stolen. Even if all votes are honestly counted so that vote fraud is not a factor, the results are still fraudulent in that they give the state an authority and power over individuals that each individual did not grant or agree to. Voting is just another form of collectivism that destroys individuality and freedom. Hopefully, with the fiasco of untraceable electronic voting, more people will see that the state has no legitimacy, and that the solution is not voting reform, but the destruction of the fraud known as the state.

Many complain about how almost 60 million Americans could be so stupid as to vote for Bush. Aside from the fact that it is impossible to know how many actually voted for Bush because of the widespread possibility of untraceable voter fraud, the real issue is how over 115 million American could be so stupid as to vote for either Bush or Kerry. That people flocked to support either yes man for the state is the real tragedy. The only voting people should participate in is the Vote to Impeach.

Some seem to have forgotten – The State is the Enemy

Unfortunately, many of those who should be at the forefront of leading the battle against the state have succumbed to unwittingly supporting the state. Though they claim to be anti-state, anti-war, and pro-market, they have openly published articles supporting the election of Bush or Kerry, Democrats versus Republicans, liberal versus conservative. Some even openly support the state wars in Iraq and Afghanistan , and the state war on terror (truly a misnomer – state war of terror is more appropriate).

Many seem to have forgotten that Leviathan is a two-headed monster. No matter what you label one head, such as Bush, Republicans, or conservatives, and whatever label you give to the other head, such as Kerry, Democrats, or liberals, by supporting one over the other, you are inadvertently supporting the state. Now that the mass hysteria of the state breeding season--otherwise known as the national elections—is over, hopefully more freedom-loving people will see the error of their ways and get back to opposing the state in all its manifestations.

What is laughable is the notion, advanced by some libertarian pundits, that promotes the idea that Democrats and liberals make better libertarians than Republicans or conservatives. This collectivist claptrap thinking is completely erroneous. What makes an individual person suited for being a champion of freedom and the free market is their own personal conviction on these matters, not some label others may attach to them. Ron Paul, congressman from Texas , with his Project Freedom website, is a perfect example of that. Maybe libertarians need to consider this quote from L. Neil Smith on “Who is a libertarian?”: "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." (bold emphasis mine).

Many libertarians now long for what they mistakenly call the golden age of Clinton . Just four years ago, these same people were hailing the selection of Bush as being the savior from the Clinton regime. I guess these libertarians forget that the Clintonistas waged wars of aggression, but with international backing (NATO and the UN), and with the help of UN sanctions, are responsible for more deaths than the Bush regime. Of course the Bush regime is now trying to surpass the Clintons in their slaughter of innocents, and is now actively carrying out the policy endorsed by Kerry of flattening Fallujah. And for those who still are not convinced by this democratic bipartisan support for war crimes, but prefer a Democrat over a Republican to do the murdering and stealing for the state, remember this – the stage is now set for the return of the Billary beast four years from now, if Bush and his criminal gang don’t destroy the empire before then.

Conclusion – The State is the Enemy

The state is the enemy. It always has been, and it will always be public enemy number one. Freedom-loving people need to remember this and always stress this point. By emphasizing partisan politics and meaningless labels, we only confuse the issue. We do not need to help the state propaganda machine, the mainstream media, by doing their job for them, to distract people from the real problem--the state.

One would have hoped, with the open criminality of the Bush administration, and its almost total bipartisan support, that most people would become aware of the danger of the state. Instead, people who should know better have been sucked into supporting partisan politics. Whichever pied piper is selected to lead the state, it will always result in going further down the highway to hell. It is time to do away with all foolish partisan politics and recognize the true enemy--the state.


November 11, 2004



The two party system is a divide and conquer control system, left v. right, dem v. rep, lib v. cons, while the two sides get bogged down fighting each other, the united minority, the elitists running the state, slip their agenda by the people. Time to wake up.

“…because I hope you know this, I think you do…all governments are lying cocksuckers.”
Bill Hicks, Relentless

[juanesky 0]

Must resist to answer this troll...must resist....

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[DrunkMonkey 0]

http://www.rathergood.com/swearotron.html<--Click!

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

The quadrennial farce known as the US presidential election... Bush was the top lackey of the state, and wanted at least four more years, to advance the Imperial agenda of Rome on the Potomac ...

That's as far as I bothered to read, in order to realize that this article wasn't worth any more of my time.

[juanesky 0]

You got to read too much...as soon as I read Free_man...then it's over.

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[Unstable 9]

Sheesh, I made the decision that I was going to start posting and enjoying the Speakers corner, and the VERY FIRST thing I run into here makes me absolutly sick.
Look, I'll Entertain this troll long enough to get my piece in. Why does government exist?! If you can answer that question honestly and with any degree of sincerity, you would see the folly of this article.

=========Shaun ==========

[free_man 0]

Government exists for two reasons only, to protect the rights and property of the Citizen.

“…because I hope you know this, I think you do…all governments are lying cocksuckers.”
Bill Hicks, Relentless

[free_man 0]

It is sad you are not open minded enough to think outside the box, and explore outside your comfort zone of beliefs.

And by the way, I have been in the sport since 1998, and I chose not to fill in information about myself, because I do not want to get into personal attacks and exchanges. My choice.

PEACE, & Blue ones Juan.



edited for spelling

“…because I hope you know this, I think you do…all governments are lying cocksuckers.”
Bill Hicks, Relentless

[juanesky 0]

Shall you be open minded, then why do you mind letting others see who you are, where are you from and most important, do you actually Exist in this planet? One of the meaning of open is "accesible on all or near all sides". IMO not applicable to your case.


Maybe, and follow me on this, it could be easier to understand you if you were lets say, from Atlantis, you could avoid us the ??? arisen from the lack of total information.

Your choice, no problem, but if you behave like a troll, with no information about you whatsoever, no source to where you got things from, then don't expect us to believe you are not one.

As far as your Skydiving experience is somewhat relevant, but I seriously doubt that.....

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[miked10270 0]

Quote

It is sad you are not open minded enough to think outside the box, and explore outside your comfort zone of beliefs.

I suspect that YOU are significantly more guilty of that than JuaneSky.

Quote

And by the way, I have been in the sport since 1998, and I chose not to fill in information about myself, because I do not want to get into personal attacks and exchanges. My choice.

Most, almost all of us here are brave enough and sufficiently secure not only in our convictions but also in the fundamental reasonableness of our peers to identify ourselves. Even to form friendships regardless of differences in opinion on specific issues.

Regarding "The Enemy is the State"!

IMHO you view the state like a disturbed adolescent views his parents. You accept the protection and the support the state gives as a right, but object to contributing, and further demanding that the state, having given you this protection and support, should then allow you to behave as you wish.

Like an unruly adolescent, you demand anarchy & nihilism from a warm house and a full belly.

Surely this is a singularly immature position?

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[kallend 2,027]

I think you are all missing his point, which is that the State as it currently exists has moved far beyond its valid purpose for existing.

It has become a monster that controls our lives to an unnecessary degree. And I agree with that point of view.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[miked10270 0]

Hi Prof,

The State (unfortunately?) must fulfil the requirements of the people as a whole. This encompasses everyone from the ultra-libertarian / nihilist, who wishes for absolutely no state involvement, and in fact, no state, all the way through to the Marxist / Trotskyite who seeks full centralisation for the benefit of the state and therefore it's people.

So, somewhere between the "Mountain Man" and "Cuba" there must be a compromise which serves the percieved greatest interests of the greatest numbers of people. The politicians who most closely straddle this compromise position will become dominant. Thus we see the emergence of bi-partisan politics and the cynicism towards them. After all, in order to be acceptable to the greatest number of people, those political parties will perforce be very similar in outlook.

Unfortunately, there then emerges a voter apathy where many voters will only vote for the large party which is slightly closer to their desires rather than waste their vote!! on the "marginal" candidate who DOES reflect their views.

In effect, how many people voted "Bush" rather than "Badnarik" because they didn't want the right wing vote to be split and perhaps allow the left wing candidate to win? Similarly, how many people voted "Kerry" instead of "Nader"?

In effect, the STATE as it currently exists is the one demanded by the majority over time through the free(?) election of their representatives.

"The People" have voted for representatives who have built up the state as it is. As such, it reflects the wishes of the voters, and if the people wish change, then their recourse is to vote for those offering change, and, if they are dissatisfied with their representative's performance and actions, then their recourse is to dismiss him by voting against him at election to replace him with a candidate who reflects their views.

That is Democracy. And "The State" continues to be "The will of the people, collectively expressed".

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[free_man 0]

Quote

I suspect that YOU are significantly more guilty of that than JuaneSky.

I have been where most of the people here are as related to their political views. Only by keeping an open mind was I able to research, and explore alternative views which I found to be supported by fact and truth. And not the agenda of others.

Quote

Most, almost all of us here are brave enough and sufficiently secure not only in our convictions but also in the fundamental reasonableness of our peers to identify ourselves. Even to form friendships regardless of differences in opinion on specific issues.

My profile has nothing to do with bravery or security, if everyone would honor the rules of the forum no problem, I make every attempt to not get into personal attacks. I do not see how my profile is germain to the topic either. I am an American, hows that.

Quote

Regarding "The Enemy is the State"!

IMHO you view the state like a disturbed adolescent views his parents. You accept the protection and the support the state gives as a right, but object to contributing, and further demanding that the state, having given you this protection and support, should then allow you to behave as you wish.

Like an unruly adolescent, you demand anarchy & nihilism from a warm house and a full belly.

Surely this is a singularly immature position?

"The State", Fed Gov't, was created by the people, it is our servant. How can our servant take the masters property by force, and still be a free society? If the services government offered were so valuable, they would offer them on a voluntary basis (like everyone else) and we the people could pay for them if we needed them, instead they are offered at the barrel of a gun.

The United States of America was created as a Republic, in a Republic the rights and property of the minority are protected, in a Democracy, which we are not, if 51% of the people vote to kill all skydivers so be it.

As long as people do not take, violate others' rights or property, people should be free to do as they please. I do not need the State to decide what is good for me and what is bad for me, I accept that responsibility, most do not, it is easier to be a slave. Freedom is not free, slavery is, kneel down and you will be made a slave.

So now freedom means anarchy, I believe anarchy would be better than what we have now, however a small, limited government, confined absolutely by the Constitution, as it was intended, would be preferable to me.

Immaturity exists when others do not accept responsibility for themselves, needing parent government all their lives. Then because of this immaturity they must take from others to support their parent, if that is your choice good for you, just leave me and others alone.

In a free society, government exists to protect, the rights and property of the people, that is it.


PEACE

“…because I hope you know this, I think you do…all governments are lying cocksuckers.”
Bill Hicks, Relentless

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

My profile has nothing to do with bravery or security, if everyone would honor the rules of the forum no problem, I make every attempt to not get into personal attacks. I do not see how my profile is germain to the topic either. I am an American, hows that.

Actually, it does. A complete profile, in your case, would demonstrate to the rest of us that you're willing to stand by your convictions, that you have the courage to come right out and say "I'm Joe Smith, and this is what I believe.", otherwise you're just something of a troll. It's difficult to take you as anything more than a troll when you're not willing to go even that far.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[crozby 0]

It's kind of funny that in a thread about freedom you are all hassling this guy to fill in optional profile information.

[cgriffin 0]

Quote

Maybe libertarians need to consider this quote from L. Neil Smith on “Who is a libertarian?”: "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." (bold emphasis mine).

While I can agree with a large part of your rant, I have to disagree here. Never, under any circumstances, huh? So, "libertarian" means "please walk on me"? No, clearly not. You are attempting to make a good point, but to show it's importance, take it too far and thus invalidate it.