I don't think this is against the rules unless it gets out of hand (which is possible in even the most unlikely of threads). But I'm curious to see what people think of themselves. We've all probably formed opinions about the regular posters in this section, but I want to know what each user thinks about themself. Plus, sometimes I get people's names confused and it's hard to remember what stance a person has on here especially when there's so many sarcastic sons of bitches in this place.

Please don't respond to anyone else's personal evaluation in this thread. If you want to discuss something you read in here, start a new thread on that topic and quote them on it in there. I'm sure theDuke won't have a problem with that. I just have a hard time keeping up with where everyone is coming from.

5/23/2008 5:19:24 PM

Personally, I'd say I'm between liberal and moderate. I'm very progressive socially on issues like abortion and gay marriage and shit like that. I'm not necessarily against government regulation in some areas but it has to be executed efficiently to be worth it definitely. I'm 100% against the government spying on people through the use of technology/internet and such. I think that's a very dangerous path to go down. I believe in upholding free speech even if it's some clown who has nothing good to say, just on principle. Guns are a little different, but I'm definitely not down for banning the shit out of them. People must be innocent until proven guilty, no exceptions. Self-incrimination, yada, yada, yada... Bottom line, maximum civil rights. I just don't see why the government should dictate what you can and can't do especially on issues where no one else is harmed. Drug legalization (cough...yeah.). Other shit like that. But yeah, social issues I am quite liberal on.

My moderateness comes from being somewhat fiscally conservative. I believe that capitalism is definitely a good thing. One of the better concepts that humanity has come up with. But it doesn't come without inherent badness too. It will no doubt leave people behind. Some people call this social Darwinism, but that doesn't make it fair. That's where I tend to go a little liberal fiscally. I think we should at least help these people and not leave them alone without a chance. Don't be giving people handouts that they don't need for sure (my mom is a nurse and tells me all the time about people who just mooch off the system so I have a little perspective in that regard), but there are certainly some people who have no chance to fend for themselves and they shouldn't be left behind. I believe taxes should be as low as possible while still being able to pay for everything the country needs. Need is a subjective term, but there are lots of things that different groups can agree on and those definitely need to be funded. Some programs benefit from being socialized and some don't. Roads, education, security, military are all examples of this. I don't pretend to have all the answers to this topic, but I'm always open to hearing someone who does.

100% pro environment. We only get one and we can't afford to fuck it up. Certainly there are times where the economic benefit takes precedence over saving some unimportant piece of woodland, but the benefit has to pretty great. I think that continually destroying the environment for economic gain is taking the easy way out and we as a society can do better than that.

I'm also for the least corrupt government possible. I don't care what kind of ideology you belong to or what ideas you have, if you honestly have the people of the country at heart and are trying to do what is best for the whole, you will be a much better politician than someone who doesn't have them in mind. I can't stand corruption for personal gain and if a politician is caught doing some especially bad they should be tossed out after Strike 1. No questions asked.

5/23/2008 5:19:45 PM

I'm an advocate of laissez-faire capitalism. Under this type of capitalism, the state is completely separate from economics and religion.

The only proper function of the government in this system is to protect it's citizens from force and fraud. Therefore, the government maintains the criminal justice system and a military. That's it. No public schools, anti-trust laws, smoking bans, welfare, health insurance regulations, FDA, minimum wage laws, and a host of other things.

Despite this, LiusClues is hot for me.

message_topic.aspx?topic=527322

5/23/2008 6:50:39 PM

I consider myself moderate to conservative.

I hate the fact that cons bend over for the religious right. Religion has no business in government.

I hate the fact that libs, deep down, believe that most people have no idea how to take care of themselves and believe that government must do it for them.

I think our borders should be protected as if it were a time of war and that our system should be adjusted to easily allow people currently here illegally to register, work and pay taxes. The registering should be streamlined and encouraged. People who employ illegals should have their businesses taken and put in jail. People who do not register should be deported on the spot.

I strongly believe in the right to bear arms.

I believe we need to maintain a strong military and believe that there are no quick fixes in the middle east and our strong presence there is necessary to prevent the spread of radial Islam and a Jewish genocide.

By our nature and status in the world we have a duty to protect those who cannot protect themselves...see Sudan and Bosnia.

I believe that drugs should remain illegal.

I believe in the Fair Tax or a flat percentage applied to all wage-earners.

I believe teachers should be paid a highly competitive wage to encourage the best and brightest into the public schools.

I believe all people start equal and earn their status in our country. I hate how excuses are accepted as the norm for the place in life people earn.

Any person should be able to date or marry whoever they choose. Gay persecution is asinine.

Capitalism is great.

5/23/2008 8:02:31 PM

Quote :

"Define YOURSELF"

You asked for it.

I don’t know that I want to define myself entirely in political terms, but I think the same values that affect my political outlook affect the rest of my life too. I’d say that I’m more open minded than open walleted, but that I have no problem paying for useful things like infrastructure, roads, schools, and some degree of a safety net. I think my support of environmental issues may be just an extension of my value for infrastructure.

My highest ranked political issue is probably a value of civil liberties. I think that respect for individuals is the foundation whereby many of my other core values grow. I want a government that doesn't spy on me, doesn’t waste money on a war on drugs (in fact wars on ideas rarely seem to be cost effective), that stays out of consenting adults bedrooms, that leaves me my civil rights & freedoms, that doesn't mess with people’s human rights & that doesn't torture, and that isn’t consumed with war.

I feel that both big parties are big spenders and that if I’m stuck with a big spender I want it spent on something more useful than war. I fear McCain will mean social reversion, continued war in Iraq, and war with Iran.

This is my core political value:

Quote :

"Civil liberties Civil liberties are freedoms that protect the individual from government to a certain extent. Civil liberties set limits for government so that it cannot abuse its power and interfere with the lives of its citizens. Common civil liberties include freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech, and additionally, the right to due process, to fair trial, to own property, to keep and bear arms and to privacy. The formal concept of civil liberties dates back to the Magna Carta of 1215 which in turn was based on pre-existing documents. Republics or democracies such as the United States have a Constitution, a bill of rights and similar constitutional documents that enumerate and seek to guarantee civil liberties. Other states have enacted similar laws through a variety of legal means, including signing and ratifying or otherwise giving effect to key conventions such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It might be said that the protection of civil liberties is a key responsibility of all citizens of free states, as distinct from authoritarian states. The existence of some claimed civil liberties is a matter of dispute, as are the extent of most civil liberties. Controversial examples include reproductive rights, same-sex marriage, and the use of certain drugs. Another matter of debate is the suspension or alteration of certain civil liberties in times of war or state of emergency, including whether and to what extent this should occur."

-wiki

I think a person is defined by their actions as much as their values. I graduated from NC State on the Dean’s List. While I did have some scholarships, I also had a twin brother going to college and parents getting a divorce so I still had to work & take out loans to pay for college. I had leadership positions in my clubs, groups, and fraternity. I got a research grant and was published in my field (philosophy) albeit in an undergraduate research journal. I’ve worked for several campaigns that share some of my values (although sometimes they have a more open wallet than I do. I'm more for workfare than wellfare, thats why I like Obama's affordable healthcare better than Hillary's mandated Healthcare). I’ve met Edwards and volunteered at his national HQ and gone to several of his rallies. I’ve volunteered for, seen Obama speak in person, and gone to several of his rallies. I’ve done a small amount of volunteering for a few other campaigns. And I worked as an intern for nearly half a year for the Jim Neal for US Senate campaign while having a full time job which wasn’t easy. Two of the three main campaigns I’ve worked for have lost. But I’d rather fight and lose for something I believe in than fight for a cause I don’t believe in. In the end all of them sort of came together in support for Obama though. I had some fun while doing it too… getting to go on the local news with a candidate, or going on NPR’s The State of Things live on primary day, and getting to canvass, make calls, put up signs, raise money for & donate to campaigns, go to rallies, and meet tons of great people across this state.

I’m also someone who has been to Florida, & the Canadian side of Niagara Falls, and New York City, and many places in between, and all across my home state of NC which is littered with friends and relatives. Travel would hardly seem like a defining aspect except for knowing so many people who have barely left their home town or county in their entire lives… perhaps that’s just part of growing up in small town North Carolina. (I grew up in Mt Airy, NC aka Mayberry).

I’m engaged to the person I’ve been dating for 5 years and may be getting married in California if it stays legal for me to marry there past this fall. I’m really hoping NC doesn’t pass the amendment on the behalf of the republicans to the state constitution to ban gay marriage. Do we really need more tampering with our state constitution to make gay marriage more illegal here? Luckily I like politics, because being gay I couldn’t strip politics out of my life I wanted to. Every political season and cycle can change legally speaking whether I can get married, whether I can have hospital visitation rights, or whether I’m a walking crime against nature.

In the interest of full disclosure I’ll even through in a section of my facebook profile. It might seem odd to include this. While I see one’s interests as a defining aspect I also see that the more I reflect on them just how many of them have grown from my core values and experiences. I like music that rejects the bad aspects of some religions and governments, I like a TV show focused on liberal politics in the White House, I like a movie that focuses on a minority that often discovers they are different around puberty, and many of my interests tie into my enjoyment of philosophy and reasoning.

Quote :

" Interests: Mu Beta Psi, Classics, Philosophy, Mythology, Astronomy, Comics Favorite Music: Greenday, Bad Religion, Anti-Flag, Linkin Park, All American Rejects, Panic at the Disco, Boys like Girls, Lifehouse, MatchBox Twenty, Evanescence. I enjoy a wider variety of music and genres than my favorites might lead one to believe. But as often as not if I'm in the car its NPR coming out of the speakers. Favorite TV Shows: West Wing, Seinfeld, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galatica, Heroes, The Office Favorite Movies: The Ninth Gate, X-Men 2 Favorite Books: The Republic, The Divine Comedy, The Tempest, The Club Dumas, Uncanny X-men Favorite Quotes: Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do and die -Tennyson "

People are also defined by those they keep around them. My mom is a life long school teacher. My dad was in the military and sold cars for a living. My brother is a coach. My fiancée is going to be a professor. My best friend works with me at a vet clinic. Although how much longer I’ll be working there before going back to school for grad school or trying to get a job with a non-profit is hard to say. I might want to run for a local office someday.


I'm sure this self definition and political positions will grow and change as I do . I know I’m sometimes critical of the short comings of my home state, but I love it and hope to change it for the better, and I fully believe that change is something well within my capacity to achieve given enough time and effort and a little bit of luck.

[Edited on May 23, 2008 at 8:58 PM. Reason : .]

5/23/2008 8:46:27 PM

I'm an anarchist pro-feminist technocratic transhumanist.

5/23/2008 8:53:34 PM

I'm conservative in the sense that I like the death penalty, guns, and the military. I'm liberal in the sense that big government is not automatically abhorrent to me. Certain parts of the U.S. government are far too large, powerful, and overreaching. Certain other parts are deplorably small and under-equipped. I like to mix and match on those.

I like corporations. I don't like paying them to do stupid things, or to prop them up after they have done stupid things. I love the free movement of goods, resources, and people between nations. I think that obstacles to these are ultimately obstacles to human betterment.

The betterment of humanity is at the root of virtually every single one of my positions, including my support for the judicious bombing of humanity. I do not feel this to be paradoxical.

Relativism is stupid. Some things are better than others. Some things are right and some things are wrong. I'm not clear on all of them, but there are a few I'm pretty sure of. Which is why if your leadership says, "Don't tell us it's wrong to kill group X, you don't understand the history behind it," I will suggest bombing you for their benefit.

I'm also not above wanting to bomb you because you're an asshole, but I won't generally recommend it as policy for that reason.

I strongly dislike hippies. I don't mind marijuana, but goddamn you people piss me off.

I think you help somebody no matter how much of a bum they are. You might alter the nature of your help, make it less easy to wrongly exploit, but you keep working at it. I don't think we're mere animals, to be able to sit back comfortably and watch the processes of nature select people to die as being unfit.

I strongly dislike most if not all of the conservatives, republicans, and libertarians on this board. On that note, I have trouble thinking of two things stupider than libertarianism and religion-minded politics. They are not stupid for the same reasons. They are just stupid. I will tend to treat practitioners of these philosophies accordingly.

I'm frequently drunk when I post on this board. This incident is an exception, because this hotel doesn't have a fucking bar. Also it's in Indiana, which is where dreams come to die. So to intoxicate myself I have been inexcusably self-indulgent for this whole post, and right now am high as a kite on myself. Thank you, IMstoned, for giving me this opportunity.

5/23/2008 11:19:46 PM

My Fellow Americans: As you all know, the defeat of the Iraq regime has been completed.

Since congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in Iraq is complete.

This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American forces from Iraq This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now time to begin the reckoning.


Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of countries which have stood by our side during the conflicts. This list is short . The United Kingdom , Spain , Bulgaria , Australia , and Poland are some of the countries listed there.

The other list contains every one not on the first list. Most of the world's nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of both lists later this evening.

Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely. The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war. THEN EVERY YEAR THERE AFTER It'll GO TO OUR SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM SO IT WONT GO BROKE IN 20 YEARS.

The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world Hell holes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption.

Need help with a famine ? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France .

In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this money toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at home On that note, a word to terrorist organizations. Screw with us and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth.

Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France or maybe China .

I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with France ,Germany , and Russia . Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well.
Bonne chance, mezamies.

I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and crushed. I don't care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch your precious Benzes, Beamers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in the world. I love New York

A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change.

Mexico is also on List 2 its president and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple extra thousand tanks and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am going to put 'em? Yep, border security.

Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty - starting now.

We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we'll be drilling for oil in Alaska- which will take care of this country's oil needs for decades to come. If you're an environmentalist who opposes this decision, I refer you to List 2 above: pick a country and move there.

It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying, 'darn tootin.'

Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet. It is time to eliminate hunger in America It is time to eliminate homelessness in America . To the nations on List 1, a final thought. Thank you guys. We owe you and we won't forget.

To the nations on List 2, a final thought: You might want to learn to speak Arabic.

God bless America .. Thank you and good night.

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.

5/27/2008 9:14:35 AM

so by pulling out of iraq, would we be removed from the parallel list 1 of countries like the UK, spain, bulgaria, etc

that and you want to be isolationist, but also you want other countries in the world to help you. i'd like to see how this works out.

Quote :

"If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier."

wow. that's some stupid bullshit.

[Edited on May 27, 2008 at 10:15 AM. Reason : .]

5/27/2008 10:11:28 AM

<--Anarchist

[Edited on May 27, 2008 at 10:25 AM. Reason : *]

[Edited on May 27, 2008 at 10:26 AM. Reason : *]

5/27/2008 10:25:17 AM

independent hard core.

While I don't classify myself as libertarian either, I advocate a multi-party system over 2-party system as we have, so naturally, I often vote libertarian. I think the most important voting issue is government accountability as opposed to liberal/conservative bickering - i.e. abortion, gay marriage, even though I fall in the democratic camp more often than not on these.

Politicians from both parties have pissed me off so much in my short life that I would never ever considering completely affiliating myself with either.


In terms of government size, I think what we had maybe 90s-ish was okay. Government is currently too big, and it's using debt to force citizens to let it get bigger. I strongly oppose any national debt that is greater than a respectable portion of yearly government spending.

The constitution was a good document. We should follow it. While gold standard, etc. is pretty much impossible anymore, we need more responsibility in management of our money system. I'm in favor of programs like Social Security if clear plans are presented to the country showing solid long-term fiscal plans. So I pretty much oppose said programs.

I strongly support that whole democracy-capitalism idea. It's well proven and the best system we know of. I still support nationalization of things like postal service and regulated monopolies in some areas, but we've gone too far with farm subsidies intervention (for example). We need more environmental protection legislation, but also smarter legislation. We're using a free market, so there is an obligation to force companies to pay for externalities, our government has largely failed in doing this. Suing people after the fact as Ron Paul advocates is simply wrong. I've alienated most parties at this point, so I hope it's clear why I say I'm independent now :/

We also need more democracy, as in more direct participation from voters. Our entire electoral system is far outdated for the 21st century. Referendums are good and should be used to decide more things.

I support our troops, and think our executive has mostly failed them. We need massive realignments and more "peace" troops.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3xlb6_0OEs
We should have diplomatic relations with any government that works hard to pave the ground for talks. We need to rethink foreign policies in a number of areas - very urgently in central & south America. We need a policy that encourages countries to slowly transition from tyranny to democracy and act accordingly.

5/27/2008 11:10:12 AM

anarcho-capitalist constitutionalist.

5/27/2008 11:46:49 AM

Quote :

"I consider myself moderate to conservative. I hate the fact that cons bend over for the religious right. Religion has no business in government. I hate the fact that libs, deep down, believe that most people have no idea how to take care of themselves and believe that government must do it for them. I think our borders should be protected as if it were a time of war and that our system should be adjusted to easily allow people currently here illegally to register, work and pay taxes. The registering should be streamlined and encouraged. People who employ illegals should have their businesses taken and put in jail. People who do not register should be deported on the spot. I strongly believe in the right to bear arms. I believe we need to maintain a strong military and believe that there are no quick fixes in the middle east and our strong presence there is necessary to prevent the spread of radial Islam and a Jewish genocide. By our nature and status in the world we have a duty to protect those who cannot protect themselves...see Sudan and Bosnia. I believe that drugs should remain illegal. I believe in the Fair Tax or a flat percentage applied to all wage-earners. I believe teachers should be paid a highly competitive wage to encourage the best and brightest into the public schools. I believe all people start equal and earn their status in our country. I hate how excuses are accepted as the norm for the place in life people earn. Any person should be able to date or marry whoever they choose. Gay persecution is asinine. Capitalism is great."

My views are almost a carbon copy of those above, so I just copied DaBird.
The exception being the drug line. I agree with this save for one. Pot. I have never smoked it and never really wanted to. But as I understand it, it does not do anything worse to a user than lets say a six pack. I think the Fed ATF, state ABC should find a way to regulate it. (Let some of the tobacco farmers grow it.) Sale it in the ABC stores and tax the hell out of it.

5/27/2008 12:56:06 PM

how do you propose to pay teachers so much more and switch to a fair tax as well?

Quote :

"I think the Fed ATF, state ABC should find a way to regulate it. (Let some of the tobacco farmers grow it.) Sale it in the ABC stores and tax the hell out of it."

the federal gov't has nothing to do with abc stores. have you ever been out of this state?

[Edited on May 27, 2008 at 2:34 PM. Reason : .]

5/27/2008 2:33:48 PM

sarijoul, GTFO.

5/27/2008 2:49:16 PM

oh. i'm sorry this is a "spew your own bullshit" thread without allowances for people to call you out on it. sorry for raining on your parade.

5/27/2008 2:57:01 PM

I put the guidelines down. Of course, there's no rule that says you have to follow them, but so far you're the only one being a dick about it. Some of the other people are at least trying to adhere to the guidelines. It's sad when I have to side with Rat over anyone, but he made more of an attempt to not be a douche bag than you did.

5/27/2008 2:59:28 PM

no i really didn't read that part of the first post. i won't post in this thread anymore because it seems pretty pointless.

5/27/2008 3:01:58 PM

it does seem pointless if there is no discussion. But sheer hostilities != discussion

5/27/2008 3:16:51 PM

Quote :

"the federal gov't has nothing to do with abc stores. have you ever been out of this state? "

Yes...I've been to every state except Hawaii. (Yes...even alaska)
My question to you is have you ever had your head out of your ass?

I stated in my post...Fed ATF...and STATE ABC......
In my view, Pot should be regulated roughly in the same fashion as beer, wine and liquor.

5/27/2008 3:17:55 PM

[Edited on May 27, 2008 at 3:47 PM. Reason : n/m.]

5/27/2008 3:46:30 PM

I like this thread...its almost like presenting yourself to run for office...your platform, so to speak.

5/27/2008 4:24:05 PM

I'm a Falangist, always have been. I just like being ironic.

5/27/2008 5:30:27 PM

I am an anarcho-capitalist libertarian.

I don't propose any radical reorganization to society. I don't support the abolition of marriage, the family, religion, wealth or private property. We should continue to do most things more or less the exact same way we do them now. Go to work, make money, spend some on what pleases you, save the rest. Have family reunions, join clubs and organizations, invest in stocks and bonds for your children's college fund, grill hamburgers on your back patio, watch lame reality television. In almost all respects the future I imagine is pretty much the same as the future you imagine, with one difference. We need to get rid of these thieving, murdering, slaving clowns who call themselves government.

My political philosophy derives from the standard libertarian non aggression principle. It is never justifiable to initiate the use of force, or some substitute for force (such as the threat of force, or fraud) against the person or property of another. Self defense, and the defense of others against aggression are the only justifiable uses for violence. A state government (being, by nature, a territorially monopoly) must initiate force to prevent potential competitors from offering the same services it offers on better terms or cease being a state as such. Hence, no state can be justified.

"Government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed" states the Declaration of Independence. With this I agree. Yet what government has ever bothered to secure the consent of more people than are necessary to compel the obedience of the remainder by force? Can any principle upon which to organize a supposedly civilized society be any more self-evidently false, absurd and barbaric than this? If you don't believe that this is how our so-called government works, ask yourself what would happen if you withdrew your consent to be taxed, to follow absurd laws, or to surrender all your rights, all your liberties and even your very life when called up for conscription. What manner of consent is this which results in such severe consequences if withheld? Is it really consent?

Certain people engaged in various sorts of criminality purport to "represent" us. If I started a school and then went up and down the street extorting money at gunpoint to pay for its operation, I would be considered criminally insane and dispatched immediately. Yet this authority, which no one ever had, which no one ever can have, is exercised daily by our "representatives" who explain that we have "delegated" it to them. If I battered down my neighbors door, shot his dog, bludgeoned him, electrocuted him, sprayed painful chemical agents in his face, kidnapped him, hauled him off and kept him captive for a number of years, all because I disliked his choice of recreational activities, I would be charged with more criminal offenses than I care to list. Yet this out-and-out criminal aggression against virtually every right and individual has is permitted to stand when certain individuals claim that this power has been "given" to them as a "public trust" by the "people". Yet how may "the people" do this when not one of them individually is permitted such atrocious behavior? Where does the collective acquire rights and powers which each individual composing it is forbidden by justice from ever having?

Some will reply that my talk of justice and of rights is mere babble. They say that no such things as rights exist without a "government" to define and enforce them, without a master to grant them. They say that justice does not exist, it must be brought about by positive institutions. Nothing could be further from the truth. The principles of justice are natural principles implicit in the nature of man and of existence.

If justice is not a natural principle it is no principle at all. If justice is not a natural principle, then there is no such thing as justice. If justice is not a natural principle, all the appeals for justice that have ever been heard, all the battles against injustice that have ever been fought, all that has been said and written about justice from time immemorial has been said and written and fought over nothing at all. If justice is not a natural principle then all the lip service governments (so-called) have payed to establishing justice, maintaining justice, rewarding justice or punishing injustice has been idle, meaningless wind uttered by charlatans or fools. If justice is not a natural principle than all the crimes that have ever been committed by one man against another are not crimes, but mere events, of which their victims had no more reason to complain than they had to complain about the rising of the sun, or the falling of the rain, or the blowing of the wind. If justice is not a natural principle then, insofar as governments (so-called) claim to exist, either in whole or in part, for the punishment or prevention of crimes, they claim that they exist for the punishment or prevention of what never existed nor ever can exist. Such claims are therefore confessions that so far as crimes are concerned, governments have no occasion to exist; that there is nothing for them to do; that there is nothing they can do. If justice is not a natural principle then all such words as justice and injustice, honesty and dishonesty, all words that are used to describe injuries and crimes, should be struck out of all human languages as having no meaning, and it should be declared once and for all that the greatest force and the greatest fraud, for the time being, shall be the only law governing the relations of men with each other. If justice is not a natural principle than all persons and combinations of persons --- those who call themselves governments and those who don't --- should be left free to practice upon one another all the force and all the fraud of which they are capable.

If, on the other hand, justice is a natural principle, then as Lysander Spooner once said...

Quote :

"it is necessarily an immutable one; and can no more be changed --- by any power inferior to that which established it --- than can the law of gravitation, the laws of light, the principles of mathematics, or any other natural law or principle whatever; and all attempts or assumptions, on the part of any man or body of men --- whether calling themselves governments, or by any other name --- to set up their own commands, wills, pleasure, or discretion, in the place of justice, as a rule of conduct for any human being, are as much an absurdity, an usurpation, and a tyranny, as would be their attempts to set up their own commands, wills, pleasure, or discretion in the place of any and all the physical, mental, and moral laws of the universe.If there be any such principle as justice, it is, of necessity, a natural principle; and, as such, it is a matter of science, to be learned and applied like any other science. And to talk of either adding to, or taking from, it, by legislation, is just as false, absurd, and ridiculous as it would be to talk of adding to, or taking from, mathematics, chemistry, or any other science, by legislation. If there be in nature such a principle as justice, nothing can be added to, or taken from, its supreme authority by all the legislation of which the entire human race united are capable. And all the attempts of the human race, or of any portion of it, to add to, or take from, the supreme authority of justice, in any case whatever, is of no more obligation upon any single human being than is the idle wind."

"But that's all theoretical" the pragmatists respond. "If we didn't have a government the poor would starve in the streets, criminals would run rampant, the security firms we hired to protects us would take over and establish themselves as predatory, monopolistic, criminal rackets that constantly wage war with one another while we get stuck in the crossfire"

The short answer is that we do have a government and all that is already true. The long answer is something I'll spare you for the time being as it's rather involved.

That's what I believe.

5/28/2008 5:25:58 AM