Hayek

For those of you who believe that these conspiracy theories are true and existent in virtually every aspect of the world, can I ask, why? No one is all-knowing and we all accept that. We decide things based on what we know and what makes sense logically and statistically. Pointing out the smallest unexplained thing does not prove anything and becoming paranoid because of it just causes hysteria.

If you can't believe in anything, then how can you even live? What is it that conspiracy theorists want to see in this world?

Axiom

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Hayek

I know different people will still believe in different things, but I am just wondering what it is that you can possibly believe in when everything is corrupt to you. So Axiom, what sort of world structure do you want?

Iconoclast

Ax wants absolute liberty. ie anarchy.

__________________
The individual is hopeless without the group.
The group is hopeless without its individuals.

Axiom

no

Ax wants a small (ie. not over reaching into micro managing and interfering in our lives) but strong(ie.not poorly paid used car salesmen types ,easily controlled by non-representative interests , but extremely highly paid consistent with the job of running a whole country) truly representative democratic government upholding the principles of individual freedom and the responsibility which that entails .Restricted only to their core job of protecting from violence,theft and fraud (not a labrynth of police state law)

Absolute liberty ( anarchy) is actually probably oxymoronic , as under this model there there would be no protection for the liberty of many .

So my ideal would be a small but strong libertarian govt .
Which i think would be the govt most would choose if they weren't so ill informed by their culture,schooling and media in buying into their fear driven free range serf enslavement. People , as huxley,wells,russell talked about would learn to enjoy their servitude , conditioned to be incapable of seeing outside their box .

The problem is undoing centuries of brainwashing by the controlling establishment ( who , contrary to the fed programming , actually adore socialism/communism.....and if you think about it , its not hard to imagine why )

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Hayek

It is interesting that you are for a very small government that is limited to essentially Mill's harm principle because I am for the same thing. Yet, we vary so much :p

Iconoclast

1. I put to you that there cannot be any such organising system (government) that can be BOTH small and strong. There reason is that there is an optimised cost for an organising system. Spend too little and the system will be too small and begin to fail by not upholding its responsibilities. Spend to much and that which it is controlling will become anaemic.

This is true for all control systems - animal and its brain, internet data flow and its switching computer(s), society
and its government.


2. I don't know that you can codify those "responsibilities." because of the enormous range of perceived "responsibilities" that are politically incompatible with each other.

Violence, theft and fraud are interactions that occur at the person to person level. Such interacts are necessarsarily complicated. Therefore, codifying and enforcing those codes of behaviour will also be necessarily complicated. Perhaps you view "complicated" law as a "labyrinth." I do not as I view it as one of the costs of civilisation - a cost I am willing to pay.

If we choose (wished for) it, we should also wish for eternal life, world peace and happiness because all those wishes are unattainable as well. So, what to do? I suggest RELAX. We live long lives, experience low crime rates and are supplied with plenty of food. What else can you ask of government? Sure some things are imperfect, so, let's work on those. Let's repair and maintain the house rather than bulldoze it and HOPE that we have a good builder.

__________________
The individual is hopeless without the group.
The group is hopeless without its individuals.

Just2Good

I cannot agree.

Its called a dog's leash, small yet effective at controlling the animal.

__________________
.
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."

~ Buckminster Fuller ~

Iconoclast

A stupid analogy. It is not the leash that controls, it is the owner of the leash.

Using your analogy I could control a country using a single hand gun pressed under the jaw of the prime minister's children.

Look, artificial complex systems must have sophisticated internal mechanisms for co-ordinating its own behaviour. Such mechanisms are costly - so very costly that for a billion years an extra large cerebral cortex did not appear in any animal with a brain.

__________________
The individual is hopeless without the group.
The group is hopeless without its individuals.

Just2Good

That's very interesting, considering the earth is less than 20,000 years old. Its called Creationist Theory, you may want to look it up if you are

ps - Yesterday I saw a dog leased to a pole, no owner in sight. The leash still seemed quite effective at restraining the dog's movements.

__________________
.
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."

~ Buckminster Fuller ~

Iconoclast

I won't take the bait.

__________________
The individual is hopeless without the group.
The group is hopeless without its individuals.

Axiom

In his book Friendly Fascism, author Bertram Gross argues that when fascism comes to America it will be “friendly” and lack the overt brutality of the classic varieties of German and Italian fascism.

Richard Nixon once said that average American is like a child in the family.

Nixon was merely expressing the dominant opinion of the ruling elite who consider us contemptible children in need of adult supervision. Hitler, too, considered the German people children in need of adult supervision.

For the elite, a political activist is the worst sort of unruly child, one that directly challenges the authority of the father who represents the state. In order to modify the behavior of a rebellious child the state must instill fear. It must intimidate but — as Gross noted — it must do this with a friendly face. It must uphold the pretense of “democracy.” A frog must be boiled slowly.

“No truly sophisticated proponent of repression would be stupid enough to shatter the facade of democratic institutions,” wrote Murray B. Levin.



In the once great United States, circa 2010, the state, the father authoritarian figure, does not generally send Gestapo thugs in leather trench coats at three o’clock in the morning to the doorstep of those bold enough to challenge the authority of the state. It may send a SWAT team of trained killers after a suspected drug dealer, but this is the exception and not the rule.

Naked brutality is reserved for al-Qaeda patsies, Iraqi children, Afghan wedding parties, Pakistani villagers, and on occasion those of us who directly challenge the state through armed resistance and self defense. Ed Brown, Randy Weaver’s wife, David Koresh and the incinerated children of Waco come to mind.

In the video below, agents of friendly fascism — who resemble a insurance salesman and his dowdy wife — visit a woman in Austin, Texas, and attempt to ask a few friendly questions about her rebellious behavior during a pro-Palestinian demonstration. Her rebellion did not consist of bomb-making or even inappropriate jokes about the president. Her crime was to display organized outrage over the murder and mistreatment of an entire people, a crime supported by and paid for by the U.S. government.

The FBI agents asked: Did she know anybody who would engage in violence or property damage? In other words, does she admit to being a terrorist and does she know of any terrorist plots ongoing?

At first glance, this line of questioning seems patently absurd. But it has a deeper purpose unstated and denied by the FBI — to inculcate fear of the state and intimidate and modify the behavior of an unruly and rebellious child. It is a routine designed to shut down opposition and discourage troublemakers from exercising their First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

Government will decide what is appropriate and what verges on a crime against the state. The First Amendment now has circumscribed areas of practice surrounded by men in black ski masks and Darth Vader storm trooper uniforms.

The intimidation process did not work on this brave woman. She knows her rights and she was not afraid to tell the FBI in a polite way to shove it where the sun does not shine.

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food | The World's Prophecy


( Food: The Ultimate Secret Exposed )

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

BZZT

Scientists stunned as bee populations continue to decline

Not a huge news story is it .
I thought the media loved scare stories ?
Except when the stories are relatively non-trivial , is that right ?!?

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Thomas Bishop

Does this mean I won't be able to buy honey anymore?