Puff-puff

[Antigen]

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:

"I bet in the 4 mph world they were not aware of the abundance of land.

Are you kidding? Of course they knew. They may not have marked and measured it in exactly the same ways. But they had plenty of contact with each other through their own travels and through traders and knew very well how the land laid, how much hunting and forraging a particular area could take, etc.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:

 Also, once an anarcho-community is established, direct democracy, community descision making is the idea for resolving who builds what and where.  Those two things combined are the key to peace without an official version of land ownership: awareness of the abundance and direct democracy.  Then add self-defense on top of it and the public awareness that the family occupying certain land is prepared to defend it.

I think the Iroquois Alliance had a pretty good thing going. Each tribe sent a rep and his support party to the council each year. Only men could be chosen to go but, in most tribes, only women could vote on who to send. This alliance exsisted for at least several hundred years and extended, at times, from Nova Scocia down at least to the Creek lands in Georgia and possibly further. There simply was no direct democracy. Any policy or other decision that applied to the entire alliance was made by the 50 or so men who were sent to represent their own tribes.

Francis Parkman's Conspiracy of Pontiac is a great read on Iroquois history and self government.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:

Communism as a means of production, anarcho-communism, is an option where people can have and produce the means of survival without restrictions.  ....

Well, I won't argue with you over the details. But suffice it to say that, as long as it's truely voluntary, I don't mind sitting back over here and watching yet another communist experiment fail. Hopefully, we'll have plenty of stuff to trade to anyone willing to provide as much labour as the market will bear for it whenever ya'll want to give up and get some good grub. :wink:

Just don't try and sell it in these hills. Yinzers have no patience left for this kind of Utopian dream.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:

Yeah Straight was a form of torture, but that's corporate/private/capitalist torture...

Oh no. You forget how law enforcement, the judiciary and legislature have cooperated in these ventures. The Seed was started with a $2M grant from NIDA along with a couple of other Synanon based programs. Straight took federal funding from Law Enforcement Assistance Agency and free endorsements from sitting presidents, vice presidents, their wives, legislators and various other characters from the pages of officialdome.

Today, DFAF gets about 30% of their funding from the Cat in the Hat (last I heard, anyway... that figure may have changed since.) And the piss testing industry, of which their members and affiliates are the dominant players, gets around another $6Bn almost entirely from government mandated programs. Who knows how much else they get in how many other ways either directly from the general fund or by way of legislatively mandated spending?

Straight is/was no more a private venture than Dyncorp is.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:

and a good example it is of what people will do to others for capital gain.  I had the government on my mind while I was writing the "we aren't tortured" part not corporations.  Yep, it is scary that our current covernment is very closely aligned (or tightly intertwined) and involved with the very same people who committed the Straight violations.

"

Same as it ever was. Just that, at age 18, I really didn't sweat the details and find out about all this crap. I was young and idealistic and thought I could just wander off into the wider world and never have to deal with those sadistic lunatics again. I didn't know, at the time, that they were the ones making all these stupid laws and policies and pushing their Hitler Jugund programs in the schools. Now I know. That's the difference.

Distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful.
--Friedrich Nietzsche

[ehm]

On 2003-05-15 16:56:00, Antigen wrote:

"

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:


"I bet in the 4 mph world they were not aware of the abundance of land.

Are you kidding? Of course they knew. They may not have marked and measured it in exactly the same ways. But they had plenty of contact with each other through their own travels and through traders and knew very well how the land laid, how much hunting and forraging a particular area could take, etc.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:


 Also, once an anarcho-community is established, direct democracy, community descision making is the idea for resolving who builds what and where.  Those two things combined are the key to peace without an official version of land ownership: awareness of the abundance and direct democracy.  Then add self-defense on top of it and the public awareness that the family occupying certain land is prepared to defend it.

I think the Iroquois Alliance had a pretty good thing going. Each tribe sent a rep and his support party to the council each year. Only men could be chosen to go but, in most tribes, only women could vote on who to send. This alliance exsisted for at least several hundred years and extended, at times, from Nova Scocia down at least to the Creek lands in Georgia and possibly further. There simply was no direct democracy. Any policy or other decision that applied to the entire alliance was made by the 50 or so men who were sent to represent their own tribes.



Francis Parkman's Conspiracy of Pontiac is a great read on Iroquois history and self government.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:


Communism as a means of production, anarcho-communism, is an option where people can have and produce the means of survival without restrictions.  ....

Well, I won't argue with you over the details. But suffice it to say that, as long as it's truely voluntary, I don't mind sitting back over here and watching yet another communist experiment fail. Hopefully, we'll have plenty of stuff to trade to anyone willing to provide as much labour as the market will bear for it whenever ya'll want to give up and get some good grub. :wink:



Just don't try and sell it in these hills. Yinzers have no patience left for this kind of Utopian dream.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:


Yeah Straight was a form of torture, but that's corporate/private/capitalist torture...

Oh no. You forget how law enforcement, the judiciary and legislature have cooperated in these ventures. The Seed was started with a $2M grant from NIDA along with a couple of other Synanon based programs. Straight took federal funding from Law Enforcement Assistance Agency and free endorsements from sitting presidents, vice presidents, their wives, legislators and various other characters from the pages of officialdome.



Today, DFAF gets about 30% of their funding from the Cat in the Hat (last I heard, anyway... that figure may have changed since.) And the piss testing industry, of which their members and affiliates are the dominant players, gets around another $6Bn almost entirely from government mandated programs. Who knows how much else they get in how many other ways either directly from the general fund or by way of legislatively mandated spending?



Straight is/was no more a private venture than Dyncorp is.

On 2003-05-15 14:29:00, JDavid wrote:


and a good example it is of what people will do to others for capital gain.  I had the government on my mind while I was writing the "we aren't tortured" part not corporations.  Yep, it is scary that our current covernment is very closely aligned (or tightly intertwined) and involved with the very same people who committed the Straight violations.


"

Same as it ever was. Just that, at age 18, I really didn't sweat the details and find out about all this crap. I was young and idealistic and thought I could just wander off into the wider world and never have to deal with those sadistic lunatics again. I didn't know, at the time, that they were the ones making all these stupid laws and policies and pushing their Hitler Jugund programs in the schools. Now I know. That's the difference.

Distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful.
--Friedrich Nietzsche

"

You do know your enemy Lady.  You're the shiznit! (that means 'da bomb' in "shizzle")

            http://www.asksnoop.com

[JDavid]

Government ownership and private/corporate ownership are equally destructive in regards to all resources.  I sure don't see any Yinzer groups offering up any solutions.  Even Anti-Flag can't come up with anything better than the Green Party.  They're Yinzers: http://www.thetartan.org/97/4/pillbox/2046.asp



[ This Message was edited by: JDavid on 2003-05-15 18:38 ]

[ClayL]

Jdavid:

Let's say this thing of yours flys. Just how do you propose taking Ted Turner's million+ acres away? I live on 120 acres and I am not having 119 other families move in with me. The only way i can see this happening is with super-strong authoritarian government intervention. There would be bloodshed and civil war. If there is one thing that angers a person more than someone trying to take their home, I cannot think of it.

This also forgets two things I have found to be true.
1. Some people don't like to share.
2. Most people don't respect things they don't own.

Ginger:

I cannot agree with you more in thinking the schmuckavelli's in DC already have asscess to way to much of my money. I have never seen anything mentioned in the Constitution about Entitlements or Social Security. I think the Commerce Clause has been interpreted far to broadly and the Federal Government has itself in far more things than the founders EVER intended. I am espicially fond of the way the tax system sets up the fewest to pay damn near all the taxes and for most people to pay no taxes and they go even better. The gov't charges everyone to much tax and then, if we jump through enough hoops, offers to "refund" the over-charge. Making things look to the unwashed masses that they are getting something from the gov't. When in reality, the gov't has used the unwashed masses money for an entire year. Kind of like taking, upon threat of prison, an interest free loan. I can guarantee the Founders, wealthy men all, did not have this in mind when writing the Constutition.

Before I said I have some issue with my government. I'll bet you can guess this is one of them?

CL

[JDavid]

It's not a "thing of mine", it's the most popular idea among anarchists... a horizontal society instead of a vertical one especially since vertical society does not have enough room for everyone.  Evidence that there is not enough room in capitalist heirarchical society is: abortion crisis, suicide, huge debt, murder & homelessness.  There is no such thing as overpopulation, only overcrowded systems.

Take Ted Turner's acres away by removing the state which enforces the deeds on that land.  He doesn't need it for anything but profit, and profit will be obsolete.  What's he going to do when there is no police force?  Hire a militia to guard it for him?  Why would the people of a militia care to guard his land (for an income) when they can get all the means of survival for free from the anarcho-communites?

Unfortunately, the current system is set up to where people with loads of money can buy up 120 acres and seal it off from the world, so if a revolution occurs tonight, it is unfair that such a person lost that investment when the state falls.  It won't take long for the people to realize that we did not create the Earth, so it is not ours to set up borders on it.  It's just a rearrangement of concept.  

If anarchy was already the way things are working, people would know beforehand that buying 120 acres is not something we do, especially since there would be no police force to help enforce the deed and seal it off from the world.  

I hope people will be aware of the fact that there is enough land for 20 acres per family though.  That's how it is right now, and population doesn't grow so fast to where that will change anytime soon.  

If the 120 acres is out in the middle of nowhere, the land and the occupants of it will be left alone until civilization spreads, reaching that 120 acres.

The deal is that you can try to horde land in anarchy, but if you're successful in guarding it with a militia or a gang, the community would cut you off from everything they provide... utilities, medical, construction, agriculture, defense equipment, and so on unless you were an agricultural establishment; in that case the community would actually help ya guard it.  Many anarchists are all for guarding wildlife reserves also, if that is what your land is.

There is no reason to take people's homes.  Only the current government finds reasons to take people's homes.  The resources are so abundant that taking someone's house would be about the most useless and pointless thing anyone could attempt in anarchy.  We just need to get the restrictions taken off the building of homes.  Remove the restrictions and the supply flourishes to the point there is no more "demand" in market terms.  Without such restrictions, and without this artificial market demand for houses, I can't think of any reason for a civil war.

Anarcho-communities would be organized about all of this.  Think of zoning laws, except they would not actually be laws.  They would just be maps of where we can build stuff agreed upon by the local majority.

People wouldn't have to like to share in this anarchism social idea.  It takes very little time or effort to be considered an active participant of an anarcho-community.  I think boredom would be the main problem.  Boredom with having nothing to do with the other 14 hours of your days (while awake).  That's not a bad problem at all.  That's why I think market socialism will be very popular.  People venturing outside the community to participate in expanded trade since they would have so much free time.

My response to your #2 is that I think people disrespect things as soon as they do own them.  I think respect comes when people realize they cannot own it.  Possessions and property are two different things.  Anarchists will own possessions, but they won't own land or any of the means of survival.  All people who want access to all of it will operate a tiny portion of it.  That's a good deal.

I think it's something to evolve to.  I know the masses right now are too stupid to conduct themselves without being ruled by authority.  70% of the current US is approving of King George, the War on Terror, the support for the genocidal  apartheid Israeli money laundering outfit, the War on Drugs, the War for Oil, Ascroft's roundups & detentions of bong makers and immigrants, World Bank / IMF skyrocketing third world debt, globalization.  The brainwashed masses are just cheering it on while similar fools are serving in the military for China, North Korea and Iran.  There's no way in hell I'd want to have to trust these sheep in an anarcho-community, but I do have all the confidence in the world in the anarchists I know.




[ This Message was edited by: JDavid on 2003-05-16 07:50 ]

[ehm]

*sucking in hard*........EAR!!!

[ClayL]

I would submit that things like abortion, suicide, huge debt, murder & homelessness are much more readily explained by factors other than the painful convolutions of this geo-political structure. This utopian view is indeed twisted. Why would someone work their ass off to provide for everyone else and get nothing in return for the part of their life they spent producing the goods? There is another word for this: stealing.

Obviously the crack heads that think up this kind of nonsense have never turned the earth or workesd to produce the things they can now go to the grocery store, mall or shopping center to buy. There would be no 14 hours of free time. All the family's time would be spent in producing enough to eat and providing for the basic necessities.

Further, you are under some mistaken impression that people are going to willingly give up their property to the greater good. You are also under the impression that these same people will rely on some kind of police structure to enforce their rights. This is not so, I think Thomas Locke said that governments govern only with the consent of the governed. Also this consent is where just governments derive their power from. Locke is only expanding on much earlier concepts.

My point is, that when governments fail to govern, then power falls back to the people. What would be protecting my property would be me, a good scope and rifle. I could probably scrape up heavier weaponry if necessary. As a matter of fact I can tell you how to make a nuclear bomb and could probably put one together if it came to that.

Something really bothering me, how do you get the governments to magically disappear?

Lastly, if people respect things they cannot own, how do you explain litter in our national parks. or on the road side for that matter? How do you explain poachers? How do you explain cigarette burns in the backseat of your car or the furniture of your house?

CL

[Anonymous]

Clay - 2 points

Ginger - 2 points

JDavid - 0

Mo - 0, but.....EAR!

PUFF-PUFF-Give! :lol:

[JDavid]

One main point of what I am saying is that this capitalist system is doomed.  It cannot possibly survive forever.  It will fall because the population excluded from the system who are unable to survive or remotely succeed in such a system are already massive in numbers.  That is the world's poverty class.  One step up from them is the working class.  Once the working class starts to intensely feel the heat is when the revolution will occur.  What are you going to do then?  All states and governments will fall.  Who is planning or designing a hope for life after that happens?  No one is except the anarchists.  It's either figure out what the anarchists are saying and why they say it or perhaps it will be chaos.  

This is not only something I want to happen, it is something that will happen regardless of who likes it.  The ruling class won't like it.  The land horders won't like it.  I will like it though.  Removing people from power over others is the greatest thing imaginable to me.

Evolution is inevitable.  People will not be buying the scam of vertical society forever.

Governments magically disappear when the masses stop supporting them.  A major part of it is the masses refusing to send them money.

National parks are government owned.  Just as susceptible to neglect as anything private/corporate owned.  Maybe the litter problem would go away without capitalist motivated marketing, advertising and excessive packaging.

I am sure people do not intentionally burn the seats in your car or your furniture.  We can't use accidents as a method of calibrating respect and ownership.

That's real impressive to hear you would execute people with a rifle for attempting to negotiate you to relinquish a sector of your so-called sovereign territory.  Reminds me of Israel.  Reminds me of what happened to the natives of North America.  I doubt anarchists would waste their time attacking.  You'd just be sitting in the middle of your 120 acres without capitalist allies forcing people to provide your gang with utilities, food, medical and the rest of what the local community produces.  We'd wait for you to come out & try to steal it from us.

I bet you're still paying for that land anyway.  If that is the case, you don't own it afterall... the ruling class does and you are serving them by sending them money for it.


[ This Message was edited by: JDavid on 2003-05-16 10:15 ]

[METALGOD8]

CL, this is OT a bit, but, you might be the only one I know that can answer this or at least interpret what the hell this guy is saying...


When you look closely at your enterprise IT architecture, what do you perceive as the speed bumps on the road to productivity?

Peter Coffee of EWeekly says:

What I see is a need for higher throughput for encryption accelerators for VPN performance, XML accelerators for Web services transactions, solid state hard disks and in-memory databases for interactive data analysis tasks, and graphics accelerators for image processing and 3-D visualization.

Holy bejeewilikers, what the hell is he talking about? LOL...

MG8 :smokin:

What would the role of the computer be in this anarchist world?

On 2003-05-16 09:10:00, ClayL wrote:

"I would submit that things like abortion, suicide, huge debt, murder & homelessness are much more readily explained by factors other than the painful convolutions of this geo-political structure. This utopian view is indeed twisted. Why would someone work their ass off to provide for everyone else and get nothing in return for the part of their life they spent producing the goods? There is another word for this: stealing.



Obviously the crack heads that think up this kind of nonsense have never turned the earth or workesd to produce the things they can now go to the grocery store, mall or shopping center to buy. There would be no 14 hours of free time. All the family's time would be spent in producing enough to eat and providing for the basic necessities.



Further, you are under some mistaken impression that people are going to willingly give up their property to the greater good. You are also under the impression that these same people will rely on some kind of police structure to enforce their rights. This is not so, I think Thomas Locke said that governments govern only with the consent of the governed. Also this consent is where just governments derive their power from. Locke is only expanding on much earlier concepts.



My point is, that when governments fail to govern, then power falls back to the people. What would be protecting my property would be me, a good scope and rifle. I could probably scrape up heavier weaponry if necessary. As a matter of fact I can tell you how to make a nuclear bomb and could probably put one together if it came to that.



Something really bothering me, how do you get the governments to magically disappear?



Lastly, if people respect things they cannot own, how do you explain litter in our national parks. or on the road side for that matter? How do you explain poachers? How do you explain cigarette burns in the backseat of your car or the furniture of your house?



CL"

[JDavid]

To insult anarchists is to insult the only ideas out there for life after capitalism dies.  To insult anarchists is to express your preference that people just perish when there is no longer a ruling class to serve.  What is this?  Serving a ruling class is the only reason people have a right to be alive?  Do you recommend the masses just commit suicide when all heirarchies fall?  If not, what the hell are you going to do?  Establish another government which restricts access to the means of survival?  Establish another central power after centuries of such organizations have done nothing but fail and violate all people all across the world?

Let's see what you geniuses propose for after the death of capitalism.

On 2003-05-16 09:24:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Clay - 2 points



Ginger - 2 points



JDavid - 0



Mo - 0, but.....EAR!



PUFF-PUFF-Give! :lol:

"

[Antigen]

On 2003-05-16 06:28:00, ClayL wrote:

Just how do you propose taking Ted Turner's million+ acres away?

. . .


Ginger:



I cannot agree with you more in thinking the schmuckavelli's in DC already have asscess to way to much of my money. I have never seen anything mentioned in the Constitution about Entitlements or Social Security. I think the Commerce Clause has been interpreted far to broadly and the Federal Government has itself in far more things than the founders EVER intended. I am espicially fond of the way the tax system sets up the fewest to pay damn near all the taxes and for most people to pay no taxes and they go even better. The gov't charges everyone to much tax and then, if we jump through enough hoops, offers to "refund" the over-charge. Making things look to the unwashed masses that they are getting something from the gov't. When in reality, the gov't has used the unwashed masses money for an entire year. Kind of like taking, upon threat of prison, an interest free loan. I can guarantee the Founders, wealthy men all, did not have this in mind when writing the Constutition.



Before I said I have some issue with my government. I'll bet you can guess this is one of them?



CL"

Well yeah. But it's not really just a few wealthy people paying all the taxes and expenses. It's everybody. Think poor people don't pay the gas tax cause they don't own cars? The people who sell them food and clothing pay it, as does the post office, city governments and all the rest. Don't pay property tax because you rent? Where do you think the land lord gets the money to pay it?

I don't know exactly how Ted Turner got his millions of acres. But I strongly suspect he hasn't been hurt by the FCC regulations that make it impossibly expensive to get and keep a broadcast license while making it easier for already wealthy broadcasters to buy out struggling smaller stations. Ted Turner's product is just not good enough to explain his wealth. He didn't get it all on merit and, I suspect, without the legislated monopoly, he wouldn't be able to hang onto so much of it in a true free market.

There's an excellent example of how that works going on in So. Florida right now. The Citrus industry is about the most powerful lobby in the state. They own everything from prisons to contracts for cleaning products to the county school districts. They're in trouble right now because Brazil is kicking their collective butts in the juice market.

So what do they do? They lobby the FLDA and USDA to spend billions on a propaganda and cutting campaing to erradicate privately owned citrus trees. Now, if you live in So. Florida and want citrus products, you have to buy them. Most of the privately owned trees have already been taken without due processor just compensation and it is a federal felony to try and sneak one in and replant.

In a free market, the citrus industry would just take the hit, cut their losses and a whole lot of citrus land would become available to other players at reduced prices. But in our Socialist Utopia, their investment is secured by armed officers who WILL arrest anyone who tries to stop them from taking their private property "for the greater good".

Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself
--Jimmy Carter

[JDavid]

Replying to Ginger's Florida message...

Your Florida citrus conquest is what I am talking about when I say capitalism is doomed.  Capitalism requires markets to be continuosly expanding, and when the market cannot be expanded, one corporation must conquer other corporations and take their markets.  This leads to monopolies.  Next, monopolies start taking over other monopolies.  That leads to imperialism.  Imperialism is the stage in which capitalism IS dead because no remnants of the free market exist in imperialism.

See, capitalism is vertical.  The more exclusive (smaller) the top tier becomes, the smaller the included working class becomes.  That creates a larger and larger poverty class as the executives and the working class of the old days fall into the poverty class.

We can kill capitalism before it reaches the point of imperialism, or we can kill the imperials once they establish their ownership over everything.  No one knows how it's gonna go down yet.

[Antigen]

On 2003-05-16 10:56:00, JDavid wrote:

"To insult anarchists is to insult the only ideas out there for life after capitalism dies.  To insult anarchists is to express your preference that people just perish when there is no longer a ruling class to serve.  What is this?  Serving a ruling class is the only reason people have a right to be alive?  Do you recommend the masses just commit suicide when all heirarchies fall?  If not, what the hell are you going to do?  Establish another government which restricts access to the means of survival?  Establish another central power after centuries of such organizations have done nothing but fail and violate all people all across the world?



Let's see what you geniuses propose for after the death of capitalism.

Well, when the last Great Empire became over-extended and fell apart, we had an era known as the Dark Ages or Midieval Times. We don't know a whole lot about what was going on then because our history books are a history of nations and wars. But we know one thing for sure; people lived, loved and died, resurected old traditions and medicines and, eventually, started out again trying to take over the world like Pinky and the Brain or some James Bond villain.

Mean time, the farmer plowed his fields, some parts of the old culture were kept, safe and sound (Latin language and the Arabic number system, for example, being the basis for much of our speaking and writing to this day)

When the current order of things falls apart, there will be no central, uniform order of things. There also won't be a population of 6 billion+. Lots and lots of people will not make it into the next few generations. The ones who make it will be the ones who do the best job of deciding what to leave in, what to leave out and how best to innovate and make do with what they have. I hope some of mine are among them.

In 1776, Thomas Paine wrote:


SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins.
More: http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/D/1776-1800 ... ensexx.htm

(Interesint, isn't it, that the first link that comes up on the Google search Thomas Paine Common Sense is in the Netherlands?

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
--Edmund Burke

_________________
Ginger Warbis ~ Antigen
American P.O.W. 10/80 - 10/82
Straight South (Sarasota, FL)
Anonymity Anonymous

[JDavid]

And the only way I see that we can avoid this cycle "started out again trying to take over the world" is if the ideas of anarchists continue to spread from generation to generation until the day comes to live in an anti-heirarchical world.