Erik Moeller wrote:
> Anton Sherwood wrote:
>
> > You said that the power structures remain after the state is REMOVED.
> > Was the Vietnam War run in the ABSENCE of a powerful government?
> > Did Nixon turn to crime to protect his PRIVATE power-base?
> > Did Bush start the Gulf War while he was OUT of office?
>
> Do you ask me for evidence for something economically impossible? It's
> actually
> you who has to prove either by history (which should be possible) or by
> economic facts
> that the removal of governments will lead to the free market you imagine. You
> never post
> sources, you never quote statistics -- you don't need this because your belief
> is good
> enough. It's time to get real, kiddo. And please, stop using caps.
What he was trying to show is that no one man who wasn't in a position of
authority in a government has ever been able to pull off the kind of power stunts
he listed, Indonesia's claims about George Soros aside (which is simply more
tyrannic fear mongering). Take Bill Gate's for example. He's the richest guy on
the planet, yet if the DOJ gets the supreme court to tell him to hup too, he'll be
a shuckin' and a jivin' like any bum on the street pushing an idiot stick.
Somebody like Clinton, on the other hand, can evade civil litigation, criminal
investigation and prosecution, having both his former best freind as well as his
Commerce Secretary assasinated, do FBI background checks on 300 private citizens
with no due process or probable cause, while taking more bribe money than any
organization man in history as well as bombing and invading a few countries while
he was at it, yet Clinton is worth tops, maybe $2 million personally (and bankrupt
if you talk to his accountant). Tell me that government doesn't give people in
authority excessive power.
>
>
> > > [...] People in the Middle Ages (another fine Free Market) [...]
>
> > Idiot.
>
> Thanks. I can't get enough of these insults. Give me more, I'll make a book of
> them. "Extropian Reasoning".
Actually, despite the nasty rumors of the European Powers, medeival europe was a
rather decent place economically, and rather fun if you were into the cloak and
dagger routine, with the singular exception of all of the plagues that were going
around.
>
>
> > >No, I won't. Give me a rational explanation.
>
> > The state, as a quasi-living self-perpetuating entity, repeats the
> > behaviors that tend to increase its power, irrespective of whether
> > such behaviors are good for the society that it nominally serves.
> > One such behavior is war-making. (As I said before.)
>
> Eurofighter increases no one's power. Vietnam War didn't increase US gov's
> power, actually it caused a lot of havoc there (but not as much as where it
> happened). WW II was nominally supposed to increase Hitler's power, but it was
> obvious that he stood no chance against the US & the Soviets. Had they wanted
> to, the US could have quit the war right after it started, the Holocaust would
> never have happened. But they remained rather speechless until the Soviet
> Union was in ruins.
Eurofighter is a symptom, not a cause.
>
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ mailto:retroman@together.net Inventor of the Lorrey Drive MikeySoft: Graphic Design/Animation/Publishing/Engineering ------------------------------------------------------------ How many fnords did you see before breakfast today?
--------------8FD9E7F982F908C15C9C177F Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Erik Moeller wrote:
Anton Sherwood wrote:What he was trying to show is that no one man who wasn't in a position of authority in a government has ever been able to pull off the kind of power stunts he listed, Indonesia's claims about George Soros aside (which is simply more tyrannic fear mongering). Take Bill Gate's for example. He's the richest guy on the planet, yet if the DOJ gets the supreme court to tell him to hup too, he'll be a shuckin' and a jivin' like any bum on the street pushing an idiot stick. Somebody like Clinton, on the other hand, can evade civil litigation, criminal investigation and prosecution, having both his former best freind as well as his Commerce Secretary assasinated, do FBI background checks on 300 private citizens with no due process or probable cause, while taking more bribe money than any organization man in history as well as bombing and invading a few countries while he was at it, yet Clinton is worth tops, maybe $2 million personally (and bankrupt if you talk to his accountant). Tell me that government doesn't give people in authority excessive power.> You said that the power structures remain after the state is REMOVED.
> Was the Vietnam War run in the ABSENCE of a powerful government?
> Did Nixon turn to crime to protect his PRIVATE power-base?
> Did Bush start the Gulf War while he was OUT of office?Do you ask me for evidence for something economically impossible? It's
actually
you who has to prove either by history (which should be possible) or by
economic facts
that the removal of governments will lead to the free market you imagine. You
never post
sources, you never quote statistics -- you don't need this because your belief
is good
enough. It's time to get real, kiddo. And please, stop using caps.Actually, despite the nasty rumors of the European Powers, medeival europe was a rather decent place economically, and rather fun if you were into the cloak and dagger routine, with the singular exception of all of the plagues that were going around.> > [...] People in the Middle Ages (another fine Free Market) [...]
> Idiot.
Thanks. I can't get enough of these insults. Give me more, I'll make a book of
them. "Extropian Reasoning".Eurofighter is a symptom, not a cause.> >No, I won't. Give me a rational explanation.
> The state, as a quasi-living self-perpetuating entity, repeats the
> behaviors that tend to increase its power, irrespective of whether
> such behaviors are good for the society that it nominally serves.
> One such behavior is war-making. (As I said before.)Eurofighter increases no one's power. Vietnam War didn't increase US gov's
power, actually it caused a lot of havoc there (but not as much as where it
happened). WW II was nominally supposed to increase Hitler's power, but it was
obvious that he stood no chance against the US & the Soviets. Had they wanted
to, the US could have quit the war right after it started, the Holocaust would
never have happened. But they remained rather speechless until the Soviet
Union was in ruins.--
TANSTAAFL!!!
Michael Lorrey
------------------------------------------------------------
mailto:retroman@together.net Inventor of the Lorrey Drive
MikeySoft: Graphic Design/Animation/Publishing/Engineering
------------------------------------------------------------
How many fnords did you see before breakfast today?
--------------8FD9E7F982F908C15C9C177F--