Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
You are the stars
#41
(07-29-2016, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 03:36 PM)taramarie Wrote: There have been many different ideals i have heard from 40s boomers. Always 40s. They seem to be the most idealistic. But i will give you one example. One who was born '49 from America was a communist. He was getting a hell of a lot of hate from others. So i pulled them off him, let him speak then i asked him how he thinks this will become reality when clearly the majority of people in his society are against communism. He had nothing. He just kept saying oh wouldn't it be nice to live in a society like that? Pipe dream is all that it is. I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it. If xers dismiss boomers for hypocrisy they evidently saw in their elders and us millies have been only getting this news 2nd hand from that era as we were not alive at the time how do those 40s idealistic boomers figure we will settle on one ideal and shape society around that ideal? I did not say all boomers were dying for their ideals. I was referring to the cultists at the time. Galen mentioned several in particular.
As I said, though, Marxists and communists are rare among our generation. Galen thinks every liberal is a communist; a common ploy by American right-wingers. What Galen mentioned is irrelevant. Jonestown had nothing to do with alternative religion or spirituality.

I raise caution about the idea that "I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it." For one thing, the majority does not shape opinion; not all things are decided by votes, and a minority takes the lead in shaping opinion. Idealists always must do that. The creative minority creates culture and society. And young people get older real fast, and become more conservative. We need people of all ages to create the world. All ages have plenty to learn, and we can all be young again and learn.

Quote:"The ideals of the Enlightenment were about liberating people and creating progress"

Then why is it younger generations are not liberated? (regarding job opportunity, affordable housing, massive student debt if we want to live our dream only to find lack of jobs in many departments, and saddled with the debt that boomer leaders gathered for the country to lump it on younger generations to fix while they go into retirement....sometimes we also have to fork over for that too as some have not prepared for their retirement. My mother included (who also loves her credit cards too much....guess who has to fix that on top of my student debt, fact i have to live with her to feed her so i cannot move out....not that i would be able to afford to anyway. Thanks boomer leaders for the lack of job opportunities and the lack of affordable housing!) So grateful for the progress!

I already said my piece about beer above in an earlier post. You should try different types. On the rare occurrence that i drink i choose fruity tasting ones. Ever hear of craft beer?

Boomer leaders were not the only ones who have stalled progress; we can thank GI Ronald Reagan for most of that. He started piling up the debt and shaping society to benefit only the 1%. Those who blame boomers for trickle-down economics don't know what they're talking about. We supported Reagan the least. Those who fail to blame trickle-down Reaganomics for our lack of progress don't know what they're talking about either.

But none of that has to do with the Enlightenment 250 years ago. That is just the movement people value the most in "Western Civilization." The libertarians like Galen just distort it, and use it to persuade us that we must look only to "The West" for our ideas and ideals, and to say that it supports their proposals to abolish government and laws and to allow the strong to abuse the weak in our society.

So they denounce movements and philosophies that help us to see beyond western individualism as denying "western civilization." But we need to see beyond individualism. Galen does not; and his misguided critique of me, and boomers, and philosophies like those of Alan Watts, stems from his unwillingness to see the obvious point that we are not separate individuals but, as you say, part of Nature, and part of the greater reality. That is the point I'm making; not that we don't need more progress today beyond what the older generations of today have achieved.

True but the majority have to eventually agree to an idea to make it a reality (like with the communist idea) It just is not going to happen at least in my lifetime. To push the idea on to people right now is unrealistic. When i say communist i do mean the boomer who said he was one. So keep that in mind.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#42
(07-29-2016, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 03:36 PM)taramarie Wrote: There have been many different ideals i have heard from 40s boomers. Always 40s. They seem to be the most idealistic. But i will give you one example. One who was born '49 from America was a communist. He was getting a hell of a lot of hate from others. So i pulled them off him, let him speak then i asked him how he thinks this will become reality when clearly the majority of people in his society are against communism. He had nothing. He just kept saying oh wouldn't it be nice to live in a society like that? Pipe dream is all that it is. I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it. If xers dismiss boomers for hypocrisy they evidently saw in their elders and us millies have been only getting this news 2nd hand from that era as we were not alive at the time how do those 40s idealistic boomers figure we will settle on one ideal and shape society around that ideal? I did not say all boomers were dying for their ideals. I was referring to the cultists at the time. Galen mentioned several in particular.
As I said, though, Marxists and communists are rare among our generation. Galen thinks every liberal is a communist; a common ploy by American right-wingers. What Galen mentioned is irrelevant. Jonestown had nothing to do with alternative religion or spirituality.

I raise caution about the idea that "I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it." For one thing, the majority does not shape opinion; not all things are decided by votes, and a minority takes the lead in shaping opinion. Idealists always must do that. The creative minority creates culture and society. And young people get older real fast, and become more conservative. We need people of all ages to create the world. All ages have plenty to learn, and we can all be young again and learn.

Quote:"The ideals of the Enlightenment were about liberating people and creating progress"

Then why is it younger generations are not liberated? (regarding job opportunity, affordable housing, massive student debt if we want to live our dream only to find lack of jobs in many departments, and saddled with the debt that boomer leaders gathered for the country to lump it on younger generations to fix while they go into retirement....sometimes we also have to fork over for that too as some have not prepared for their retirement. My mother included (who also loves her credit cards too much....guess who has to fix that on top of my student debt, fact i have to live with her to feed her so i cannot move out....not that i would be able to afford to anyway. Thanks boomer leaders for the lack of job opportunities and the lack of affordable housing!) So grateful for the progress!

I already said my piece about beer above in an earlier post. You should try different types. On the rare occurrence that i drink i choose fruity tasting ones. Ever hear of craft beer?

Boomer leaders were not the only ones who have stalled progress; we can thank GI Ronald Reagan for most of that. He started piling up the debt and shaping society to benefit only the 1%. Those who blame boomers for trickle-down economics don't know what they're talking about. We supported Reagan the least. Those who fail to blame trickle-down Reaganomics for our lack of progress don't know what they're talking about either.

But none of that has to do with the Enlightenment 250 years ago. That is just the movement people value the most in "Western Civilization." The libertarians like Galen just distort it, and use it to persuade us that we must look only to "The West" for our ideas and ideals, and to say that it supports their proposals to abolish government and laws and to allow the strong to abuse the weak in our society.

So they denounce movements and philosophies that help us to see beyond western individualism as denying "western civilization." But we need to see beyond individualism. Galen does not; and his misguided critique of me, and boomers, and philosophies like those of Alan Watts, stems from his unwillingness to see the obvious point that we are not separate individuals but, as you say, part of Nature, and part of the greater reality. That is the point I'm making; not that we don't need more progress today beyond what the older generations of today have achieved.
Not blaming it all on boomers unlike some xers here. It would be totally ignorant to blame it all on them. However, they certainly have not helped things along in many ways. Especially the economy. They have when it comes to rights for gays, women etc by an idea. I do not blame boomers for trickle down economics. We know Reagan started that and its effects.

As to the enlightenment, tell us in your words how you view it if it is being distorted. I am listening. I have read some of your thoughts but if you have anything further to add please do.

I am sure he is aware he is a part of nature. It would be silly to think otherwise. We would not be here otherwise. It can even be proved through science.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#43
I was just watching some videos and came across this one. The last example interests me. The protesters are all young people in the late 60s.



1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#44
(07-29-2016, 05:42 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 03:36 PM)taramarie Wrote: There have been many different ideals i have heard from 40s boomers. Always 40s. They seem to be the most idealistic. But i will give you one example. One who was born '49 from America was a communist. He was getting a hell of a lot of hate from others. So i pulled them off him, let him speak then i asked him how he thinks this will become reality when clearly the majority of people in his society are against communism. He had nothing. He just kept saying oh wouldn't it be nice to live in a society like that? Pipe dream is all that it is. I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it. If xers dismiss boomers for hypocrisy they evidently saw in their elders and us millies have been only getting this news 2nd hand from that era as we were not alive at the time how do those 40s idealistic boomers figure we will settle on one ideal and shape society around that ideal? I did not say all boomers were dying for their ideals. I was referring to the cultists at the time. Galen mentioned several in particular.
As I said, though, Marxists and communists are rare among our generation. Galen thinks every liberal is a communist; a common ploy by American right-wingers. What Galen mentioned is irrelevant. Jonestown had nothing to do with alternative religion or spirituality.

I raise caution about the idea that "I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it." For one thing, the majority does not shape opinion; not all things are decided by votes, and a minority takes the lead in shaping opinion. Idealists always must do that. The creative minority creates culture and society. And young people get older real fast, and become more conservative. We need people of all ages to create the world. All ages have plenty to learn, and we can all be young again and learn.

Quote:"The ideals of the Enlightenment were about liberating people and creating progress"

Then why is it younger generations are not liberated? (regarding job opportunity, affordable housing, massive student debt if we want to live our dream only to find lack of jobs in many departments, and saddled with the debt that boomer leaders gathered for the country to lump it on younger generations to fix while they go into retirement....sometimes we also have to fork over for that too as some have not prepared for their retirement. My mother included (who also loves her credit cards too much....guess who has to fix that on top of my student debt, fact i have to live with her to feed her so i cannot move out....not that i would be able to afford to anyway. Thanks boomer leaders for the lack of job opportunities and the lack of affordable housing!) So grateful for the progress!

I already said my piece about beer above in an earlier post. You should try different types. On the rare occurrence that i drink i choose fruity tasting ones. Ever hear of craft beer?

Boomer leaders were not the only ones who have stalled progress; we can thank GI Ronald Reagan for most of that. He started piling up the debt and shaping society to benefit only the 1%. Those who blame boomers for trickle-down economics don't know what they're talking about. We supported Reagan the least. Those who fail to blame trickle-down Reaganomics for our lack of progress don't know what they're talking about either.

But none of that has to do with the Enlightenment 250 years ago. That is just the movement people value the most in "Western Civilization." The libertarians like Galen just distort it, and use it to persuade us that we must look only to "The West" for our ideas and ideals, and to say that it supports their proposals to abolish government and laws and to allow the strong to abuse the weak in our society.

So they denounce movements and philosophies that help us to see beyond western individualism as denying "western civilization." But we need to see beyond individualism. Galen does not; and his misguided critique of me, and boomers, and philosophies like those of Alan Watts, stems from his unwillingness to see the obvious point that we are not separate individuals but, as you say, part of Nature, and part of the greater reality. That is the point I'm making; not that we don't need more progress today beyond what the older generations of today have achieved.

True but the majority have to eventually agree to an idea to make it a reality (like with the communist idea) It just is not going to happen at least in my lifetime. To push the idea on to people right now is unrealistic. When i say communist i do mean the boomer who said he was one. So keep that in mind.

Communism in general is not relevant today; it's just something conservatives throw at liberals.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#45
(07-29-2016, 05:52 PM)taramarie Wrote: Not blaming it all on boomers unlike some xers here. It would be totally ignorant to blame it all on them. However, they certainly have not helped things along in many ways. Especially the economy. They have when it comes to rights for gays, women etc by an idea. I do not blame boomers for trickle down economics. We know Reagan started that and its effects.
But trickle down economics is the reason for today's economy. So if you agree that boomers aren't blamed for trickle-down economics, they are not to blame for today's economy.

Quote:As to the enlightenment, tell us in your words how you view it if it is being distorted. I am listening. I have read some of your thoughts but if you have anything further to add please do.
Not much to add. The enlightenment pushed individual rights. Libertarians push the individual as all important to the point of blaming government for most problems because it restricts the individual. All government action they say violates the non-violence principle. But the enlightenment never said we don't need laws and government. It said we needed government by consent of the governed.

Quote:I am sure he is aware he is a part of nature. It would be silly to think otherwise. We would not be here otherwise. It can even be proved through science.

And yet, he does. He thinks we are individuals. The individual is the only important thing. That's the point; he ignores the obvious.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#46
(07-30-2016, 12:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:52 PM)taramarie Wrote: Not blaming it all on boomers unlike some xers here. It would be totally ignorant to blame it all on them. However, they certainly have not helped things along in many ways. Especially the economy. They have when it comes to rights for gays, women etc by an idea. I do not blame boomers for trickle down economics. We know Reagan started that and its effects.
But trickle down economics is the reason for today's economy. So if you agree that boomers aren't blamed for trickle-down economics, they are not to blame for today's economy.

Quote:As to the enlightenment, tell us in your words how you view it if it is being distorted. I am listening. I have read some of your thoughts but if you have anything further to add please do.
Not much to add. The enlightenment pushed individual rights. Libertarians push the individual as all important to the point of blaming government for most problems because it restricts the individual. All government action they say violates the non-violence principle. But the enlightenment never said we don't need laws and government. It said we needed government by consent of the governed.

Quote:I am sure he is aware he is a part of nature. It would be silly to think otherwise. We would not be here otherwise. It can even be proved through science.

And yet, he does. He thinks we are individuals. The individual is the only important thing. That's the point; he ignores the obvious.
I have heard Bill Clinton has run up a lot of debt too (I am a foreigner so not 100 per cent sure on that) What I am sure of is that a certain politician who is very much a boomer also supports trickle down. He is running for the presidency this very year. That tells me they certainly are not helping the situation and if anything are making things worse by supporting such policies.

Hmm well we cannot have lawless folk running around. Laws are there for a reason. As long as it is fair and within reason.

Well that is absolute nonsense from a scientific and evolutionary pov as well as the life around us that gave us life and supports it. If that is what he believes i have to firmly disagree with him. Wicca was spot on when it comes to its thoughts on nature as it supports the scientific stand on life too. We would not be here without the life around us which is partially supported by the sun and the moon and many thanks to the great bombardment (tips hat). Smdh.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#47
(07-29-2016, 02:51 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 06:52 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: I see no excuse for Xer cynicism. Economic and spiritual opportunity has been all around them, and reacting and throwing over the boomer experience was what was harmful to them, and not anything else. Xers such as Galen are resentful and jealous. There is no excuse for boomers either to turn away from the ideals of their youth and embracing conservative ideas. That is betrayal, pure and simple.

Seeing as Galen and no xer so far has come forward to agree with you and Galen certainly did not disagree with me I think i am on the mark with this. I will believe their pov ONLY from their mouths tvm.

Of course Eric the Obtuse thinks it was great since he was busy getting stoned and laid along with the rest of the hippies.  Galen is simply tired of having to deal with the consequences of the Boomers big party, known to everyone else as the late sixties and seventies.  Then their is their persistent incompetence.

Oddly enough my mother, who was not a hippie for which I am very grateful, has even admitted the Boomers screwed Xers over.  She has the self-absorbed characteristic so it only took about thirty years but still she is doing better than Eric the Obtuse.  In fact you might be curious what another Boomer has to say about Clinton.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.   -- Ludwig von Mises
Reply
#48
(07-30-2016, 12:50 AM)Galen Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 02:51 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 06:52 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: I see no excuse for Xer cynicism. Economic and spiritual opportunity has been all around them, and reacting and throwing over the boomer experience was what was harmful to them, and not anything else. Xers such as Galen are resentful and jealous. There is no excuse for boomers either to turn away from the ideals of their youth and embracing conservative ideas. That is betrayal, pure and simple.

Seeing as Galen and no xer so far has come forward to agree with you and Galen certainly did not disagree with me I think i am on the mark with this. I will believe their pov ONLY from their mouths tvm.

Of course Eric the Obtuse thinks it was great since he was busy getting stoned and laid along with the rest of the hippies.  Galen is simply tired of having to deal with the consequences of the Boomers big party, known to everyone else as the late sixties and seventies.  Then their is their persistent incompetence.

Oddly enough my mother, who was not a hippie for which I am very grateful, has even admitted the Boomers screwed Xers over.  She has the self-absorbed characteristic so it only took about thirty years but still she is doing better than Eric the Obtuse.  In fact you might be curious what another Boomer has to say about Clinton.

Very interesting read. Yes I know of another boomer who was one of the earliest members of the forum who also shakes his head at his own generation. It is rather intriguing. Those who cannot see their own generation's flaws do not learn from it and do not see the problem. They may not have started it but they certainly have fed it by the looks of things. Many forgot the message of peace.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#49
(07-30-2016, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:42 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 03:36 PM)taramarie Wrote: There have been many different ideals i have heard from 40s boomers. Always 40s. They seem to be the most idealistic. But i will give you one example. One who was born '49 from America was a communist. He was getting a hell of a lot of hate from others. So i pulled them off him, let him speak then i asked him how he thinks this will become reality when clearly the majority of people in his society are against communism. He had nothing. He just kept saying oh wouldn't it be nice to live in a society like that? Pipe dream is all that it is. I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it. If xers dismiss boomers for hypocrisy they evidently saw in their elders and us millies have been only getting this news 2nd hand from that era as we were not alive at the time how do those 40s idealistic boomers figure we will settle on one ideal and shape society around that ideal? I did not say all boomers were dying for their ideals. I was referring to the cultists at the time. Galen mentioned several in particular.
As I said, though, Marxists and communists are rare among our generation. Galen thinks every liberal is a communist; a common ploy by American right-wingers. What Galen mentioned is irrelevant. Jonestown had nothing to do with alternative religion or spirituality.

I raise caution about the idea that "I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it." For one thing, the majority does not shape opinion; not all things are decided by votes, and a minority takes the lead in shaping opinion. Idealists always must do that. The creative minority creates culture and society. And young people get older real fast, and become more conservative. We need people of all ages to create the world. All ages have plenty to learn, and we can all be young again and learn.

Quote:"The ideals of the Enlightenment were about liberating people and creating progress"

Then why is it younger generations are not liberated? (regarding job opportunity, affordable housing, massive student debt if we want to live our dream only to find lack of jobs in many departments, and saddled with the debt that boomer leaders gathered for the country to lump it on younger generations to fix while they go into retirement....sometimes we also have to fork over for that too as some have not prepared for their retirement. My mother included (who also loves her credit cards too much....guess who has to fix that on top of my student debt, fact i have to live with her to feed her so i cannot move out....not that i would be able to afford to anyway. Thanks boomer leaders for the lack of job opportunities and the lack of affordable housing!) So grateful for the progress!

I already said my piece about beer above in an earlier post. You should try different types. On the rare occurrence that i drink i choose fruity tasting ones. Ever hear of craft beer?

Boomer leaders were not the only ones who have stalled progress; we can thank GI Ronald Reagan for most of that. He started piling up the debt and shaping society to benefit only the 1%. Those who blame boomers for trickle-down economics don't know what they're talking about. We supported Reagan the least. Those who fail to blame trickle-down Reaganomics for our lack of progress don't know what they're talking about either.

But none of that has to do with the Enlightenment 250 years ago. That is just the movement people value the most in "Western Civilization." The libertarians like Galen just distort it, and use it to persuade us that we must look only to "The West" for our ideas and ideals, and to say that it supports their proposals to abolish government and laws and to allow the strong to abuse the weak in our society.

So they denounce movements and philosophies that help us to see beyond western individualism as denying "western civilization." But we need to see beyond individualism. Galen does not; and his misguided critique of me, and boomers, and philosophies like those of Alan Watts, stems from his unwillingness to see the obvious point that we are not separate individuals but, as you say, part of Nature, and part of the greater reality. That is the point I'm making; not that we don't need more progress today beyond what the older generations of today have achieved.

True but the majority have to eventually agree to an idea to make it a reality (like with the communist idea) It just is not going to happen at least in my lifetime. To push the idea on to people right now is unrealistic. When i say communist i do mean the boomer who said he was one. So keep that in mind.

Communism in general is not relevant today; it's just something conservatives throw at liberals.

You are not listening. A communist America is an ideal that an idealistic boomer wanted. My point is that some ideals are unrealistic. This has NOTHING to do with conservatives and what they say. I swear it seems i am speaking another language sometimes. I type it out clearly and plainly but you still read something entirely different. I KNOW it is not relevant today. But to some idealistic folk it isn't. This applies to other unrealistic and unsustainable ideals also. The point also is how other generations see the idealistic 60s as that will shape the future.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#50
(07-30-2016, 12:20 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: Not much to add. The enlightenment pushed individual rights. Libertarians push the individual as all important to the point of blaming government for most problems because it restricts the individual. All government action they say violates the non-violence principle. But the enlightenment never said we don't need laws and government. It said we needed government by consent of the governed.

You clearly have not read much of the works of the because if you had you would know that they believed in a limited government.  They also maintained that government should be as decentralized as possible.  Even Alexander Hamilton, which is the only founder the lefties like, would be appalled at the size an scope of the Federal Government now.

As for how a minarchist libertarian sees the role of government I give you this from Mises:

  • As the liberal sees it, the task of the state consists solely and exclusively in guaranteeing the protection of life, health, liberty, and private property against violent attacks. Everything that goes beyond this is an evil. A government that, instead of fulfilling its task, sought to go so far as actually to infringe on personal security of life and health, freedom, and property would, of course, be altogether bad.
Indeed Mises described you and the others like you:
  • In fact, however, the supporters of the welfare state are utterly anti-social and intolerant zealots. For their ideology tacitly implies that the government will exactly execute what they themselves deem right and beneficial. They entirely disregard the possibility that there could arise disagreement with regard to the question of what is right and expedient and what is not. They advocate enlightened despotism, but they are convinced that the enlightened despot will in every detail comply with their own opinion concerning the measures to be adopted. They favour planning, but what they have in mind is exclusively their own plan, not those of other people. They want to exterminate all opponents, that is, all those who disagree with them. They are utterly intolerant and are not prepared to allow any discussion. Every advocate of the welfare state and of planning is a potential dictator. What he plans is to deprive all other men of all their rights, and to establish his own and his friends' unrestricted omnipotence. He refuses to convince his fellow-citizens. He prefers to "liquidate" them. He scorns the "bourgeois" society that worships law and legal procedure. He himself worships violence and bloodshed.
As for what government is:
  • Government is beating into submission, imprisoning, and killing...The authority of man-made law is entirely due to weapons of the constables who enforce obedience to its provisions.
This last what the Boomers worship of government, from both the left and right, along with their need make the rest of us conform to their wish has brought to the US.  This is why we currently live in a functionally bankrupt police state.

As the kiwi has noted the US is really a collection of separate societies.  She referred to Americians as tribal which not a bad observation from someone who doesn't live here.  The only solution is to put the Federal government back into the bounds of the Constitution but that is an anathema to Eric the Obtuse and the modern liberal.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken

If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.   -- Ludwig von Mises
Reply
#51
(07-30-2016, 12:50 AM)Galen Wrote: Of course Eric the Obtuse thinks it was great since he was busy getting stoned and laid along with the rest of the hippies.  Galen is simply tired of having to deal with the consequences of the Boomers big party, known to everyone else as the late sixties and seventies.  Then their is their persistent incompetence.

I only wish I had been stoned and laid as often as you think I was Smile The consequences of the boomer party was that people were able to live in peace and love, and shared that love with others. They were less prone to engage in insult, as you do. I suppose you can prove empirically and statistically that boomers (1943-1960) are more incompetent than other generations? How would you go about proving this? And what possible purpose could it serve to prove this?

Quote:Oddly enough my mother, who was not a hippie for which I am very grateful, has even admitted the Boomers screwed Xers over.  She has the self-absorbed characteristic so it only took about thirty years but still she is doing better than Eric the Obtuse.  In fact you might be curious what another Boomer has to say about Clinton

David Stockman participated, to his regret, in the dismantling of competent government that had been able to pursue its true purpose up until then. He is no source of wisdom about whose generation might produce what kind of president, since he served one of the worst presidents ever. And the Party which shares your philosophy might as well be known as the party of bad presidents: McKinley, Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, Bush, and, if we are extremely unlucky, Trump. It's been an almost steady downhill slide of presidents who extol and practice your philosophy.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#52
(07-30-2016, 02:01 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:42 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 03:36 PM)taramarie Wrote: There have been many different ideals i have heard from 40s boomers. Always 40s. They seem to be the most idealistic. But i will give you one example. One who was born '49 from America was a communist. He was getting a hell of a lot of hate from others. So i pulled them off him, let him speak then i asked him how he thinks this will become reality when clearly the majority of people in his society are against communism. He had nothing. He just kept saying oh wouldn't it be nice to live in a society like that? Pipe dream is all that it is. I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it. If xers dismiss boomers for hypocrisy they evidently saw in their elders and us millies have been only getting this news 2nd hand from that era as we were not alive at the time how do those 40s idealistic boomers figure we will settle on one ideal and shape society around that ideal? I did not say all boomers were dying for their ideals. I was referring to the cultists at the time. Galen mentioned several in particular.
As I said, though, Marxists and communists are rare among our generation. Galen thinks every liberal is a communist; a common ploy by American right-wingers. What Galen mentioned is irrelevant. Jonestown had nothing to do with alternative religion or spirituality.

I raise caution about the idea that "I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it." For one thing, the majority does not shape opinion; not all things are decided by votes, and a minority takes the lead in shaping opinion. Idealists always must do that. The creative minority creates culture and society. And young people get older real fast, and become more conservative. We need people of all ages to create the world. All ages have plenty to learn, and we can all be young again and learn.

Quote:"The ideals of the Enlightenment were about liberating people and creating progress"

Then why is it younger generations are not liberated? (regarding job opportunity, affordable housing, massive student debt if we want to live our dream only to find lack of jobs in many departments, and saddled with the debt that boomer leaders gathered for the country to lump it on younger generations to fix while they go into retirement....sometimes we also have to fork over for that too as some have not prepared for their retirement. My mother included (who also loves her credit cards too much....guess who has to fix that on top of my student debt, fact i have to live with her to feed her so i cannot move out....not that i would be able to afford to anyway. Thanks boomer leaders for the lack of job opportunities and the lack of affordable housing!) So grateful for the progress!

I already said my piece about beer above in an earlier post. You should try different types. On the rare occurrence that i drink i choose fruity tasting ones. Ever hear of craft beer?

Boomer leaders were not the only ones who have stalled progress; we can thank GI Ronald Reagan for most of that. He started piling up the debt and shaping society to benefit only the 1%. Those who blame boomers for trickle-down economics don't know what they're talking about. We supported Reagan the least. Those who fail to blame trickle-down Reaganomics for our lack of progress don't know what they're talking about either.

But none of that has to do with the Enlightenment 250 years ago. That is just the movement people value the most in "Western Civilization." The libertarians like Galen just distort it, and use it to persuade us that we must look only to "The West" for our ideas and ideals, and to say that it supports their proposals to abolish government and laws and to allow the strong to abuse the weak in our society.

So they denounce movements and philosophies that help us to see beyond western individualism as denying "western civilization." But we need to see beyond individualism. Galen does not; and his misguided critique of me, and boomers, and philosophies like those of Alan Watts, stems from his unwillingness to see the obvious point that we are not separate individuals but, as you say, part of Nature, and part of the greater reality. That is the point I'm making; not that we don't need more progress today beyond what the older generations of today have achieved.

True but the majority have to eventually agree to an idea to make it a reality (like with the communist idea) It just is not going to happen at least in my lifetime. To push the idea on to people right now is unrealistic. When i say communist i do mean the boomer who said he was one. So keep that in mind.

Communism in general is not relevant today; it's just something conservatives throw at liberals.

You are not listening. A communist America is an ideal that an idealistic boomer wanted. My point is that some ideals are unrealistic. This has NOTHING to do with conservatives and what they say. I swear it seems i am speaking another language sometimes. I type it out clearly and plainly but you still read something entirely different. I KNOW it is not relevant today. But to some idealistic folk it isn't. This applies to other unrealistic and unsustainable ideals also. The point also is how other generations see the idealistic 60s as that will shape the future.

No Tara. Communism was NOT the ideal of the Boomer generation. Just because you knew one, does not mean anything. One person does not a generation make. This has everything to do with conservatives, because the only real "communists" are those in their minds. It is their slogan to put down liberals, and those are the only "communists" who exist. That is what Galen and other cynical Xers do. They call us "communists." If you need to learn about them, go ahead. But I am older and I know all about them.

The idealistic 60s will shape the future, or we will not have one. It is up to all generations to see that, and to help in that quest. Or to stand in the way and cause our destruction. It's that simple. It is the opponents of 60s idealism who are creating the unsustainable world. They are the ones putting Republicans into office to block all action to preserve and sustain our world-- now in danger from corporate greed and exploitation. They do not understand the need for peace and ecological awareness, which is what GI Generation member Alan Watts helped many Boomers to understand in the 60s. Of course ideals need to be practical; I already admitted that, so you don't need to keep prattling on about it to me.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#53
(07-30-2016, 05:45 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 02:01 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:42 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: As I said, though, Marxists and communists are rare among our generation. Galen thinks every liberal is a communist; a common ploy by American right-wingers. What Galen mentioned is irrelevant. Jonestown had nothing to do with alternative religion or spirituality.

I raise caution about the idea that "I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it." For one thing, the majority does not shape opinion; not all things are decided by votes, and a minority takes the lead in shaping opinion. Idealists always must do that. The creative minority creates culture and society. And young people get older real fast, and become more conservative. We need people of all ages to create the world. All ages have plenty to learn, and we can all be young again and learn.


Boomer leaders were not the only ones who have stalled progress; we can thank GI Ronald Reagan for most of that. He started piling up the debt and shaping society to benefit only the 1%. Those who blame boomers for trickle-down economics don't know what they're talking about. We supported Reagan the least. Those who fail to blame trickle-down Reaganomics for our lack of progress don't know what they're talking about either.

But none of that has to do with the Enlightenment 250 years ago. That is just the movement people value the most in "Western Civilization." The libertarians like Galen just distort it, and use it to persuade us that we must look only to "The West" for our ideas and ideals, and to say that it supports their proposals to abolish government and laws and to allow the strong to abuse the weak in our society.

So they denounce movements and philosophies that help us to see beyond western individualism as denying "western civilization." But we need to see beyond individualism. Galen does not; and his misguided critique of me, and boomers, and philosophies like those of Alan Watts, stems from his unwillingness to see the obvious point that we are not separate individuals but, as you say, part of Nature, and part of the greater reality. That is the point I'm making; not that we don't need more progress today beyond what the older generations of today have achieved.

True but the majority have to eventually agree to an idea to make it a reality (like with the communist idea) It just is not going to happen at least in my lifetime. To push the idea on to people right now is unrealistic. When i say communist i do mean the boomer who said he was one. So keep that in mind.

Communism in general is not relevant today; it's just something conservatives throw at liberals.

You are not listening. A communist America is an ideal that an idealistic boomer wanted. My point is that some ideals are unrealistic. This has NOTHING to do with conservatives and what they say. I swear it seems i am speaking another language sometimes. I type it out clearly and plainly but you still read something entirely different. I KNOW it is not relevant today. But to some idealistic folk it isn't. This applies to other unrealistic and unsustainable ideals also. The point also is how other generations see the idealistic 60s as that will shape the future.

No Tara. Communism was NOT the ideal of the Boomer generation. Just because you knew one, does not mean anything. One person does not a generation make. This has everything to do with conservatives, because the only real "communists" are those in their minds. It is their slogan to put down liberals, and those are the only "communists" who exist. That is what Galen and other cynical Xers do. They call us "communists." If you need to learn about them, go ahead. But I am older and I know all about them.

The idealistic 60s will shape the future, or we will not have one. It is up to all generations to see that, and to help in that quest. Or to stand in the way and cause our destruction. It's that simple. It is the opponents of 60s idealism who are creating the unsustainable world. They are the ones putting Republicans into office to block all action to preserve and sustain our world-- now in danger from corporate greed and exploitation. They do not understand the need for peace and ecological awareness, which is what GI Generation member Alan Watts helped many Boomers to understand in the 60s. Of course ideals need to be practical; I already admitted that, so you don't need to keep prattling on about it to me.

Eric you are not listening to me. Where did i say ALL boomers were commies? Like wtaf?! I said ONE boomer!!! ONE! But idealism OF ALL KINDS NEEDS TO BE REALISTIC AND HAVE PEOPLE AGREE WITH THAT IDEAL. YOUNGER PEOPLE AS WE ARE THE FUTURE. NOW IT IS IN CAPS DO ....YOU......UNDERSTAND??? Seriously, you are not really this slow are you?
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#54
(07-30-2016, 05:50 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 05:45 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 02:01 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:42 PM)taramarie Wrote: True but the majority have to eventually agree to an idea to make it a reality (like with the communist idea) It just is not going to happen at least in my lifetime. To push the idea on to people right now is unrealistic. When i say communist i do mean the boomer who said he was one. So keep that in mind.

Communism in general is not relevant today; it's just something conservatives throw at liberals.

You are not listening. A communist America is an ideal that an idealistic boomer wanted. My point is that some ideals are unrealistic. This has NOTHING to do with conservatives and what they say. I swear it seems i am speaking another language sometimes. I type it out clearly and plainly but you still read something entirely different. I KNOW it is not relevant today. But to some idealistic folk it isn't. This applies to other unrealistic and unsustainable ideals also. The point also is how other generations see the idealistic 60s as that will shape the future.

No Tara. Communism was NOT the ideal of the Boomer generation. Just because you knew one, does not mean anything. One person does not a generation make. This has everything to do with conservatives, because the only real "communists" are those in their minds. It is their slogan to put down liberals, and those are the only "communists" who exist. That is what Galen and other cynical Xers do. They call us "communists." If you need to learn about them, go ahead. But I am older and I know all about them.

The idealistic 60s will shape the future, or we will not have one. It is up to all generations to see that, and to help in that quest. Or to stand in the way and cause our destruction. It's that simple. It is the opponents of 60s idealism who are creating the unsustainable world. They are the ones putting Republicans into office to block all action to preserve and sustain our world-- now in danger from corporate greed and exploitation. They do not understand the need for peace and ecological awareness, which is what GI Generation member Alan Watts helped many Boomers to understand in the 60s. Of course ideals need to be practical; I already admitted that, so you don't need to keep prattling on about it to me.

Eric you are not listening to me. Where did i say ALL boomers were commies? Like wtaf?! I said ONE boomer!!! ONE! But idealism OF ALL KINDS NEEDS TO BE REALISTIC AND HAVE PEOPLE AGREE WITH THAT IDEAL. YOUNGER PEOPLE AS WE ARE THE FUTURE. NOW IT IS IN CAPS DO ....YOU......UNDERSTAND??? Seriously, you are not really this slow are you?

Of course ideals need to be practical; I already admitted that, so you don't need to keep prattling on about it to me. What about that do you not understand? Seriously, you are not really this slow are you?
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#55
(07-30-2016, 05:45 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 02:01 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:42 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-29-2016, 05:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: As I said, though, Marxists and communists are rare among our generation. Galen thinks every liberal is a communist; a common ploy by American right-wingers. What Galen mentioned is irrelevant. Jonestown had nothing to do with alternative religion or spirituality.

I raise caution about the idea that "I said to make this reality the majority have to be in favour of such a society existing as they have to live in it. If the majority are against it it will not happen. The same applies to other ideals and it is wise to take note of how the majority feels about other ideals that boomers stand for because it is the younger generations (xer and us millies) who will be shaping it." For one thing, the majority does not shape opinion; not all things are decided by votes, and a minority takes the lead in shaping opinion. Idealists always must do that. The creative minority creates culture and society. And young people get older real fast, and become more conservative. We need people of all ages to create the world. All ages have plenty to learn, and we can all be young again and learn.


Boomer leaders were not the only ones who have stalled progress; we can thank GI Ronald Reagan for most of that. He started piling up the debt and shaping society to benefit only the 1%. Those who blame boomers for trickle-down economics don't know what they're talking about. We supported Reagan the least. Those who fail to blame trickle-down Reaganomics for our lack of progress don't know what they're talking about either.

But none of that has to do with the Enlightenment 250 years ago. That is just the movement people value the most in "Western Civilization." The libertarians like Galen just distort it, and use it to persuade us that we must look only to "The West" for our ideas and ideals, and to say that it supports their proposals to abolish government and laws and to allow the strong to abuse the weak in our society.

So they denounce movements and philosophies that help us to see beyond western individualism as denying "western civilization." But we need to see beyond individualism. Galen does not; and his misguided critique of me, and boomers, and philosophies like those of Alan Watts, stems from his unwillingness to see the obvious point that we are not separate individuals but, as you say, part of Nature, and part of the greater reality. That is the point I'm making; not that we don't need more progress today beyond what the older generations of today have achieved.

True but the majority have to eventually agree to an idea to make it a reality (like with the communist idea) It just is not going to happen at least in my lifetime. To push the idea on to people right now is unrealistic. When i say communist i do mean the boomer who said he was one. So keep that in mind.

Communism in general is not relevant today; it's just something conservatives throw at liberals.

You are not listening. A communist America is an ideal that an idealistic boomer wanted. My point is that some ideals are unrealistic. This has NOTHING to do with conservatives and what they say. I swear it seems i am speaking another language sometimes. I type it out clearly and plainly but you still read something entirely different. I KNOW it is not relevant today. But to some idealistic folk it isn't. This applies to other unrealistic and unsustainable ideals also. The point also is how other generations see the idealistic 60s as that will shape the future.

No Tara. Communism was NOT the ideal of the Boomer generation. Just because you knew one, does not mean anything. One person does not a generation make. This has everything to do with conservatives, because the only real "communists" are those in their minds. It is their slogan to put down liberals, and those are the only "communists" who exist. That is what Galen and other cynical Xers do. They call us "communists." If you need to learn about them, go ahead. But I am older and I know all about them.

The idealistic 60s will shape the future, or we will not have one. It is up to all generations to see that, and to help in that quest. Or to stand in the way and cause our destruction. It's that simple. It is the opponents of 60s idealism who are creating the unsustainable world. They are the ones putting Republicans into office to block all action to preserve and sustain our world-- now in danger from corporate greed and exploitation. They do not understand the need for peace and ecological awareness, which is what GI Generation member Alan Watts helped many Boomers to understand in the 60s. Of course ideals need to be practical; I already admitted that, so you don't need to keep prattling on about it to me.

This has nothing to do with conservatives. That ONE BOOMER ......ONE AND I REPEAT ONE boomer said himself he was a communist. NOTHING TO DO WITH CONSERVATIVES. That is merely American tribal hostility talking on your part. YOU are inserting conservatives into this when this particular incident had nothing to do with it. He said he was one himself. Stick to what i am saying please. Tribalism in America is tiresome as it causes people to only hear what they want to frigging hear. Btw you may know all about them but i have an outside perspective that is not influenced by one side or the other. I can see with a clear mind and see flaws and potential from both sides. Something i wonder biased folk may not see. SOME are so warped they assume if you are not with them like a lost puppy you are a racist or a communist/socialist who is bent on destroying the economy and taking all the guns away. What a clown fest over there. I do not favour labels. It closes down all conversation. Your country is screwed if it keeps this up and screwed if it votes either candidate in. This election I can easily predict will be a disaster and will tip the 4T into the deep end. You can already tell the worst part is building up. Anyway, off to bed for the kiwi. Please read this properly before commenting. Rather embarrassing having to repeat myself to someone your age.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#56
(07-30-2016, 06:03 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 05:50 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 05:45 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 02:01 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 12:15 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Communism in general is not relevant today; it's just something conservatives throw at liberals.

You are not listening. A communist America is an ideal that an idealistic boomer wanted. My point is that some ideals are unrealistic. This has NOTHING to do with conservatives and what they say. I swear it seems i am speaking another language sometimes. I type it out clearly and plainly but you still read something entirely different. I KNOW it is not relevant today. But to some idealistic folk it isn't. This applies to other unrealistic and unsustainable ideals also. The point also is how other generations see the idealistic 60s as that will shape the future.

No Tara. Communism was NOT the ideal of the Boomer generation. Just because you knew one, does not mean anything. One person does not a generation make. This has everything to do with conservatives, because the only real "communists" are those in their minds. It is their slogan to put down liberals, and those are the only "communists" who exist. That is what Galen and other cynical Xers do. They call us "communists." If you need to learn about them, go ahead. But I am older and I know all about them.

The idealistic 60s will shape the future, or we will not have one. It is up to all generations to see that, and to help in that quest. Or to stand in the way and cause our destruction. It's that simple. It is the opponents of 60s idealism who are creating the unsustainable world. They are the ones putting Republicans into office to block all action to preserve and sustain our world-- now in danger from corporate greed and exploitation. They do not understand the need for peace and ecological awareness, which is what GI Generation member Alan Watts helped many Boomers to understand in the 60s. Of course ideals need to be practical; I already admitted that, so you don't need to keep prattling on about it to me.

Eric you are not listening to me. Where did i say ALL boomers were commies? Like wtaf?! I said ONE boomer!!! ONE! But idealism OF ALL KINDS NEEDS TO BE REALISTIC AND HAVE PEOPLE AGREE WITH THAT IDEAL. YOUNGER PEOPLE AS WE ARE THE FUTURE. NOW IT IS IN CAPS DO ....YOU......UNDERSTAND??? Seriously, you are not really this slow are you?

Of course ideals need to be practical; I already admitted that, so you don't need to keep prattling on about it to me. What about that do you not understand? Seriously, you are not really this slow are you?

I rest my case...
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#57
Corny song, I always thought. But it makes the point. We are not separate from our world.





John Oliver recently made a parody of this, with celebrity singers demanding that candidates stop using their songs. Funny.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#58
I'll take drug-fueled hippie orgies over the Social-Darwinist hellscape people like Galen, want. And I am a person who generally disapproves of drug-fueled orgies. Rolleyes 

I am so sick of the childish whining of all the right-wing Xers about how the hippies ruined their childhoods who then turn around and accuse us Millennials of being childish whiners.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#59
Taramarie is not the only one who goes on about "younger people are the future." I have as much hopes for millennials as she does. As our bloated friend with the bloated ego who now wants to rule the world says, "believe me!" However, they are not making the future now, because in the USA they don't vote in midterm elections when legislatures are gerrymandered. We are all stuck with the results: the boomers and silents and Xers are making the future right now. And guess what, when the "younger people" grow up, they will also have younger people shouting at THEM, "we are the future; your ideals have to be agreeable to US, because WE are the future!" No, it takes all generations alive at any one time to make a future. And this "future" might as well be the present, it comes upon us so quickly!
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#60
(07-30-2016, 02:30 AM)Galen Wrote:
(07-30-2016, 12:20 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: Not much to add. The enlightenment pushed individual rights. Libertarians push the individual as all important to the point of blaming government for most problems because it restricts the individual. All government action they say violates the non-violence principle. But the enlightenment never said we don't need laws and government. It said we needed government by consent of the governed.

You clearly have not read much of the works of the because if you had you would know that they believed in a limited government.  They also maintained that government should be as decentralized as possible.  Even Alexander Hamilton, which is the only founder the lefties like, would be appalled at the size an scope of the Federal Government now.
I'm not the biggest fan of centralization, being a green, but in some matters it's necessary.

Quote:As for how a minarchist libertarian sees the role of government I give you this from Mises:


As the liberal sees it, the task of the state consists solely and exclusively in guaranteeing the protection of life, health, liberty, and private property against violent attacks. Everything that goes beyond this is an evil. A government that, instead of fulfilling its task, sought to go so far as actually to infringe on personal security of life and health, freedom, and property would, of course, be altogether bad.
Oh gee, what would I do without you having "given" Meece some Mises!

"Private property" today is a government program enforced by violence. Therefore "violent attacks" includes activities by business and corporations that harm the environment, workers, consumers or the economy in general. Concentration of wealth is the biggest threat to freedom, because wealth is power backed by the state. Therefore, the state must do all that it can to mitigate the effects of concentrated wealth and to redistribute that power. Most wealth is expropriated and not earned.

Quote:Indeed Mises described you and the others like you:

In fact, however, the supporters of the welfare state are utterly anti-social and intolerant zealots. For their ideology tacitly implies that the government will exactly execute what they themselves deem right and beneficial. They entirely disregard the possibility that there could arise disagreement with regard to the question of what is right and expedient and what is not. They advocate enlightened despotism, but they are convinced that the enlightened despot will in every detail comply with their own opinion concerning the measures to be adopted. They favour planning, but what they have in mind is exclusively their own plan, not those of other people. They want to exterminate all opponents, that is, all those who disagree with them. They are utterly intolerant and are not prepared to allow any discussion. Every advocate of the welfare state and of planning is a potential dictator. What he plans is to deprive all other men of all their rights, and to establish his own and his friends' unrestricted omnipotence. He refuses to convince his fellow-citizens. He prefers to "liquidate" them. He scorns the "bourgeois" society that worships law and legal procedure. He himself worships violence and bloodshed.

It's getting to the point that the opposition to progress in this society is so "obtuse," so intractible, that it may come to this. Obviously the same words apply to zealots among libertarians and conservatives as well. It would be good if we could work together. It takes a bit more than politics; it takes recognizing that we are the stars. Bringing it back to topic! The moral and spiritual awareness of our interdependence needs to become the ground of our political life. Then respect for those with whom we disagree becomes more natural. At least Democrats today have voiced some recognition of this moral reality and imperative at their convention, while the Republicans are consumed by hero worship.

Quote:As for what government is:

Government is beating into submission, imprisoning, and killing...The authority of man-made law is entirely due to weapons of the constables who enforce obedience to its provisions.

Ideally though, it can be based on consensus, and it needs this to actually work. Obedience to the laws is a value in a civilized society that mitigates the need for state violence.

Quote:This last what the Boomers worship of government, from both the left and right, along with their need make the rest of us conform to their wish has brought to the US.  This is why we currently live in a functionally bankrupt police state.
Where we have arrived is oligarchy, developed and maintained by those of all generations who adhere to your laissez-faire philosophy.

Quote:As the kiwi has noted the US is really a collection of separate societies.  She referred to Americans as tribal which not a bad observation from someone who doesn't live here.  The only solution is to put the Federal government back into the bounds of the Constitution but that is an anathema to Eric the Obtuse and the modern liberal.

Maybe we'll need to split up. Right now we have 40%+ of the voting population who are so wedded to the "red" team that they will vote for anyone, no matter how unfit, as long as (s)he wears the Republican label. The purpose of the "red tribe" is to preserve the power of the wealthy at all costs, and to keep us within the veil of traditional authority. It cannot continue to rule us or have any power if we are to live sustainably in our country and our world. If it can't be defeated, separation will be needed so at least half of us can move forward, instead of having their backward ways imposed on the rest of us. Republicans today are not even the party of Nixon; let alone the party of Eisenhower, or TR, or Lincoln. They are the party of Bush and Trump, and as such the only use for them is to drive them out of power and out of business, so that a true opposition party can replace it; or preferably, a parliamentary, multi-party system with ranked-choice voting where all can be represented.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  It's in the "stars" (predicting by astrology and other means) Eric the Green 236 75,340 05-23-2019, 10:58 PM
Last Post: taramarie

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)