TakeYouToTasker

It’s the Bernie people (literally people who worked for his campaign) who are leading the looting and rioting. They said (again, literally said) that if Bernie didn’t win the Democratic nomination that they would start burning down major cities. What America is experiencing right now, (one more time, literally) is a Communist revolution. I’m not so sure that it would have been a good idea to give these people power.

One more time for the class: Public polls are not designed to gauge popular public sentiment (Internal polling is, but the public never gets to see those numbers). Public polls are PsyOps used to drive public sentiment and behavior.

Thought experiment: Regarding underperforming schools, the refrain from the left is that they are underfunded, and need more money in order to improve performance. The same individuals, when confronted with substandard policing, insist that police forces be defunded in order to improve performance. How are these two positions congruent?

In addition to these victims of racist violence who tragically lost their lives in one of the largest black eyes in US history, do you know who else died? Every single adult alive in 1921 in the entire world, and the overwhelming majority of their children. There have been at least eight identified generations of individuals living since that time. The year 1921 is nearer to the Civil War on a timeline than it is to today. James Monroe was the President in a year closer to 1921 than we are today. The President of the United States in 1921 was Warren G. Harding, who was born in 1865, the same year the Civil War ended. That’s how far removed America is from any events that happened 1921.

“White people” or just that dope? Because I only saw that dope, not an entire race of people. Or is attributing something negative to people as a general characteristic of their level of melanin OK now? I can’t keep up.

Are you familiar with the name Duncan Lemp?

So you’re looking for your personal biases to confirm... your personal biases? Seems circular and uninquisitive to me.

LOL, no. I am not Eric July, though I do speak with him reasonably frequently. Eric is a prominent and powerful advocate for libertarian philosophy

I don’t propose that aggression can be stopped, I simply think we should stop institutionalizing it and giving political activists a gun to point at everyone else In order to steal from them and force them to live a certain way. I also don’t equate violence with aggression. Using violence to stop someone from aggressing you is perfectly moral. Gladly. I’ll tag you shortly.

I don’t disagree with this. I simply recognize that America is far to large, and far too ideologically diverse to remain a single nation. It is unjust as it cannot be maintained without the application of force.

You’re clearly entitled to that. I’m sure someone else will, however. I believe aggression to be immoral.

Philisophically I’m an AnCap, but don’t believe that to be practical in application. Functionally I’m a minarchist, as some legal structure is needed for the enforcement of contracts.

The United States is far too large, and has large political groups whose philosophies are completely incompatible with each other. This inevitably leads to political violence as national politics becomes a constant struggle over the gun that is government, such that one group can point it at the other, and force them to live a specific way which violates the principals of that group. This doesn’t even begin to speak to ideologies which are intentionally marginalized by the Two Party system. Why should it be this way? It doesn’t make any sense that California should either dictate to, or be dictated to by, the rest of the nation. Let them go. And if we are being consistent, let anyone else who wants to go, go as well. Government is only just with the consent of the governed, and that’s not how America operates any more. One could easily argue, if one agrees with Greg on the state of corruption and malfeasance entrenched in our government, that it actively does none of the things it was chartered to do, and instead simply now exists to feather the nests of the politically connected. Power corrupts, and there is nothing more powerful than the US government. What sort of individuals are drawn to that sort of power? Not peaceful people who simply wish to leave others alone; but rather men and women who would seek to harness that monopoly on violence in order to bend others to their own preferences, and have the will to do so at massive costs of human lives. There were no gentle hearted plantation overseers. Elected office attracts sociopaths. That’s who leads us. What I am proposing doesn’t leave you without government, if government is what you desire, but rather allows you to have the government you want without imposing it on others who reject your philosophy. As for disagreeing with my assessment of America as a police state, that’s not my opinion, but rather the legal dictate of the Supreme Court.

You’re aware that I offered multiple solutions, all of which could be implemented in concert; not just private security. This included abolishing all gun laws, and a return to a sherrif and deputy system. The state is violence, and America is a police state, and has been since SCOTUS ruled that the police have no legal duty to defend your rights, your property, or your life; but rather are agents of the state whose sole responsibility is to enforce the law, regardless of the justness of that law, or if it violates the rights of its citizens. There is no “yeah but” which makes this acceptable. As such I advocate for the abolition of the state as well. The Constitution was put in place as a cage on the growth of government. It has proved absolutely useless towards that purpose. Its long past time to be done with it. Abolish it all, and allow localism to dictate new alliances and structures of multiple governments for those who want them, and no governments at all for those who don’t.

No it wouldn’t. For lots of reasons. First of which is that the police are far from the only thing I’d see abolished.

The Autonomous Zone in Seattle is hilarious. Three days in and they’re already starving, and are being brutalized by a self-ordained warlord. Three. Days.

I’m at the point that I’m actually embarrassed for you. You’re the reason that the “women are like children” stereotype exists.

Localism. Sheriffs and deputies. Private security. Abolition of all gun laws. Neighborhood defense. Not the thread for this though.

What a bizarre choice of... insult? Stop being pouty, and accept responsibility for poorly communicating your ideas. Again, I am actually in favor of abolishing police. I’m happy to make that argument in another thread. I was actually pleased to hear the term “defunded” used, because I know what the word “defunded” means, and I thought, for a fleeting moment, that the extreme left and principled libertarians might have found a singular common purpose.

Ah, but you’ve made the positive assertion here. It falls to you to prove the argument you are making, not to others to accept your claims as verboten, and then to disprove them. That’s the argument of a child. As for volcabulary, it’s hilarious how little responsibility you’re willing to accept for something as insignificant as not knowing that “stupidest” isn’t actually a word. Ironically it’s just about the most Trump-like trait imaginable. You look at Trump, and you hear him say something that’s obviously a lie, but it’s such a stupid lie that you can’t actually figure out why he’d say it. It can’t possibly help him in any way because everyone knows it’s a lie. It can only do him harm if he tells it, but he does it anyway, and then lies about the lie. That’s exactly how you behave in regards to personal responsibility. That you can’t actually see this is my favorite thing about conversing with you. You and the President are two peas in a pod intellectually.

When you say “stupidest” (Which isn’t a word by the way. The term you’re looking for is “most stupid“. When you’re trying to insult someone’s intelligence, you may wish to consider using real words to do so.) I can only assume you mean something else entirely, given your standard insistence that language is like water, and nothing really means anything anyway. You’re fun to play with.

She’s not smart enough to know this, nor honest enough to admit it if she did. And somehow it’s your fault. Its basically the most cartoonish, cruel, and harmful stereotype of a woman sprung to life on my keyboard.

Self described is spelled with a single “L”. As for blocking me, I don’t think you have the mental capacity to understand most of the arguments I make; so in essence you doing so is akin to a fish throwing away it’s roller skates.

No. I think I‘d rather continue to point out childish antics. Act like a grownup or be treated like a child.