![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no_apologiesThere's this Holier Than Thou ignoramus of a statist on Twitter I had debated with, earlier today. It was overall unproductive, and it didn't really go anywhere. I'm reasonably annoyed at him now, and I just need to vent for a little while. He apparently doesn't know how to understand the definitions of words. He is morally bankrupt as well. His logic is flawed due to Authority Support Syndrome (ASS).
Authority by definition is the power or right give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.
Obedience isn't a virtue! The moment you sacrifice your own free will and conscience over to follow someone's orders without question, you cease to be a real human being. You become a little cog within the insane machine that is group-think. Your mind is not really your own if you choose to repeat what the fear-monger propagandists say on Tell-Lie-Vision, without question. And HINT, HINT at the first four letters in the word soldier, because anyone who joins the USA Inc. military sells their soul to fight the "government's" and bankster's bloody wars.
How many senseless and psychotic crusades must happen, with the piss poor excuse "fighting for our freedoms"?
I remember this meme I found in which there's a guy with a State religion's fabric idol (American flag) over his face with the talk bubble that reads, "I wish I could quit you!" at this other guy that has his back turned that has the label "Perpetual War" over where his face would be...
I'll list some of the most idiotic things this Keynesian dolt posted to me. Before I do, I'll start be quoting out in a brief explanation to the non-aggression principle (N.A.P). "Never be the first one to use force. More peaceful options exist, and good ideas don't have to be voluntary. If we make good examples of life without statism by only engaging others in an agreeable manner, then more people will try voluntaryism. Defense is the only acceptable use of force."
He arrogantly replied, "Guys everyone in a stateless society would follow this 'law'."
In USSA today, most of the 20,000 or so laws are unjust and wrong. What they basically are the opinions and judgments with the threat of violence attached to them. Not everyone knows what all the laws even are, and the legalese words in them are quite complex!
Keynesian Dolt: "Morality is not a governing force."
Basically, he stated that ethics don't matter. LOL, sure. People can't cooperate, organize, and be polite to each other without being under the oppressive thumb of someone who's allowed to wield control over them? Puh-lease!
I don't need a coproach, legislator, president, congressman, or even a propagandist to tell me how to act around my friends and family. I already know how to act. I already know it's wrong to steal something that's not mine. I already know it's wrong to assault or kill someone. That's called self-governance!
But this guy needs these political scribbles and bizarre rituals because of his indoctrinated beliefs that everyone's too stupid and would be a bunch of savages without these holy things he cherishes. He needs aggressive assurance that no one is going to violate him.
Oh, and did I mention that he wants to pursue a career as a legislator? I already warned him about the lobbyists. Because they SUCK. They are parasites who bribe congress to let them write down rules that benefit them more than anyone else! Look at Common Core. Look at who David Coleman, head of the College Board, is.
Me: "Can you delegate a right you never had to anybody else?"
Keynesian Dolt: "Of course. That's what laws do. Like it or not, it's that simple."
Oh really? How? If you're not allowed to rob your neighbor, then how could it be that you give the IRS thugs and coproaches to rob your neighbor? Is this statist able to be present during any legislation? Is he able to be there in a meeting behind closed doors and agree by saying, "Yeah, I want my neighbor's money"?
I wasn't sure if he was implying that really bogus statement, "we are the government", so I asked him that, along with asking if he was a coproach, judge, legislator, or congress "representative". That's when he told me that he's studying constitutional law so he could be a legislator. He said he had no power yet, and he's luckily able to tell the difference between authority figures and everybody else.
Keynesian Dolt: "All ideas require force."
Uhhh, no they don't! Example: Someone decides to organize a birthday party for a friend of his. Does he approach others and say, "You're going to help me set up a party for my friend. If you don't, I'll kick your ass"? Definitely not if he grew up within a peaceful household.
Peace starts at home! If there's a child who doesn't respect or behave well around his parents, or if he or she has abusive parents - then how would you think he or she would behave around others?
Here's a bigger example: A person or a group of people decide to run a business. Do they coerce consumers to buy their products, or do they get together and plan on advertising and how to attract attention from their potential customers?
Then, some minutes before I started this entry, he said his denials over the basics of economics. Economics involves studies of human interaction and decision making. The market IS a means of voluntary human interaction, after all. He disagreed with the definition and told me to read up on this Yale University economist known as Robert J. Shiller, about behavioral economics. Mmmmkay... I'm skeptical, but I will read it eventually. I have other stuff to do. When I have much less to do - I will look at Shiller's website. (His last name is amusing to me. Take away the E and the R. *chuckle*)
I'm planning on doing an entry about why ethics matter. Why it requires both ethics and logic for humans to be able to be civil with each other. That idiot on Twitter has given me the inspiration to do that. This will be something for everyone to read, including arrogant boneheads who don't beLIEve ethics would relevant to anything.
I'll also explain, in two ways, how statism doesn't make sense to me.
Authority by definition is the power or right give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.
Obedience isn't a virtue! The moment you sacrifice your own free will and conscience over to follow someone's orders without question, you cease to be a real human being. You become a little cog within the insane machine that is group-think. Your mind is not really your own if you choose to repeat what the fear-monger propagandists say on Tell-Lie-Vision, without question. And HINT, HINT at the first four letters in the word soldier, because anyone who joins the USA Inc. military sells their soul to fight the "government's" and bankster's bloody wars.
How many senseless and psychotic crusades must happen, with the piss poor excuse "fighting for our freedoms"?
I remember this meme I found in which there's a guy with a State religion's fabric idol (American flag) over his face with the talk bubble that reads, "I wish I could quit you!" at this other guy that has his back turned that has the label "Perpetual War" over where his face would be...
I'll list some of the most idiotic things this Keynesian dolt posted to me. Before I do, I'll start be quoting out in a brief explanation to the non-aggression principle (N.A.P). "Never be the first one to use force. More peaceful options exist, and good ideas don't have to be voluntary. If we make good examples of life without statism by only engaging others in an agreeable manner, then more people will try voluntaryism. Defense is the only acceptable use of force."
He arrogantly replied, "Guys everyone in a stateless society would follow this 'law'."
In USSA today, most of the 20,000 or so laws are unjust and wrong. What they basically are the opinions and judgments with the threat of violence attached to them. Not everyone knows what all the laws even are, and the legalese words in them are quite complex!
Keynesian Dolt: "Morality is not a governing force."
Basically, he stated that ethics don't matter. LOL, sure. People can't cooperate, organize, and be polite to each other without being under the oppressive thumb of someone who's allowed to wield control over them? Puh-lease!
I don't need a coproach, legislator, president, congressman, or even a propagandist to tell me how to act around my friends and family. I already know how to act. I already know it's wrong to steal something that's not mine. I already know it's wrong to assault or kill someone. That's called self-governance!
But this guy needs these political scribbles and bizarre rituals because of his indoctrinated beliefs that everyone's too stupid and would be a bunch of savages without these holy things he cherishes. He needs aggressive assurance that no one is going to violate him.
Oh, and did I mention that he wants to pursue a career as a legislator? I already warned him about the lobbyists. Because they SUCK. They are parasites who bribe congress to let them write down rules that benefit them more than anyone else! Look at Common Core. Look at who David Coleman, head of the College Board, is.
Me: "Can you delegate a right you never had to anybody else?"
Keynesian Dolt: "Of course. That's what laws do. Like it or not, it's that simple."
Oh really? How? If you're not allowed to rob your neighbor, then how could it be that you give the IRS thugs and coproaches to rob your neighbor? Is this statist able to be present during any legislation? Is he able to be there in a meeting behind closed doors and agree by saying, "Yeah, I want my neighbor's money"?
I wasn't sure if he was implying that really bogus statement, "we are the government", so I asked him that, along with asking if he was a coproach, judge, legislator, or congress "representative". That's when he told me that he's studying constitutional law so he could be a legislator. He said he had no power yet, and he's luckily able to tell the difference between authority figures and everybody else.
Keynesian Dolt: "All ideas require force."
Uhhh, no they don't! Example: Someone decides to organize a birthday party for a friend of his. Does he approach others and say, "You're going to help me set up a party for my friend. If you don't, I'll kick your ass"? Definitely not if he grew up within a peaceful household.
Peace starts at home! If there's a child who doesn't respect or behave well around his parents, or if he or she has abusive parents - then how would you think he or she would behave around others?
Here's a bigger example: A person or a group of people decide to run a business. Do they coerce consumers to buy their products, or do they get together and plan on advertising and how to attract attention from their potential customers?
Then, some minutes before I started this entry, he said his denials over the basics of economics. Economics involves studies of human interaction and decision making. The market IS a means of voluntary human interaction, after all. He disagreed with the definition and told me to read up on this Yale University economist known as Robert J. Shiller, about behavioral economics. Mmmmkay... I'm skeptical, but I will read it eventually. I have other stuff to do. When I have much less to do - I will look at Shiller's website. (His last name is amusing to me. Take away the E and the R. *chuckle*)
I'm planning on doing an entry about why ethics matter. Why it requires both ethics and logic for humans to be able to be civil with each other. That idiot on Twitter has given me the inspiration to do that. This will be something for everyone to read, including arrogant boneheads who don't beLIEve ethics would relevant to anything.
I'll also explain, in two ways, how statism doesn't make sense to me.
