news

It’s actually a big part of the problem.

I am an anarchist, libertarian, free markeeter, free associationist, mutualist, or whatever combination of those terms;

And while economically I may in some case by a capitalist in the sense that I employ capital, just as I also sometimes employ land, labor, time, etc., as factors of production, it’s an anti-concept which intentionally causes a lot of unnecessary confusion to say that I am, politically, a capitalist.

As it always has been everywhere in the world.

But those of us who stay here working to get rid of coercive monopoly government LOVE America. That’s why we are are here and why we are trying to make it a better place.

Nothing against those who like other countries better, and I like variety myself.

America has many advantages and many disadvantages.

The American Revolution was a good start, but we can do even better, moving beyond its concepts much further in the direction of liberty.

For this to happen, we have to destroy our enemy, the regime.

Some – but not all – of us think the best way to do so is by infiltrating and taking over the regime.

Others think this is counter-productive.

Some think that the best way to infiltrate the regime is through infiltrating the major parties, while others prefer to have our own.

Having our own party may have the potential to do some good here and there – often, in ways that can’t be readily attributed or measured – but the electoral system in America is set up in a way which makes third party large scale success of ANY ideology extremely difficult and unlikely.

To the extent that our own party is a good idea, we have to be vigilant that it not become another vehicle to destroy our liberty through the regime, and that it not be taken over as a propaganda organ for reich wing enemies of liberty.

Of course, some people think this has already happened, and it probably has to some extent, so then the question becomes whether it is worthwhile or possible to take the party back from them.

I believe it still might be, and will make a good faith effort at trying to do so before abandoning that strategy completely, but I always have believed in employing a variety of tactics simultaneously; the party is just one among many.

Well, we should certainly abolish the corporate fascist USSA, inc., regime.

That would be a good start.

Of course the real answer is to abolish all the world’s regimes. Every single one.

The only ultimate solution is worldwide anarchist evolution.

But as for the country itself – I rather like it. It’s a wonderful cultural melting pot and has some spectacular scenery in places. The economy is pretty good compared to most places. The people, when not being deluded by government-worship and corporate control tactics, are generally more freedom-oriented than most.

None of this is true with the parasitic regime-state many people are referring to when they say “the United States of America”.

Why should we go through the hassle of moving? Some people don’t find it a hassle and already have, but where to? Every piece of the earth is claimed by one regime or another, and all these regimes suck big hairy whale testicles.

Moving to a deserted island – which are still claimed as turf by various regime gangs – is an even much bigger hassle than moving somewhere established.

Of course, some people find the benefits of moving to be greater than the hassle, and perform a tradeoff calculation to find a regime less personally onerous for them, on the whole, than the USSA. But no choice is perfect, and the decision to move or not is an individual one.

Others may choose to stay and fight, hoping to win the battle for freedom in this country.

Or, they may be unable to move because of economic, family, or other concerns, and choose to stay for that reason.

Then of course there will soon be the little matter of exit visas. They already exist for traveling to most countries, so we are not even allowed to leave without the regime’s permission, just like in the good old USSR. This will be extended to the remaining few nations in the next year or two.

Incidentally, the USSA fascist regime might still claim you as a subject and vassal even if you do move outside its borders. Nice, huh?

Then Eric brings up Alaska, which of course, is still under the boot of American occupation.

If a free state (state-free) project in Alaska were to make any sense, several things would have to be in place.

1. A realistic plan to secede from the United States, either by acquiring our own weapons of mass destruction and forcing the USSA to go away fearing mutual assured destruction, or by playing a balance of powers game whereby, say, Russian and the USSA would each nuke the other if either were to mess with the world secret banking and free trade haven that an independent Alaska could become. Of course, a well armed citizenry and plenty of wilderness would help keep away invaders from the USSA and other foreign regimes.

2. A way to keep the Alaskan state from becoming just another USSA. Limiting government does not work. This is what the American experiment has so far proven, in spades. A free and independent Alaska would only do better by going beyond the failed American Revolution forward to a more radical anarchist revolution.

3. A way to convince enough Alaskans that this is a good thing. You have little chance if any of convincing enough people to move there to implement it, and even if you did, they would be resented as invaders and meddlers. You would have to work on convincing enough Alaskans to agree with you.

4. Personal spiritual growth among those leading the Alaska FSP. At present the ones I know are not secessionist, not anarchist, and not very convincing.

If this were to change, I would not object to being on board and perhaps helping out with the Russian side of things.

Canada would also be an interesting factor in this equation, but that is another story.

With any luck and a little local/global warming, it could conceivably work, but the plan needs to be developed much better.

Eric’s statements about a lot of things are retarded.

for instance he calls a lot of NSGOPers who are, well, NOT, libertarian. And even a few warmonger Democraps. (Why not Her Hillaryness? Could Eric be starting Libertarians for Hillary next, as he started Libertarians for Bush and Libertarians for Lieberman?)

Also, he claims it is “libertarian” to support the regime’s war of agression and “anti-libertarian” to oppose it. As we all know, nothing could be further from the truth.

Big, burly bad-ass that he is, as you and other can now tell, he was all talk when he said he would gladly re-enlist if only he was not too old.

Now that we have shown him a variety of ways to do so, he side-steps the issue.

But, hey, at least he admits to being a bullshitter, so maybe he’s not so retarded after all.

For example, as we all know, if a Libertarian is presented with the problem that a monopoly exists (say, in regime-issued cab licenses), the answer of course is to get rid of the monopoly. Eric’s answer is that the real problem with the monopoly is that the contract went to Muslims. Solutions might include forcing Muslims to violate their religion, or perhaps taking away their jobs and giving the contract to someone else (while still maintaining a regime monopoly license) or perhaps even better yet just killing all the Muslims. Would any of these be libertarian solutions? Of course not.

Incidentally, this is far from the first time that Eric has had these and other examples of logic and facts presented to him, yet he consistently evades logic and facts and spouts of the same old line of baloney later.

Eric calls the normal, logical, and correct libertarian question – :where is the initiation of force?: – a “looney tunes out on the fringe extremist libertarian concept” thus dismissing all of libertarian theory in one fell swoop, and calling our whole philosophy names (while simultaneously insisting it is inconsequential) AND at the same time claiming he is a libertarian himself.

Wow, that’s retarded!

How much more ridiculous and illogical is it humanly possible to get?

Now, Eric does have one thing right: so far, more libertarians and Libertarians have allied or actually run as Republicans than left, liberal or Democrat. Of course he wildly skews the extent by claiming all sorts of people the mantle of libertarian, based on his extremely distorted misconception of what libertarian means.

But, there is a grain of truth in that particular line of bullshit.

The answer is to change this. The temporary late 20-th century alliance between conservitudes and the NSGOP on the one hand and libertarians on the other must, can, and should be ended – the sooner, the better.

In other words, what Eric gloats about is precisely the problem with the libertarian movement and party, and what needs to be changed as quickly as possible for the party and/or movement to have any hope or chance of success – or, indeed, for any success it has to actually be a good thing.

The good news is that this is already happening in the movement at large, with a huge shift in libertarian voting away from Eric’s NSGOP. The bad news is that most of this shift is in the direction of the Democrats, and the LP is moving ever further in a right/Republican leaning direction, thus killing its chances to be a relevant organization, or one that would actually make the world better in some way if it were to ever win anything significant.

The only hope is that Kubby will bring in enough people from the left to overwhelm the fifth column forces of evil within the LP, drive the invading enemy hordes out of the party and particularly positions of leadership, and
open the party up to a massive green/libertarian surge as the Democrats betray every reason why they won control of the Congress this past year.

As for leaving the country, Eric, in what spirit do you ask?

First, you confuse the regime with the country, and invite those of who don’t like it to leave.

But since the regime is actually just a parasite enemy which feeds off the country, and in fact stands against the very premise of Liberty for which this country is created, why should we be the ones who have to leave?

Wouldn’t it be better to stay and smash the regime? If any regimists have a problem with this, put them on a boat out to sea and deny them the right to restock their supplies or indeed drop anchor anywhere in the world unless and until they repent and renounce the initiation of force.

Of course, they will be forced at gunpoint to build this boat themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1zqu9AhbLM

Don’t blink or you’ll miss Kubby! (near the end)

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1zqu9AhbLM]

Was it here?

That was then, this is now.

Now he finds out he can re-enlist (or enlist in IDF, French Foreign Legion, Blackwater USA, etc) after all but he side-steps it and says he already served (in peacetime, of course).

Bullshitter?

Yeah, I think so.

Glad he admits it….

So you admitt to being a bullshitter.

No, unlike the RepubliCON Party which you suppport, I do not support any drug prohibition (alchohol is a drug). Saying that a cabbie has no obligation to pick somebody up is not the same thing as supporting the prohibition of alchohol.