Leaderboard

@EGregAt its base Anarcho-Capitalism: No rulers of capital, people can still develop communes if they wish. Empire: The Emperor as the Moral Imperative,(Imperator). Ways of structuring morality in society, in the absence of Ethics. Africa: If IQ isn't relevant then why didn't they develop roads and use the wheel?(Egypt and Carthage Excluded) Ownership: You can still have shareholders in an organisation, thus individuals owning a percentage of the company, buyers owning their Iphone. In Islam companies are supposed to be dissolved on death of their owners and assets given to the wives under Sharia. Patents are in opposition to ownership, only so many ways to crack an egg. So are you arguing in favour of Empire? If so, who gets to be Emperor? Both the Roman Empire and British Empire had previous periods of economic expansion and growth under a more republican form of government before they were Empires. Under the Spanish Empire the Capital Madrid was constructed in the centre of the Iberian Peninsula, which contributed to mass starvation at the time.

Got as far as the first sentence of the second paragraph before checking out. You said “ancaps seem to think” which tells me you don’t understand the position, an hypothesis that is quickly substantiated when you begin to compare a voluntary relationship like FDR to a coercive one like the government.

Government No, the government is not an organization. An organization does not indoctrinate children who didn't sign up to said organization and point guns at them. The government is just a group of individuals pointing guns. Freedom An individual at Apple set up the contract that way, I am not sure if the government had anything to do with apple, however, in a free market an individual can set it up so the money made doesn't belong to an individual but instead has to be spent in order to profit to keep shareholders happy. Which is what I believe apple has done. Free Market The free market is simple, no taxation, no regulation, No coercion Tribalism not sure on the point here Empires Coercion is whats "totally bad" As far as speaking English and using computers. it's simple in the free market. Whoever has the best incentive will win, no guns needed. Like I am not going to learn some African clicking language because the incentive is low. I am not going to use a floppy disk computer because there are people with a better one that I can use. Nothing beats the free market. People will choose what they want to do best in a free market. Races & Summary not sure on the point on race Anyways, it seems you are fixated on this "empire" thing. Well it's time you know this, There is no such thing as an empire, just individuals with a gun.

I don't find Stephen King to be that much of a cerebral writer. He's a quantity over quality kinda guy and with the amount he's written it's almost inevitable to come upon a great number of gems. As far as I know he's the one that created the whole genre of "innocent childish thing is actually evil". It was literally a million dollar idea. Serial killers mumbling nursery rhymes, killer dolls, child ghosts, devil kids, haunted schools, cursed toys, masked Halloween killers, evil crazy parents, dream monsters, evil siblings, and so on are horror-movie themes that are being constantly recycled even now. A killer clown is just another subset of that same idea. The underlying message of "adult cover-up of child abuse" does seem to me to fit however take in account that the clown is actually not a clown, or a human, or a demon, but a giant spider. Why? Because some people have a phobia of spiders so wooooo, scaaaawry. A better movie that does have an underlying message is The Babadook. The movie takes on a whole new meaning (removing the supernatural element altogether) when you realize the first half is from the mother's perspective and the second half is from the child's perspective. That said I would love to hear more movie reviews from Stefan and Mike. The District 9 review was also fantastic.