powder

this is a philosophy site, where volunteerism and the Non Aggression Principle (NAP) are promoted. For me, just about everything 'wrong with the world', and the only issue I have with people's interaction with each other has to do with violating the NAP. I sense you are proposing something else. Do you think people didn't care enough about Robin's well-being or that 'we' have some responsibility to intervene in his life?

You still said, "what really matters, or what should matter" but still didn't say exactly what that is. Is it reaching out to people who are cut off from society as you say? Don't know much about Robin's personal life or problems but I do not see us all as victims in the way you describe. Life is about choices.

Interesting post, not sure what you are really trying to say here 1776, or how it relates exactly to the title of the thread. Can you expand on the statement "we were not there for him" - do you mean giving him $?

And there you have it. See what I mean?

I understand where you are coming from, you are totally owned. I get that. Debating this kind of thing on a forum dedicated to philosophy and anarchy is just so outlandish to me - there is no Israel! There are no Jews!

Wow,... Adam's responses here, and the fellow from the other thread who has been blocked, are the reason I suggested that FDR stay away from wading into this debate with facts and 'the truth' (the truth about video) and instead stick to philosophy.

Interesting, so we are often told the anger and bitterness we hold onto is 'unhealthy' on some many levels, and you guys are saying that is not the case? Letting it go, or trying to, gives us a false sense of pride or virtue and it is actually there to protect us from further hurt? But isn't it unpleasant to feel bitter and angry, why not purge that instead and learn from the lesson to protect yourself? I am just parroting the commonly preached rhetoric here, but I have never considered that it wasn't somehow valid, though it never did feel right to me.

thanks for responding MMX. Not sure if I understand your position. can you finish the first sentence? "...but I find (Stefan's position that ... ).... What exactly? and the second sentence. "reason such people out of this position" which position? and who exactly is best avoided? sorry, wasn't clear to me.

thanks Patrick, I really get this, I find it to be very true that forgiveness is an involuntary reaction. It has certainly cut thru a lot of the nonsense that you get, esp from some counselors, regarding how forgiveness is experienced and practiced. So how do you respond to the commonly preached notion that forgiveness is for the victim so that they can 'let it go', release the anger and bitterness that 'eats you up on the inside'.

good post Alan

-who will pick the crops? -who will take care of the slaves? how will the slaves support themselves? -they can't read or write, they will all become criminals. -society and the economy will collapse. ...etc.

And there it is. I suspected that there was some infidelity involved that you did not mention in earlier posts. We are responsible for our choices, as mentioned above. He chose to betray your trust by having an affair. That changes things. You are in no way responsible for his decision to deal with his frustration (or whatever it was) with the relationship by stepping outside of it. Do not take that on. He could have decided to do many things instead, try to talk to you, to friends, counselors, read books on relationships, etc. The dysfunctional relationship stuff, the dysfunctional childhood stuff, that all needs to be worked on and fixed. There has been some good advice in this thread so far. But he has to do whatever it takes to make this right, to regain your trust before any of that will matter to you. The car may need some upkeep and even some repair to keep it going, but when someone runs it off into the ditch they are responsible for getting it out of the ditch and fix it first. I feel sorry for you that you are in this situation. You are on the right track and I sense that you have to integrity to do what is best for you, the marriage, and the kids.

I like Robert's post.

I've got a tip: learn to be a friendly, empathetic, skilled communicator. your words: trivial, unimportant, inconsequential, useless, shallow, trite,... even if you don't say them to their faces people will know what you think and feel. It is easy to tell what matters to people, they like to spend a lot of time doing it and talking about it so for you to categorize their activities and interests in that kind of light will surely make you an unpopular person. that said, I am not one for what I call 'small talk' and do not engage in topics that are of no interest to me or that I have little or nothing to contribute. I may come across as aloof or rude to some people, but I am not very concerned about what other people think of me. I do have a number of things that I can chat about and I have had to develop social skills and conversational abilities because I did not learn any growing up. Still I try to be friendly and empathetic if I am stuck in a social situation and I have found ways to steer people into talking about themselves (cuz that is what everyone likes to do) in a way that is interesting. If it is a group setting and I am the odd man out (nothing to contribute of no interest in the topic) then I don't have a problem opting out. I hope that I do not come across as feeling superior or condescending though.

Holy Crap Phuein, what are you arguing for here? I have debated with statists who put forward these kinds of arguments. What does the reality of weapon bearing cultures have to do with ethical/moral behavior? which is by definition universal. that means everywhere, anytime. Its not OK to shot someone who slaps you, or kill women for not being virgins, or whatever other kind of insane behavior is practiced by different societies and promoted by the ruling class. You say "people tell people what to do." The point of philosophy is to show us that we should act according to what is right, and ethical and rational instead of going along with whatever cultural or religious propaganda is fed to us by the oligarchs.

Russia isn't doing anything at all, Russia does not exist.

I did take time to watch most of the video and it was well done and at the end Stef did get into the philosophical side of it to emphasize the bigger truth behind such conflicts. Which I think is the essential message. Like I said, I have spent a lot of time reading about this stuff and the history of the area going back thousands of years. I am aware of the impact of the Balfour Declaration and so on. Perhaps I am missing an important point but I think FDR should stick to the philosophical side of things, the NAP type stuff, and beware of taking on such debates with facts and quotes. The alternative media has been all over this stuff for years. Do you want to go down that road? I spent years trying to show how the government, the financial system, the military industrial complex, was corrupt and inefficient and wicked with facts and information. Then I came across the idea (mostly here) of looking at it from the perspective of principles. boom, done. Nothing left to prove. Everyone knows that the NAP is right. If you start taking on stuff like Israel, 911, Afghanistan, Lybia, the Halocaust, and so on, I think you risk getting caught in the battles and people lose sight of the bigger picture and what the 'war' is really all about. Each side in these kinds of debates will find the stats and facts to support their own perspectives, but you can't argue with UPB and NAP stuff. I think it is a good idea to use the example of the middle east conflicts to demonstrate the importance of philosophy and the NAP, and I think the video could have been 7 minutes long. There is no Israel!

This is the quote that lands closest to what I think is most relevant for philosophy, and what I have appreciated about FDR. The world and its problems really came into focus for me when Stef talked about the 911 situation and on another occasion I heard him respond to a caller who was challenging the Holocaust information - he basically said "so what?" Its not about facts, you can never know for sure what is the absolute truth about such things - you have to rely on principles. I am reinterpreting/paraphasing based on what I got out of it. It was so good for me, so freeing - all that time researching and reading to learn as much as I could to be informed about all the different perspectives (esp 'alternative') of all this stuff. FDR's contribution to my world view has helped me see that philosophy cuts through all the politics, debate and propaganda. I have not listened to this video but I have read a lot about the history and conflicts in the area over the years and I am sure that Stef and his staff have done a decent job of summarizing the situation. I just have to say: "So what?"

Like Magnus says, paying taxes is not what sustains the oligarchs. Give a small group the authority to rule and they will find a way to control and enslave. If the majority of people were anarchist then I don't imagine that the state would be sustainable. I think the problem with arguing from this perspective of minarchism and taking affirmative action is challenging because you need to shift your perspective rather than look to 'solve the problem'. Evil does not exist because good people do nothing as the famous saying goes - it only thrives because it masquerades as goodness or necessity. Once people recognize and are made aware of evil they automatically repel and recoil from it. Getting involved in the illusion of the myth of authority in any form only legitimizes it. When people stop imagining that it is somehow OK to allow other people to have special rights - the right to steal and initiate force - then the state will simple evaporate. You don't kill the beast by training it to be nicer, you simply starve it to death by not feeding it.

the state is immoral, period. You don't petition for a nicer master that beats you less, you don't argue for less rape, or join the mafia to make it less violent. So no, using the system to make changes is unethical. There are other threads about this topic that have been discussed and it comes down to perspective, if you choose to think of it from a practical perspective (Minarchism) then it seems to make sense that you can work to shrink government influence to make life better. I think it is better to think of it from an ethical perspective. Voting is advocating violence. That is not a complacent stance.

I love those Hitler vids, some of them are really funny. the first one I saw was about hockey, brilliant. the acting in that video is fantastic. I like to see Stef and FDR promoted that way, needs more than 50 views though. thanks for sharing.

I really like PS as an economic analyst. I used to listen to him back 2006-09. I am pretty sure he does not agree with Stef about the NAP and no government but I think it is cool that he allows Stef to spread his anarchist message on his show. PS actually ran for senate, for a place in the belly of the beast. He is like a mini Ron Paul as far as I can tell. the general sense I get from FDR is that there is no tolerance for 'almost' there. He still wants you shot, just for less stuff. So are people hitting their families with the 'against me' thing but still willing to support Schiff and Ron Paul?

davidlangevin.com

Hi Violet, I was able to see a couple of your paintings on your FB page - I like them. I have been a full-time professional artist (painter) for over 25 years and I can tell you that if you want to be successful you have to work very hard. It is the same with anything that you want to be really good at, you know, the 10,000 hours thing. I also teach painting workshops and give lectures on the business side of the art career. Its not about the art. that is the hardest thing for most artists to get their heads around. I know its ironic. I said you have to work really hard, ie, make a ton of paintings, but then added that its not about the art... I can take a person who has been successful, I mean really good, at anything really, business, sports, writing, whatever, and teach them how to make a very good living as an artist within a year or two - all I have to do is teach them to create a marketable product and introduce them to the simple concepts of the market. Learning to be really good at anything develops character, and in this business you will need a bunch of it to be successful.

the crap going on in your part of the world is horrific, but certainly nothing new, that is what states and governing bodies have been doing for thousands of years. It is not about the people. Sorry, I don't make appeals to people who think they have authority to rule. I really do wish you all the best with whatever you are able to do to make your life more peaceful.