James Dean

Is anyone else not NEARLY high enough to read this shit?

Let's make a drinking game!! every time he says "you weren't there" take a drink when he makes a creepy reference to indoctrinating kids, take a drink when Bill gives the camera an exasperated look, take a drink when he makes an appeal to authority fallacy, take a drink when he commits the false dichotomy fallacy, take a drink OH! when he says something has been "hijacked by secularists" take a drink anyone got more? Edit: I got a few more, any time Ham says "There a book for that" take a drink

This is what keeps me up all night thinking. This is what i usually come to, wondering what you guys think of it. Human beings with mental retardation that exempts them from the category of moral agents are the creation of human beings who where/are moral agents. This makes them, like all children, the responsibility of those who created them. They understood that there was a chance of this eventuality, and must now face the consequences of taking that gamble. We also offer them the protection of ethics, that we do not extend to other non-agents, because we understand that they are a deviation on the scale of moral agency. Just because someone is born without a leg, doesn't mean that they are no longer a human because part of the definition of human includes 'bipedal.' The science, as my understanding goes, corroborates with this. I have not seen evidence that any animal can reason in the abstract at all, let alone moral abstraction. It's perfectly fine to say that aesthetically it's preferable to not agress against animals, but being put in the category of aesthetics, you cannot legitimately initiate the use of force to prevent the effects of those actions. The same way being on time is universally preferable to being late, but only in an aesthetic sense... I can't use force against my friend for being 3 hours late to my birthday party (no matter how much I want to.) I think what he was trying to say was that the pointing is a way of abstract reasoning. Animals have a hard time understanding that your extended finger means anything that does not have to do with my finger. I could be wrong but this is what I get from it. A dog understands that a hand raised in anger will strike him on the nose, he see's the hand (the implement which is about to strike him) as an object. A dog understands a closed fist can mean they get a treat! but only because the treat is in your hand. they can't separate the concept from the object, they can't universalize or abstract. They can connect stimuli with other stimuli (pavlov's dog) but they can't be prompted to a concept. When a dog see's another dog being punished for something, they don't conceptualize that thing as 'bad' even from a negative reinforcement standpoint. That was kinda rambling and might make no sense, but I hope it helps.

Watching any of that shit just gives me an honest to god panic attack. I can't even.

Awesome song, man. I first heard Frank Turner's song, Glory Hallelujah, and was thinking, "cool! a talented musician who's really outspoken about atheism." And when I found out he was more liberty minded, I shat myself! Atheist, Libertarian, AND a kick ass musician. Frank Turner takes the cake.

I'm confused, if the whole universe will eventually reach an end singularity, how does that singularity have any effect on us today when the universe is, quite noticeably, not a singularity?

dsayers, That's all very true! I guess on a first skim it seems alright but really falls apart at the in depth analysis. Maybe it just goes to show that anything looks ok in comparison to, you know, abuse. :/ Thanks for the thoughtful points. Mysterion Muffles, thank you for your kindness. It seems so strange to have to trumpet the ideals of not abusing children, and it's baffling that so many people can be blatantly evil. I also feel that urge that do something like an e protest or a freedomain radio cyber raid. That would be emotionally satisfying, but it would be just so futile as to not be worth it. The only thing that can change these abusive people is self knowledge.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-maclaughlin-lsw/7-new-ways-to-navigate-defiance-from-your-child_b_4564781.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009 I read the article, and I was pretty well pleased with the conclusions that this usually lefty 'news' site came up with, but I have to be honest, I read some of the comments below and I actually wept for the children of those parents. I guess it's just a soft spot for me, but whenever I hear the 'because I said so' parents in their cold and unfeeling, un-curious, stupid ex post facto justifications it really makes my blood boil. This is how my mother was and I never had a real relationship with her she was just so cold and frigid.

If I truly want something, and work is the way to get it, yet I procrastinate the work, would it be a failure of my ability to asses my wants correctly because if i didn't do it, I must not want it... or would it be a failure of my motivation to prefer 'slacking off' for hours straight? I think you are saying that the later would be incorrect as work is not where my mind is trained to find enjoyment. I find this fascinating and I want you to elaborate!

Pharmaceutical companies pressured the state to require more and more unnecessary and potentially toxic vaccines. Look at the vaccination schedule from the 1980's and now look at the schedule today. Way more. I'd look at each vaccine individually and weigh 1) the likelihood of your child getting that disease. 2) the possible side effects of that particular vaccine. 3) and the severity/ long term repercussions of them actually contracting the disease. The vaccination process can overstimulate a growing child and since it does not stimulate the immune system in the way that developing regular immunity does, the growing bodies of children are not 'designed' to handle it and it can be dangerous, though complications are rare. Talk to your pediatrician about postponing vaccinates, more that likely they will be fine with that and probably secretly relieved that you knew about it without them having to tell you. Doctors often choose to keep their mouth shut than to risk getting sued. As far as the morality of it all, I would say, like most things, you as the parent having infinitely more worldly knowledge have the responsibility to make smart and informed choices for your children. There will always be risks, know and unknown, just make sure you do the very best for your kids. Remember, you chose to have them, but they did not choose to be born. All the best.

It is a noble effort to plant the seeds of reason and rationality in people, though I doubt such cases can be reversed. Remember, irrationality is like a disease and if it spreads too far, or is too mixed with the healthy tissue, there is no chance of a cure. I'd focus on the children of people you know, or the younger adults, especially boys, who will be naturally questioning the nonsense anyway. I came to liberty and anarchy this way. I watched Adam Kokesh debate on youtube some other group of statists and dismissed every argument he made out of hand. About a year later the seeds of wisdom that had been planted by that conversation bloomed into a tall oak tree of logic and reason. Exposing simple truths, taxation is theft, the government is force, etc, even while I rejected them at first, there was a point where I could deny their truth no longer. So it is with religion as well (statism is just another kind of religion.) Point out the basic stuff, the unspoken but amazingly simple truths, god as a concept is a contradiction, god breaks his own commandments, belief by definition denies proof, etc. Even if the people reject this (and they most likely will, the false self is good at protecting it's safety) they next time they hear the truth, they will remember the small seeds that you have planted. best of luck.

Such Socrates, so wow. Good job being consistent and curious. I wonder what you got from the 'debate.' for lack of a better word... You could tell when he got irritated and impatient, he kept switching the goal posts and couldn't seem to follow the conversation without getting sidetracked... I honestly don't think anyone has talked to him like this before, by which I mean, I don't think anyone has actually ever talked to him. He was certainly thrown off track by your questions into his childhood, but you let it stray back into abstractions, I think you should have kept going with the questions, asking him about his parents and the discipline they used etc. There was one part I really loved... Anyone feel like a defense mechanism buffet? I can almost imagine him sweating and shaking as he typed this, and by 'him' I mean his false self. And right at the end! in true form he can't even accept his own emotions, classic passive aggressive behavior... "not mad, just passionate." Yeah. Sure. That's why you were basically demanding we not question your beliefs at all. Don't you know that, "you can't generalize something like God."

I swear to Nog that it so brilliant I want it painted on my wall.... or tattooed on my ass, I can't decide which.

OP: Dude this is a philosophy forum, you might want to take your stone age nonsense and protest songs elsewhere, if you want to define what a war criminal is and see if adam lines up with that standard, than fine. The morality of Adams actions aside, Jesus mumbo-jumbo and hippie kumbaya don't constitute an objective standard of truth. This always confuses me. I see the bumper stickers with slogans such as, "Support the troops, end the war." I wasn't aware that the war was waged by fairies and unicorns, and all the armed to the teeth solders were just there for a tea party. Forgive my sarcasm, but without the troops, there is no war. The "war in Iraq" does not exist, there are people wearing one costume killing people wearing a different costume. If you morally object to this act, you cannot then not morally object to he who perpetrates the act. I don't know how you could have respect for someone who voluntarily engages in this system. Vietnam might have been different, since men were violently coerced into the army (the draft), but that's what sets the soldiers now apart from the taxpayers, both 'prop up' the war machine, but the tax payers have no choice, they are in a state of violent coercion, the soldiers volunteer to be there, they know that their job entails murder, and they go anyway. I think that puts them at full responsibility. Do I think we should spit on the infantry as they come home from the middle east? of course not! (that would be the initiation of the use of force!) but don't give them a pass, no circumstance can justify those actions. Adam did what he did, the value he provides the cause of freedom does not make that less immoral, nor does his past evil invalidate his contributions.

Just reminds me of something Stef sometimes says, which I think is a Gandhi quote ironically enough. "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." I think we have all seen a hell of a lot of ignoring and laughing, now we're just getting into the meaty bits of fighting. If what we're saying is causing this much of a turmoil in the system, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect liberty in our lifetimes. Wishful thinking, maybe.

Now that I think about it, St. Peter's Basilica does look a lot like a circular city....

I LOVE Protest the Hero, didn't know a lot of other people listened to them! If that kind of stuff is your forte, A little more on the surreal side, Between The Buried and me never fail to amaze... particularly "colors." To me it's like if dark side of the moon went metal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5WHCxxXYSI I like the live version because it shows you how dedicated and amazing they are all as musicians. As a musician, that's super important. but here's the regular album. And now that I'm thinking about it, All that remains always struck me as very Libertarian... not really based on long in depth analysis, just kinda how the music rubs me. Usually my instincts are pretty good here. Here's what comes to mind... and I was right!!! kinda... http://noisecreep.com/all-that-remains-phil-labonte-interview/

http://guardianlv.com/2013/12/icelanders-overthrow-government-and-rewrite-constitution-after-banking-fraud-no-word-from-us-media/ When this came all over my facebook wall today, this was my response. It's a shame that Icelanders could not see the true cause of the issues and directed their actions in a refreshingly proactive, however ultimately futile fashion. It does make me a little hopeful that the will of people who refuse to be so blatantly trodden on can stand up to the violence of the state and the embedded interests of banksters in a non-violent fashion, however i'm saddened by the short-sided revolution and what will turn out to be an ultimate squandering of potential and social momentum. It just goes to show, i suppose, the true value for those in power to control education as even when the people rise up to overthrow one oppressive institution, they will inevitable set up another oppressive institution; the people can't think of a way to solve problems without force. Re-writing constitutions is not a safeguard against corruption as the root of corruption is power, and as long as the people of Iceland continue to allow the immense monopoly of power to exist and remain concentrated in the hands of the few, those with evil intent and the desire to dominate will always and forever seek to gain that power and until that dynamic is vanquished, I fear they will not know real freedom. I know I'm preaching to the choir to you guys, but I was more interested in what you had to say about the US not covering it? and how people will react to such a huge and obvious coverup?

I don't think the systems come into particular contention if we're all practicing volunteerism. An anarcho-socialist society could exist within or alongside an anarcho-capitalist society in which they pool resources, have nested councils, etc. So some people, in the absence of a state find it more beneficial to practice a system of free trade, others want to be communal. as long as no one is forcing them to do these things and they've choose to do them, I don't see the conflict... Correct me if I'm wrong and again, be careful drawing examples from the current mixed semi-fascist hell hole that we enjoy today and saying that represents capitalism or the free market. Current events must always be taken in the context which they occurred and the fact is, since the state is so pervasive, they're almost always the results of statism, not really capitalism. For example in poor working conditions in sweatshops, people often say that it's the capitalist's fault for exploiting the workers because their labor is so cheap and effective. really what is happening behind the scenes is that the garment factory or whatever is bribing the government to use the army and police forces to keep out competition, and because there is no competition for the workers' labor, their wages stagnate. In a free society, that adhered to capitalism, more factories would move in and bid up the labor of the workers until an equilibrium was reached where the workers were being paid the highest wages possible. with regards to your point about anarcho-capitalism having rulers because we have bosses in a company, you are missing something crucial.... bosses and employment relationships are voluntary interactions, no one is forcing you to work for them and no one is forcing you to work for anybody. Like I said earlier, if people wanted to get rid of capitalism all together and live within or alongside a capitalist society, as long as they were not violating the NAP, and everyone was in those societies by choice, there is no problem... at least in my view. The big thing here is that we need to get rid of the state, and I think debates on how best to self-organize in the future can be helpful, but the truth is we have no idea what society will look like in the absence of violent coercion. People may start out with DRO's and being totally capitalist then realize DRO's are more trouble then they're worth, and that "a handshake is always enough." people might choose not to be capitalists in some areas because of a small group or living in isolation etc, in the absence of a state and the collective genius of the human race, we really can't know what will happen, only that whatever does will (hopefully) be completely voluntary. I think when talking with anarcho-socialists, or anarcho-syndicalist, or anarcho-eat my shorts... we need to focus on similarities rather than differences in the long run. Though I'm not saying this kind of discussion is not helpful.. because it is, and I thank the OP for his intellectual curiosity.

lions are kinda like cats just don't try to pet it's belly

Maybe since the true meaning of love, which you guys have given some stellar definitions of, has been so warped, it's hard to just throw it around without putting a lot of mirk in peoples mind. That in mind, I think something so special as the bond between man and animals should be given some special treatment, is that fair?

Haha neither do I, but I do have a looooooot of conjecture around my pet's motivations, mostly they involve the procurement of belly rubs and elaborate plans to rule the world Is this bonding and attachment a unique relationship? Like such bonding and attachment between humans is different from all other relationships? distinct from say, attachment to a computer or to an heirloom? furthermore, can I love someone who I am not attached or bonded too or can I be bonded and attached to someone without loving them?

Interesting, the first thing that comes to my mind is that humans have the same biological imperatives and it is on these imperatives that virtue is built, like the NAP or property rights, it may not be as advanced in animals, but could it be said that they contain the ingredients of virtue but just haven't figured out how to put it all together yet, (what with their small brains and all..) another thing I think of is Dolphins, now being treated as somewhat separate from the majority of the animal kingdom? Non human personhood I think it's called. Also, if the love is not reciprocal, can the human healthily feel that love or is that by it's nature unhelthy because it is love that is not responding to virtue, as animals have no virtue. Thanks for your thoughts!!

I don't think it needs much more clarification... I was just petting my cat when I realized that I care for this life in a very selfless and unconditional kind of way, the way that I care for certain people in my life. Could it be projection or could it be that I do actually love my cat? We're not talking bestiality here, although if you think that's relevant, I'm open to considering it's relevance.

Thanks for the correction, with this in mind, the claims against a DRO model seem even more fallacious. Funny how working under the table for so long can get you out of touch with the tax system. though that might not be a bad thing...