dsayers

Ask them if some person they've never met is worth disbanding the family. Ask them if they think that the fact that a person who is X, Y, and Z could achieve a title as to rule over others, maybe having such a title is a bad idea? Ask yourself these questions first though. While you can try to influence others, the only person you can control is yourself. The State wins as people voluntarily divide horizontally among themselves to cling to those who vertically enslave us all. No strings attached! It really is brilliant puppetry if the end result wasn't so very tragic.

Or not False analogy. In the analogy, there is fundamental difference between the cups, the person could choose to drink from neither, choosing to drink one is actually doing something, but isn't doing something to hundreds of millions of people... still.

https://steemit.com/anarchism/@dsayers/are-you-looking-for-yourself My brothers and sisters, have you ever been so hurt, sad, or angry that you've done something you otherwise would not have? The question is rhetorical and meant to start a conversation about the ways in which people can get so caught up in the moment that they do something they otherwise would not have. Imagine though that your answer was yes. Can you also imagine the hell you would find yourself in suffering the consequences of an action that is not one you would choose to take if you had the presence of mind to make the decision with deliberation? Nobody wants to experience that. It can weigh on a person tremendously as they doubt how far they've actually come to be able to engage in such a lapse of judgement. For months, I have watched as people who accept property rights, self-ownership, the inherent immorality of the State, etc dispensed with those values for the illusion of comfort in the present. I did what I could to offset this, but it is a position not arrived at by way of logic, reason, and evidence. While I think I might have been largely ineffective, I rest easy knowing I did my part... And knowing that it would eventually come to and end. Sadly, it has not. Eleanor Roosevelt is credited with saying, "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." While I don't think you can sum up a mind so simply, I think it's an accurate categorization of the behaviors. So many of the people I saw abandoning their values before the election were doing so because "Trump is different." Of course no candidate is. They were all chasing after the exact same, invalid throne that has subjugated humans throughout recorded history. This belief led them to invest inordinate amounts of time trying to figure out ways to justify their belief, vilify their savior's competitor, watch their savior interact with their competitor... The list goes on. Now that their savior has won/lost, they've spent so much time pinning their identity on these people they'll never meet, that they've forgotten how to return to their own lives. Some of those same people are celebrating as if they've won something. Others are protesting that the one they didn't choose will be inflicted upon them. The former group will not be able to find the solutions to the problems they were looking for because they looking for it from without. They've invested so much of their time and effort into the success of that person that they will likely turn a blind eye to the ways in which our new master will fail us all. Because that's what masters do and they knew that. At the same time, they are mocking other people for being emotionally invested in something that largely does not effect their lives. Seemingly with no cognitive dissonance the act of even having an interest in such things is the very thing they are referencing in others. It's astounding. Then the latter group are like rebels without a cause. Perhaps more accurately, people with an idea that they don't know how to articulate. They are furious that the master they didn't choose will be inflicted upon them. Even though this is the exact same eventuality they were trying to inflict on others! Seemingly with no cognitive dissonance. They realize that having somebody's will inflicted upon them is wrong, but they're not willing to internalize this idea. Because they were raised by and therefore seek out and surrounded themselves with people who will agree with them that it's okay to inflict your will upon others as long as it's done in the name of Democracy or the State. Part of me is very frustrated with the fact that the election is over, yet the ways in which people are allowing the moment to cloud their judgement has largely not subsided. I feel this way because it was the members of my tribe that accept property rights, who betrayed all of us by turning to slavery in order to pretend to achieve freedom who should be consoling the followers of the losing side, helping them to interpret the impulses they're feeling now and parlaying them into an understanding that the entire system is invalid. That it only "exists" because we cooperatively pretend it does. Another part of me is very inspired. To see so many people rebelling against having the wills of others inflicted upon them is a sign of immense potential. Potential that is largely being squandered because so many of the people who could be helping these people to put their feelings into words are themselves distracted, too busy enjoying their suffering, or celebrating a perceived win, or otherwise just allowing their time to be monopolized by the circus that's meant to distract us all. Hypnotism is not real, but many of us are hypnotized. Please consider this me snapping my fingers, trying to wake people up. People that would've previously described themselves as woken up. Who allowed themselves to be distracted because the powers that be figured out improved ways to spin their millenia-old craft in a way that would dupe those who otherwise know better. We have a responsibility and the iron is hot. Let us strike now. May we all take a step back, find ourselves, and use this time to discuss the IDEA of freedom. Focusing on specific people and events will only drown out what matters: We are all still slaves. That has not changed because people are still cooperating with their enslavement and the enslavement of their family and friends. They don't want to because people are mostly good. They've just been abused and are so desperately seeking for others to share in that abuse so that they're not alone. Instead, why don't we heal, together, by spreading these ideas and giving people the greatest gift of all: Responsibility. Your masters cannot absolve you of it. Time spent turning to them for answers is time the problem gets worse because you are not addressing it. Please stop running away. We need you. All of us. The future is counting on us.

SHOULD say? What age child? For what purpose?

How do you know?

Considering a bunch of folks who accept property rights were advocating political voting, I think that ship sailed a while back.

Everybody that voted was showing a lack of empathy for you. They voted for a system that has taught people to be this invested in WHO sits on the throne to distract them from the question of whether or not the throne is valid. The ones that don't already understand property rights and see the immorality of the State remain victims. There's nothing wrong with experiencing compassion for them.

I have no way of measuring how many people are reminded of the truth and experience the conviction to (re)accept it. Though I do fully accept that they would not be vocal about doing so here. Social discomfort for doing what's right isn't for everybody. As for being on the same page, if somebody says to me 2+2=5, God exists, or your vote matters, all I can do is speak the truth. If after that, we are still not on the same page, this is not my responsibility. Prisoners don't have a vote because they're in prison. If they had a say as to the conditions of their life, they would choose to not be in prison. Political voting works because most people do not realize they are slaves. I can't further explain how asking for a master is consenting to slavery. It's sort of axiomatic. It's like asking why the word tree refers to a tree. That's just the definition of the word.

We live in a statist world. EVERYBODY is damaged. Isolating yourself from somebody just for being damaged will just isolate you. It won't heal anybody, not even yourself. I'm not saying don't have any filters. But in terms of politics, the only real divide is top to bottom. As you divide horizontally, you're doing their work for them. This is how the corrupt few leverage control over the masses. With you and your willingness to dignify it all with your consent (vote).

I wonder why the gender specificity? In a world where the State is ready to grind up men at the behest of accusatory women, I think that if you were so inclined to be gender specific, wouldn't the more accurate version be of greater use? I'd be more curious as to what people think a man should do when women can just snap their finger, bury the guy under legal entanglements, and walk away consequence free? I think the scenario you paint is largely a story from the past. One that mostly doesn't play out in the present because of the scenario I've painted.

Divided, we fall! Let's isolate ourselves from other damaged people so that our masters can continue to enslave us all.

You don't know this. Not knowing this and pretending to know it is a characteristic of the victim mindset Pretending to own people is doing nothing. Accepting reality and not believing the same fairy tale that got us here in the first place is not at all "doing nothing." People who need the fairy tale to be true keep trying to manipulate others in this fashion. It's an appeal to emotion, not an argument. Makes you wonder why the pro-voting crowd continue to avoid making any arguments, answering any challenges, or null hypotheses.

Political? Show me how. Replicated a thousand times over? Show me where.

THIS is art. It shows us the root of all interpersonal communications breakdown. It personifies what child abuse and the cycle of violence leads to. I get tears in my eyes every time I think about it and the ways in which it represents the tragedies I've known in my life. To answer the question itself, I would say art is in the eye of the beholder. Anything that solicits an emotional response could be considered art. Or perhaps only things that fit that criteria and were designed specifically for that purpose. Why does it matter? Not saying it shouldn't. Just curious in what way having a precise definition will enhance your life.

Do you mean to ask if the idea of Marxism will ever be fully rejected? Not in the foreseeable future. When the greatest philosophy show in the world in the information age pushes for the perpetuation of the State by engaging in political voting and turning to masters for solutions, Marxism isn't even threatened.

This seems to be sending a conflicting message. You've spent a lot of time here referencing length, as if that is a factor. Here though, it seems that length is NOT a factor (which was my point). If you feel it takes longer for you to participate in such things, and it can be a source of frustration for you, then it seems like it would be a good idea to "pick your battles." You didn't answer my suggestion before to check out the Bomb in the Brain series. It can be useful in helping you to pick your battles. No point in using flesh and bone to penetrate a brick wall, right?

It's nice, right? The ability to save all that time talking about things that matters (ideas) instead of things that don't. Namely people and events, which on the scale of human history are dust in the wind. @Wuzzums: The State has/will kill(ed) lots of people (foreign and domestic) before/during/after Trump. Trump/POTUS isn't even a variable if you understand what's being discussed.

Amen Thanks for sharing the part about your parents too. Just as we talk about peaceful parenting to raise the bar for how parents treat children, I think by being more outspoken on subjects like makeup might help to raise the bar of how to treat women who don't wear it. I'm all for it. It's okay to be tired or not well sometimes. Why should women have to doll themselves up for the comfort of others?

I'm not even sure what you're talking about. Words like "criminal" and "law" means you're trying to have a conversation about made up stuff. That's not particularly meaningful. The irony here is that without the State, there would be little incentive to make such false accusations. If a person makes an accusation that is false, the repercussions of the claim if it were true should accrue to the person who made the claim. If it was an "accident" or something they only said out of "emotional instability," let them make the necessary restitution. Your proposition that actions do not have consequences is ludicrous, regardless of the circumstances. This is another myth that belief in the validity of the State perpetuates.

Saying, "I choose you to rule over 300 million people" is pretending to own those 300 million people. Pretending to be able to bind 300 million people without their consent. You're right, your vote doesn't say you own a SHARE of somebody else's property; It says you own ALL of it.

People get jail time for that now.

You're very welcome. And don't be afraid to hash this out here as you're learning. You don't want to learn a bad foundation and then build upon it. One tip of advice if I may: Your 2nd to last post in this thread didn't seem very curious at all. Here, you seem much more curious and open-minded. I for one appreciate that very much. Could you elaborate on which parts you're struggling with or which pieces of feedback you found to be helpful or challenging?

So reality is altered because people got together to wish it to be so?! Where coercion is present, choice is not. How many times have I said this I wonder? Now you're just making stuff up. Force used to defend yourself is not violence and nobody said anything about not defending yourself. I've debunked the "self-defense" claim of voting many times. Here is one example. Trying to enslave 300 million people is a not proportionate response to any level of coercion used against you. It is the escalation and creation of a new debt to the tune of about 300 million to one.

You poison the well with your use of the word "allowing" here. What I know is that I'm not owned by others. One way I demonstrate this is not pretending that somebody could own me by asking them to. I mean, you're admitting that you understand that elections are rigged, but admonishing me for not playing along. Does this not inspire any cognitive dissonance? So no feeling ill at ease as a bunch of people who accept property rights push for violations of property rights, but discomfort in the face of somebody reminding them that the ritual by which they demonstrate this is fantastical? This is an indication of bias confirmation.

You don't see how "a link to a 30 page article that according to them I must read in order to respond" is different from "wall of text"? It sounded to me like time was a factor and part of your confusion and/or feelings of inefficacy came from a person's ability to PRODUCE a "30 page" item, not just linking to one. It's not nearly as impressive or intimidating if a person comes back 15 minutes later to drop a link. You can claim that 2+2=4 even if you don't have a calculator. Anybody that says they reject 2+2=4 until you have a calculator is telling you that rationality isn't of interest to them. Were you to satisfy their arbitrary price of admission, I'd wager you'd find them just moving the goalposts. They NEED for 2+2=5 and requiring a calculator is just one way of preventing you from challenging their need.