Donnadogsoth

I didn't ask about an omnipotent being's ability to perform alchemy, I asked if an omnipotent being could make a legal $20 bill. So? Can he?

Please define "omnipotent being". Can an omnipotent being make a legal $20 bill?

Can you please refer me to any Christian authority who agrees with your above statement?

I'm having trouble with your jargon. Take a case study: I make it publicly known that I am non-violently educating my child in the Nicene Creed. Does anyone take my child from me then?

Oh no you don't. Next you're going to tell me an omnipotent being can make a legal $20 bill.

Are the people behind the anti-rape campaign also behind an anti-hit-your-baby campaign?

What about international lending organisations like the IMF or the World Bank? Won't they be viewed as an option to prevent civil war?

Seems like powerful incentive for the rich to forestall national bankruptcy procedures for as long as possible.

Can we engage in bankruptcy reorganisation and leave the pension fund and similar funds intact?

The debt per se can be dealt with by 5) filing for bankruptcy. The State puts the entire country in bankruptcy reorganisation and cancels the national debt, with the proviso given above about separating physical assets from financial assets. The debt itself isn't just bad, it's unconstitutional, it was created by the repeal of the Glass-Steagal law separating the physical economy from the predatory financial economy. Without this the economy is doomed as the multiple bubbles including the derivatives bubble (read: economic brain aneurysm) inevitably pop. I can't gainsay what you've said about the need for debt and interest, but I do know the national debt as it stands is only an insoluble problem for those who reject the Glass-Steagal principle.

Are you coupling your assertion with the removal of the State, or are you presuming that the State still exists during this "great immigration experiment" you are propounding?

You're saying that in a free society retirement is impossible. Never thought about it like that. Very interesting, thank you. (1) In my experience savings accounts offer a pittance in interest. So by "saving for retirement" you must mean pensions, financial instruments, investments, that kind of thing, right? (2) What about the unpayable government debt? The possibility of a Glass-Steagall reorganisation of liabilities has been floated, i.e., to put the country into bankruptcy reorganisation with a "firewall" between the financial and the physical assets to avoid plunging the economy into a depression or worse-than-depression. That doesn't achieve an Ancap "free society" but it does address the problems with the current system. Any thoughts about that?

No, the definition has changed. The definition has always been this way: racism is anyone who is not non-white.

I put $100 in my savings account, and nothing else is done by anyone. Why does this break the economy? Not saying you're wrong, just trying to understand this.

Neither is the moral high ground possessed by those who would invade and possess the current residue of Western civilisation. The West has given the world many good things, and treacherous factions within the West have promoted a policy of imperial looting and clash of civilisations. The current situation was planned, and now that it has been delivered, the order is for a new feudal condition of rotting countries existing under some manner of Anglo-American empire. The option out is to opt out of the clash of civilisations and instead spark a neo-Renaissance. If the Western countries can take back their destinies they can demand a new discipline, where Western values are made to be mandatory, Western borders are maintained and defended, and economic progress becomes the basis for worldwide progress pipelined through the Asian-Russian-BRICS cooperation. If the current, bankrupt and toxic financial system can be routed around, as by BRICS New Development Bank, we have a chance. We're not licked yet, as long as we remember our greatest power is not merely our science but also our classical art, which alone is capable of effecting a transformation of opinion towards defense of our now-globally-extended European civilisation.

I'm suggesting that the oligarchy is smart and sees ways to derail movements towards freedom, such as "What's the bet there are already astro-turf movements afoot or in the pipeline, using crony-corporate funding to target the youth with anti-constitutional propaganda." Sorry if I derailed your thread, my comment seemed in the ballpark.

Kind of like how the oligarchy quietly tolerates the growth of anarcho-capitalism, in the secure knowledge it atomises the population and disengages them from political participation?

More lies. You pay too much attention to Christian-hating secular scientists who like to pretend science is a secular trade secret rather than something bequeathed to them in large part by Christian (mostly Catholic) scientists. If what you say is true there would have been no Catholic scientists, scientist-priests no less. How did Gregor Mendel benefit from his pea experiments?

You can rephrase "ought" to be another "is" if you wish. The intent in both cases is clear. If you want X you need Y. "Should" or "ought" may seem old-fashioned, but the intent is the same. "Ought" is doing justice to the original "is". If you want children you ought to get married. if you want children you need to get married. Both are statements of fact.

I'm not sure I understand. Your genetics is another "is" which gives rise to the "is" of your libido. "Ought" implies a judgement. An ought would be an IF/THEN statement. IF you wish to have children THEN you should pursue (hot (and reliable)) women.

I call it ICES: Ignorance causes Craziness which causes people to behave in Evil and Stupid ways.

You're implying that killing your kids by depriving them of modern medicine is common to Christianity, which is a patent lie. Does the Church promote faith healing at the expense of modern medicine?

Will Torbald is alluding to something that I have spoken about previously: the need for a culture to go along with freedom. Freedom without culture to restrain and mould it is mere license. Will thinks this culture should include the abolition of religion. He's wrong, remove religion and there will be catastrophe, as we see in the decadent West with its suicidal birthrates, particularly in the Scandinavian countries such as Sweden which are compounding their destruction with unlimited alien (and alien religious) immigration. What is needed is what I have termed the ligamental principle, to bind populations together in solidarity that will form the basis for their interactions beyond the mere "I won't hurt you/you won't hurt me" premise of the NAP.

Agreed.

And you're good at missing the point.