Kaz Lokuciewski

Dude. The video suggests that they had a functioning peaceful Anarchy made up of 100,000 people. It worked. How they hell did you get the above from that video and the focus on the natives before Columbus?

My rule is..help those who help themselves. Few inheritances are intended for a person to get a bad habit. Think they are cleverer than they are. It's to subsidize the theft that a mortgage is and provide opportunity for self investment. If you give a 22 year old who lacks ambition $100,000 you CAN set them up to miss out on drive and learning that would have earned them so much more, both emotionally AND in income. With my kids I expect them to be in a career and building a family...then, when they need the 3 bed house..they can have 10% and pay 1% interest on the 90% to the trust..so that their kids can also have a cheap mortgage and so on.

I have two views on this. 1. Other than the rape of natural resources, a currency is predominately pegged to the at the minimum hourly wage. If the minimum wage / hour becomes $20 instead of $10 / hour and the rest of the market remains the same. The dollar will simply inflate by 100%. It will however give a temporary reprieve to low earners who reap the benefits BEFORE inflation, which is the opposite to what happens. When one state does it this is super confusing. A cafe can be 10 yards from a labor intensive business with half the labor cost. I'm not sure if California is really looking out for the low wage worker or simply remove the low skill labour population from their area as such businesses leave. The supermarkets are going to stay and that way local government no longer has to pay for the Walmart heirs extravagances. I think it's only really an option for states that do not have a big low skill factory base, but do have high property prices. If you really want to create a living wage, you need to make minimum wage relative to average rent prices and give people the right to buy their homes from scrounging landlords after a given time so long as they pay their rent, and splitting the capital gain.

This is mostly circular now with people making the same point and stating that they have not been responded to while my own responses seem to be getting moderated so I decided not to let this topic mull over in peoples own minds. However..I just saw this great young Turks video. I wonder what system Native America used? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FBUEfdPDOQ

I'm saying there's not way round corruption in ANY system and some magical parenting won't do it either. In the mean time..may as well steer things the the right direction..you not supporting an accountable transparent candidate less forceful candidate right now is a vote for scum who will force you further. I admire your ideals....and it's nice that you believe that loving parents can train their children to have no aggression or desire to cheat to get ahead...and that hose cheated will not feel compelled to resort to violence to claim back the fruits of their labour and instead peasfully find new piece of land to live on free from the dangers of roving bands. It may be that you're right and that is possible..there are plenty of people who have gone off to live in the wilde and pay no taxes, trade goods. If that is the life you'd truly prefer then the option is there. In the mean time..in this system. Why help make it worse? I'm not saying don't vote. I'm saying ask for your consumer rights and perhaps a few force reductions. If you don't get any (95% likely)...then don't vote with your conscience intact. What your're going now is not topping up the oil in the car you use every day because one day you hope to have an aeroplane that you have no way of getting and don't even know how to fly. non-sensicle. Nice projection there dude. Anyone can read back though your and my observations. Regardless of view...all I've done is use analogies and experiences to describe what I consider likely outcomes. You keep repeating that a perfect race will exist when people don't spank their kids.

I don not believe we can be taught to reason and be rational all the time and the moment it does not, if one persons livelihood is at stake, for example stop polluting the river upstream from me, that the result would be war eventually unless a 'force' consensus is reached. Hell. I can't even get apparently enlightened people to accept the idea that appointing reps to manage communal assets should require a competitive system of transparency and accountability rather than fame and marketing. From my experience, those who have traumatic upbringing often end up with the resolve to challenge their base instincts of dumb pride and hold high moral ideals. Those who had 'The perfect' upbringing turning out less so. That may be counter intuitive to some. But to me, it takes resolve to challenge your animal instincts and you're not going to be able to nurture them away,

No. New discussion. I like the way you described 'perfect' which hits the nail on the head. I do not believe that there is a 'perfect' but ensuring that the collective has the right to comparable transparent obligations offered by those seeking the roles will always make the system more perfect.

Your ruled dude. And, if there is someone who stand who wishes for you to self rules by consensus rather than coercion..at the moment you're not even bothering to check so..nose spite face. We've gone full circle now.

No..because your policies (contractually obligated ones) would be reductive...to expand decentralisation of law and military accountability...you're going to have to be quite clever here because you are going to have to sell the idea of greater decentralization to people. You may like to be strategic and start moderate. You can be honest and say..look, I'm an anarchist...but I think we can all agree that xyz are leading us into WW3. It's not using force because you are seeking a consensus on the removal of existing layers of force. Not that I'm an anarchist and would therefore agree with any of it...but if I were, and intending to implement it...I see it as the only way. This thread on 'Don't vote stupid if you don't want to be ruled by the corrupt' has gone to parenting experiences and how to move toward anarchy from within an oligarchy posing as a democracy.

You should stand. If your policies are clear..No invasions without referendum, I forgo my write to call such a deed. Should and enough of you stand then that's what will happen. If you don't someone will stand saying they respect the bountries of others then invent a reason to invade for war money. You might not vote for them but the stupid 90% will and they will overpower your 10% at a later date anyway.

We've just been though this. Stephs history show is almost continuously covering these cycles and unavoidable scenarios. Evendence wise ALL systems end up corrupting and always will until relative Oligarchs send their disillusioned followers or oppressing mercenaries to challenge another Oligarch, just smaller ones at war with each other until they combine. I'm not going to write the history of mankind out for you. Regarding the idea of voters requiring competing contractual obligations of authority candidates to offset the tendency for corruption and make the competition one of maximum transparency and implementation of popular policy for the least money, instead of one of maximum PR popularity and ideology quotes that can not be attributed to an inaction later ...not been tried yet, but seems pretty stupid to insist on voting for an unaccountable liar in a faux democracy, or in an Anarchic group, just because you didn't like the tone of the chap to pointed out the folly in a chat site.

D is persuading you with security & opportunity.

Indeed. So long as you have access to food, shelter, water..you can be manipulated into working to the limit of your diminishing expectations for less. That's why secret societies exist and people who do not demand consumer rights in the countries that the establishment are presently invested will continue to tow the line for an ever diminishing piece of the pie. There piece of paper would have worked had the put in a clause that criminalized even trying to break it and by an automatically created public militia (money was supposed to be state issued backed by gold). One of my contractual obligations was 'No one above the law' which allows the public to call a Trial on both the assumed criminal and those who should have called a trial in the first place. Had I not proposed that bill I would have forfeit my position. The whole idea of consumer rights is pretty simple and to keep it simple I steered clear of what the contractual obligations should be..only that their should be some and they can only be personal conduct ones or proposing and supporting bills, not actually passing any bills. Every time a candidate says 'I will make this change (that required a bill to pass) that 600 strangers with vested interests must agree with me on' then they are a liar who thinks you're a fool. We have contracts and money back guarantees in every trade. Business can not function without it. Putting the initial (non emergency..unforeseeable) political services into a contract is a pretty obvious starting point. You are assuming that the anarchists have any information or any right to access it? The kids just start getting ill and the plant sells them medicine. Double whammy. You are assuming that the anarchists have any information or any right to access it? The kids just start getting ill and the plant sells them medicine. Double whammy. Covered already dude. Going circular. You have to differentiate the initiation of violence, meeting it with violence and teaching in that instance that there are better ways. To open someones mind to an alternative method you have to sometimes open their mind to how it feels to be on the other side of their chosen method. You see this a lot with charity video's of starving children. You need them to identify. They show the parents anguish for their starving children. In the spanking model it's very important that spanking is used to show that violence only biggets violence. The evidence is in for me. To my mind the unspanked Alpha boys boys get experimental at 18 and the Beta ones get trodden on at school. (UK school...my wife said Bullying was not a thing in Morocco (spanking bad kids very much was). You are suggesting that a thug who takes what they want from pacifists is more likely to change tactic from repeated lectures than they get hit back?

It does if someone else has organized into a bigger pack and want what you have,

Oh I agree. Unaccountable Oligarchy is not working. If the individuals responsible had their assets reduced to zero paying reparations..this would not happen. The problem is when the business person promotes the person looking over them and neither have traceable wealth or an administrator willing to deliver justice. Shareholder (pension funds) bear the brunt of the cost, and the criminals pocket the money they made while skimping on safety. Our crazy system I suspect this would be even worse under an Anarchy in which people appoint lying crooks though. Again I revert to the bit where I currently have only one person who seems to agree that getting accountable contracts from applicants for positions of responsibility, is a necessity...and how we appoint right now is evidence of how irresponsible we are.