John R

Yea, it's looking pretty bleak. The corruption is so rampant it is sickening. We need to change our Morals...Fast! On a similar note..I gave my views on how to get to a free society, but not the “common morals” side (the dreaded word: religion). I’ve only been thinking about this topic since Friday Night (3 days). The idea might be a little rough, but I believe it is far enough along to start sharing. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is a depressing statement. But if it is true, then Absolute Power trumps Power (You don’t need government if you have religion). So, all we need to do, is take the corruption out of religion (underlined for your laughing enjoyment). An ‘enlightened religion’ has accepted that moral beliefs cannot be forced upon someone. Moral beliefs are the choice of the individual. For this reason, they do not punish non-believers. The founding fathers based the religion of the Constitution on Christianity; the most common, enlightened religion on the planet. We started with a minimal government, but only grew. I believe any other existing religion would have had the same fate, just at a quicker pace. Corruption is the root of all evil, and deceit is the cause of corruption. No one can be perfect in their morals, therefore we can deceive. Cue the Non-aggression principle. The NAP shows up in Judaism, Christianity and even Islam. How could this one principle be in so many different religions? Corruption! As a principle, The NAP is just a general law that can be used whenever convenient. As an Enlightened religion, The NAP is incorruptible. Any attempt to manipulate it or disregard it would be deceit, and therefore a violation of the religion. Because NAP is incorruptible, religions only use it as a principle, and build a system around it, for extortion purposes. Telling its followers, “This is what we believe, but…” Currently, there are two basic types of people that use the NAP. The first type of person uses the principle when it fits their needs. This person could belong in any current religion you see today. The other person is so afraid of the NAP getting corrupt by other religions, they hide their view of calling it a religion. The second group of NAP users I described are like the Levites of the Bible. The closest people to God, but unable to be free due to all the laws they need to follow to keep their religion thriving. Except, the NAP users are unable to be free due to all the laws they need to follow to keep their religion hidden. The Awakening (working title) NAP is the uncorrupt version of all three religions I described earlier (and probably many more). Because NAP is the universal religion, what I'm about to say can work with any current religion dealing with NAP. I’m Christian and Christianity is ready for the next best thing, so I will be using it for the example. God is NAP The easiest way to help show this, is to read the Bible and replace ‘God’ with ‘NAP’ and replace ‘Jesus Christ’ with ‘enlightened NAP’. It just makes more sense. There is a lot of corruption written into in the bible, but by using the theory that NAP is incorruptible, you can use it as a tool to remove the corruption. The New Testament corruption is harder to untangle then the Old Testament. Jesus Christ had to bring Enlightenment for the society to be free, but they sneaked in ‘absolute forgiveness’ to everyone that says they will convert (what I like to call: The Moral Pardon). If you want to see a great analogy of this, check out Daredevil season 2 on NetFlix. The Punisher is God (NAP) and Daredevil is Jesus Christ (enlightened NAP). The majority of Season 2, episode 3 is a fascinating argument about their same-but-different beliefs. And episode 4 shows how they can work together. I’ve only seen the first 5 episodes of season 2, but, I think elektra represents the Devil (Deceit). Is that far enough outside the box to save the world?!

If getting to self defense is the goal, couldn't you argue that the politician bought your vote with a promise? And If he can't deliver, you can vote him out.

Thanks, man. Yea, Politicians are supposed to be the majorities Representative to act morally. The fact that we like the person is irreverent (and arguably the first line of corruption). It is quite shocking how close we where to a Free Society (in the structured sense) in the first 70 years of the constitution. The Fight against "taxation without representation" is the foundation of a Free Society. In a Free Society: The invested people of the community believe in common morals. At the birth of the constitution: The Property owners of the community voted on common morals. And when the government realized it needed an army from invading forces (I believe the war of 1812): The tax paying citizens of the community voted on common morals. All we needed was to turn the majority into the whole society. On a long enough time line, anything is possible. It could be argued that not voting on moral issues is immoral.

I like your Ideas. It got me to write some of mine down...Please excuse the length, lingo and terminology. I'm a little new at this. My view: A Free Society is a form of government, in the same way zero is a number. Let’s say a Free Society is 0 and Socialism 10. In this analogy, the Constitution would be numbers 2 thru 9 (1, being a Free State). I don’t think the founding fathers created this tug-of-war, mob rule, government as an endgame, but a stepping stone toward a Free Society. Where Mob Rule only requires the majority of the participants to perform but a Free Society needs everyone’s acceptance to exist. If we can educate the majority, we can tug the government to 2. Then, we can transition into a Free State while the minority self deports. Or we can let the government get pulled to 9 and into Socialism (or economic collapse). I believe this government was working. We were learning. We were achieving amazing feats in the ways of culture, technology, social structure, economy and human rights that the world had never seen. We survived a civil war and two world wars. We ended slavery, and all citizens became equal under the law. We were starting to become free, in a controlled environment. But, a relatively unnoticed crack appeared in that controlled environment. By 1850, voting was no longer tied to property ownership and tax requirements. Then, the controlled environment collapsed in 1964, when LBJ implemented the 24th amendment, adding this voting rule to the constitution. You no longer have to pay, to help tug on the rope. The experiment became tainted. The people that would have self deported in a Free Society were allowed to play the game. Arguments, reason, and morals where no longer required in this experiment…all it needed were bodies. Cue the Welfare state. For 188 years the experiment was working. Then, with the nitro boost of welfare, it only took 52 years to produce a self proclaimed, socialist presidential candidate. Phase 1: Voting back to our roots When I use the term Right or Left, below, I am only speaking of the size of government, not necessarily the party affiliation (left = bigger / Right = Smaller) Now, we can’t just start by voting Libertarian and expect to get any traction in mob rule. We need to pick the most popular candidate that claims to be for the least amount of government. We need to flood the government with these pawns on the City, State and Federal levels. The Tea Party movement, for example, began this process but was shut down with propaganda. This is where the spreading of philosophy is essential. Propaganda only works on people who lack the ability to reason, or the ill informed. The more people that are aware of this propaganda, the more steps to the Right we can take with each candidate. Another way to quicken this move to the Right is to get rid of the career politicians. Career politicians are squatters when it comes to change. Never vote to the Left of any incumbent, but if the incumbent and their opponent share the same views, go with the opponent. We need to use these people the way scientists use Fruit flies to study genetic testing…it just gives faster results. During phase 1, we will work our government back to its original size. We will revise the 24th amendment to its original purpose of stopping the ‘poll tax’ (being charged an extra fee to vote). This will insure only taxpaying citizens have the right to vote, and in-turn dissolving the Welfare state. We will lower taxes and pay off our debit. We will spread philosophy, NAP, peaceful parenting and all the other essentials for a more intelligent society, inside and outside our borders. If the Socialists don’t start a civil war in this phase, I will have confidence that our society can survive. Phase 2: A Free State A Free Society within our borders (Similar to how the Hobbits lived in a free society because they had humans protecting their borders). I don’t know if the constitution will be dissolved, revised, or just become obsolete. The only Government tax will be to maintain the military. This military will be a ‘defense only’ military with a missile defense capable of intercepting ICBM’s. The military will not be allowed to leave American soil or police inside its borders. This military will be necessary to defend America from the hatred that it created in the past, as well as the new mess it will create by not militarily defending its allies (if we have allies then). With America not policing the world, I imagine a lot of war around the world, resulting in a drastic decrease in nations and shifting borders. Hopefully, we won’t have to deal with nuclear winter. Immigration will probably start highly regulated and slowly move to open borders as the world forgives or forgets our previous State. Phase 3: a Free Society I don’t know if we will just absorb other countries or there will be several Free States that will eventually merge. I would assume the latter, on the fact that a Free State had sacrificed and shown their determination to be free (similar to Star Trek’s, Prime Directive). Once we’ve consumed the world, we can dissolve the military and their taxes and end the Free State. That’s my NWO plan for a Free Society. It is my first attempt and full of holes, but it’s something to start with.

Oh, the power of words...Just because you speak French, don't make you a Frenchman. It sounds like we are on the same page. However, I'm speak with the mentality of getting to a free society, where you are speaking in 'role play', like we are already in one. The terms and language will change the closer we get.

I'm sorry if I'm using the wrong word. I'm using (il)legal in the same way you want a free society to be legal. Are you dismissing the possibility that rape couldn't, one day, be on the ballot or just right-out legalized because it's immoral? You are giving the government a lot of credit. Abortion is legal and we didn't get to vote for it. The current government, itself, is legal and there was no vote for that. yes, that is a way of looking at it. I think a better prison analogy would be that the inmates get to vote on who their guards and warden are. Eventually, they could be living in unlocked cells, open visitation rights and maybe even furloughs. Yes, they are still living behind a wall, but that's how a free state would have to work until the world became free, as well. Look at Unions. They have voted themselves so many benefits, they are crippling large company's, cities, and even states. With philosophy, we could harness the power of mob rule. All we have to do, is turn the mob into philosophers. And instead of voting for free shit, we would vote for less government. I think it would be more peaceful than the alternative of not voting. If the people that want little or no government didn't vote, that would mean the only people voting are the people that want large government and free stuff (just like the Unions). Therefore, the the economy will crash. Hopefully, before they take your guns, money and property. Thousands, if not millions will die of starvation, civil war or invasion. If we can pull ourselves out of the ashes of that (and we don't belong to Russian), maybe a free society will emerge...until we create a new government or we finally do get taken over. But, that is just how I see it.

Thank you for that clarification. I can see where you are coming from with the rape analogy. However, rape is illegal, giving far more options of prevention. Government & it's processes, on the other hand, are legal. This gives Government a huge advantage over rape. I guess my question is, what is the endgame for getting to a free society without the use of the vote?

I think The Sex Pistols and the Punk bands of the 70's and 80's had a little to do with that. Growing up in the 80's, these bands had me convinced it was all about chaos and violence. In fact, it is so rarely talked about or discussed in MSM that I wasn't corrected on this issue until a fellow coworker educated me 3 years ago. But for Judge Jeanie to use the term in that way does sounds a bit fishy. Maybe the anarchist movement is getting big enough to scare the establishment into starting up the propaganda.

Sorry, for being my first post, but this is a very interesting topic for me. An anarchist, atheist, NAP, co-worker got me hooked on Stefan a few months ago. I bring this up because Stefan made me realize how may anarchists & NAP friends I really have. First, I have a question about the video. Doesn't person 'A' negate the NAP when he draws the weapon on person 'C'? NAP has to work both ways to work, right? I am new to this, but this video makes it sound like NAPers are slaves to Aggression. About voting: Chris Matthews told Trump that it doesn't matter if abortion is immoral...It's legal. I don't believe Politicians want you to vote. The less people that vote, the less money they need to spend to get power. If only 1% of America votes, Politics will commence as usual. They would call it "the lowest voter turn-out in America" and move on. Before I continue, I want to state that I believe that the NAP and all Stefan is fighting for will not happen in our lifetime; if at all. Some people are worried about Global Warming...I'm worried about Global I.Q. cooling. I don't think a NAP world could exist without a minimum global I.Q. of 100 (maybe 115). That being said, why isn't there a NAP party (please, excuse me if there is)? You can't change the rules, unless you play the game, right? Warning: Lord of the Rings analogy...NAPers are like the Ents. So powerful, yet unwilling to retaliate on beliefs. The good news is that the Democratic Party only took 60 years to get us to this hell hole, maybe we can bring it back sooner. If you vote now for some form of NAP/anarchist party, maybe the system could be infiltrated and dismantled from the inside (kind of like what the SJW and PC are doing now). Is this far fetched? It seems logical, to me, at the moment. Is this out of line?