powersquash Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/30/politics/new-year-laws/index.html?c=politics At first look, 40,000 mandates in one year looks as efficient as all get out. If I did 40k things I would have to do 13.1 of said things per minute around the clock for the entire 365 days of the year. I know we, for the most part, already ascribe to the fuckthegov sentiment but that blows my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lians Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Here's another statistic that might improve the taste in your mouth: The number of subscribers to the FDR YouTube channel grew from 100,000 in October to 125,000 now. 25k in just three months! Holy moly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Both of these are amazing. If this keeps going on, we'll have a philosophical revolution all over the internet! Congratulations to Stefan and everyone who made this incredible growth possible! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 I absolutely adore how out of control government has gotten in the last decade. Statist: mwa mwa mwa mwa mwa Thinker: empirical evidence Statist: mwa mwa mwa mwa mwa Thinker: empirical evidence squared Statist: mwa mwa mwa mwa mwa Thinker: empirical evidence cubed Statist: ... I get it now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cab21 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 At first look, 40,000 mandates in one year looks as efficient as all get out. If I did 40k things I would have to do 13.1 of said things per minute around the clock for the entire 365 days of the year. 525949 minutes in a year 43829.1 minutes in a month where does 13.1 come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceD Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 I'm so excited. The US Government's madness is accelerating at what appears to be a really great pace. Lets keep this up, I say we all vote democrat all the time and call our representatives constantly pushing for all the big government nonsense that's being talked about. We can start off by making that Oregon statute mentioned in the article nationwide. And lets give people two months paid leave for a death in the family, and for a sickness, and for a baby being born and whatever else we can think of! Then we need that $15 minimum wage some democrats have been talking about. And obviously Obamacare is a failure so lets just do a single payer system already. Whatever it takes to bankrupt this country as quickly as possible I support. The sooner this shit blows up, the sooner the anarchists can work to take over a bit of space to start a free society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersquash Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 Can't agree more lance. And to cab21. My math is quite horrid but I figured there were 525949 minutes ÷ 40,000 laws=13.1 laws/minute no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cab21 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 And to cab21. My math is quite horrid but I figured there were 525949 minutes ÷ 40,000 laws=13.1 laws/minute no? 40000÷525949=0.076 laws per minute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 And to cab21. My math is quite horrid but I figured there were 525949 minutes ÷ 40,000 laws=13.1 laws/minute no? 40000÷525949=0.076 laws per minute I feel like its funny that my first reaction to reading this was: "Phew! At least its not THAT bad." It's like you got shot and you're not sure where as the pain hasn't registered. You turn to a friend who says you were shot in the head. Then you turn to your other friend who corrects it to say you were only shot in the ear. You feel relief and pain simultaneously as everything registers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersquash Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 Damn, my math is that bad XD love the analogy Wesley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I say we all vote democrat all the time Except that voting is the initiation of the use of force. The sooner this shit blows up, the sooner the anarchists can work to take over a bit of space to start a free society. Except that the way anarchists "take over" is by getting people to think and understanding that violence is what failed us. If everything collapsed today, there would still be enough people that don't understand self-ownership and the NAP that they would just give themselves away to whatever demagogue convinced them that if we gave him a monopoly on the initiation of the use of force, all our problems would be solved. Worse, this would be a bonding action, the demagogue would go down in history as a savior, and we would be relegated to another dark age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceD Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Except that voting is the initiation of the use of force.Except that the way anarchists "take over" is by getting people to think and understanding that violence is what failed us. If everything collapsed today, there would still be enough people that don't understand self-ownership and the NAP that they would just give themselves away to whatever demagogue convinced them that if we gave him a monopoly on the initiation of the use of force, all our problems would be solved. Worse, this would be a bonding action, the demagogue would go down in history as a savior, and we would be relegated to another dark age.Standing on the moral high ground and talking about how we are all going to win a war of ideas is really nice and all. I'm just not of the opinion that talking is going to get anything done. So while I'm not saying we should all grab guns and storm the capital I do not think a peaceful solution is possible. My observations of my fellow Americans has led me to two conclusions. 1. As long as the State appears to be functioning they will support it. So our government needs to be in serious decline before any movement gains real reaction 2. There will be a lot of people unwilling to see things change and willing to perpetrate violence on us to see things not change. There are just to many people around who think their way is the right way and it's okay to use violence to force people to do things their way. So your statement is great for a discussion and it sounds really nice when Stefan says similar things. However a real peaceful change starting with changing the way people think will take generations. However I have children and if I want them to see something better that isn't going to cut it. So let's bring on the extreme growth in government and drive this thing into the ground already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 1. As long as the State appears to be functioning they will support it. So our government needs to be in serious decline before any movement gains real reaction TSA, NDAA, drones, nationalized health care snafu 3 layers deep, and the upcoming lack of SS funds, pensions, fiat currency collapse, etc. Just look at how many people take the media seriously to understand that people do think the state is functioning. Even by way of improper reasoning, such as viewing the recent "shutdown" as failing the people. However a real peaceful change starting with changing the way people think will take generations. However I have children and if I want them to see something better that isn't going to cut it.So let's bring on the extreme growth in government and drive this thing into the ground already! THIS isn't going to cut it. Collapsing it before people realize that the foundation was unsustainable only to rebuild it all over isn't going to cut it. Saying that the right answer will take generations, so patch it to get us through our time isn't going to cut it. In fact, it's one of the inherent flaws that got us so deep that it will take generations to fix. Willpower doesn't influence the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceD Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 You seem to think I want to save everyone. I agree if our goal is to take a whole country, in this case the US, and convert it to a free society you are entirely correct! However I don't care to save everyone. I want a power vacuum big enough that a group of people who already see the truth can take an area for themselves. I have a family to concern myself with so I'm not really sympathetic to those ignorant masses who choose to empower this system that abuses my children. I want to save my own and I'm happy to work alongside anyone else who already sees things the correct way. It's my opinion this struggle cannot be won with simply words. I don't see how we can possibly talk the statists down. So to avoid a full on civil war the best solution I can see is to drive this thing into the ground. Then maybe a movement like the free state society can really form a legitimate free state in the emptiness left behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegahero09 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I really think the way anarchists would get things done is just to come together in a community inviting business entrepreneurs and standing with their arms crossed at statists who come to try to stir shit up- waiting to use defensive force, or to happily trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 It's my opinion this struggle cannot be won with simply words. You're right. It doesn't need the plurality of wordS. If a good portion of the enforcer class said, "no," we'd have a revolution without a drop of blood being spilled and we could have that TODAY. You are favoring wishful thinking over empirical evidence. You wouldn't achieve your stated goal by way of your prescribed methodology. If you're one guy surrounded by eight people that think their numerousness shifts the ownership of you from you to them, your understanding of the truth won't save you. People cheer when one person's unsubstantiated claim of a plant leads to one person's arbitrary blessing to a paramilitary force coming in like well-coordinated home invaders, killing a baby, and imprisoning somebody trying to defend themselves for life. These people are not going to let you have a club off to the side that denounces violence while they believe that violence is an answer and therefore violence to force everybody to cooperate is noble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceD Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 You're right. It doesn't need the plurality of wordS. If a good portion of the enforcer class said, "no," we'd have a revolution without a drop of blood being spilled and we could have that TODAY. You are favoring wishful thinking over empirical evidence. You wouldn't achieve your stated goal by way of your prescribed methodology. If you're one guy surrounded by eight people that think their numerousness shifts the ownership of you from you to them, your understanding of the truth won't save you. People cheer when one person's unsubstantiated claim of a plant leads to one person's arbitrary blessing to a paramilitary force coming in like well-coordinated home invaders, killing a baby, and imprisoning somebody trying to defend themselves for life. These people are not going to let you have a club off to the side that denounces violence while they believe that violence is an answer and therefore violence to force everybody to cooperate is noble. I really don't think you read all the words in my post, or if you did you just ignored them in favor of saying what you wanted regardless of the statements I made. Anyway, if you have all the answers on how this should go down please propose them. It would also be awesome if you could show examples of where and when this strategy has been employed in history as well that would be great. We all know the armed revolution has worked, as well as the idea of replacing a collapsed system with a new one. So my ideas are based in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I really don't think you read all the words in my post, or if you did you just ignored them in favor of saying what you wanted regardless of the statements I made. In other words, either I agree with you or I didn't read what you wrote. This is removing me from the conversation. Anyway, if you have all the answers on how this should go down please propose them. "2+2=5 is false" is true even if I do not provide 2+2=4. Besides, saying violence will not work IS proposing the answer: not violence. It would also be awesome if you could show examples of where and when this strategy has been employed in history as well that would be great. Akin to saying, "since we've always had slavery, we're always going to have slavery." There are different ways for peaceful revolution and the enforcer class saying no is just one of them. Not that they're required as you stipulate, but there has been examples in history. I'm not like Stef and cannot pull such examples off the top of my head. We all know the armed revolution has worked The point in time which you're referring had two sides with equal level of technology. As opposed to drones, advanced surveillance, etc. Not that penning a document that leads to the single largest, most destruction force in the history of mankind could be accurately described as "worked." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceD Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 In other words, either I agree with you or I didn't read what you wrote. This is removing me from the conversation. "2+2=5 is false" is true even if I do not provide 2+2=4. Besides, saying violence will not work IS proposing the answer: not violence. Akin to saying, "since we've always had slavery, we're always going to have slavery." There are different ways for peaceful revolution and the enforcer class saying no is just one of them. Not that they're required as you stipulate, but there has been examples in history. I'm not like Stef and cannot pull such examples off the top of my head. The point in time which you're referring had two sides with equal level of technology. As opposed to drones, advanced surveillance, etc. Not that penning a document that leads to the single largest, most destruction force in the history of mankind could be accurately described as "worked." You didn't read my post because you didn't actually respond to the content of it, you just responded to one sentence you picked out and ranted about. I'm not proposing violence. I'm simply proposing the government continues to do what it is already doing, and I have no chance of stopping, to the point of self destruction. If anything I am doing more to prevent violence then you are because i'm actually thinking up realistic ways to bring down the government. You're just sitting here telling me i'm wrong while presenting no realistic alternative. Also why would the enforcer class say no? How has the faith in government been shaken enough to lead to that? How are we going to ever achieve a free state when most of the people who want to fight against the things our government is currently doing just want to institute a government of their design? Really I am not proposing an armed revolution. Simply a course of action if one should occur or if the government falls under its own weight, the much more preferable option. I got side tracked a bit trying to press you to actually present an idea of your own and referenced them as an example. Though on a side note the technology thing is total nonsense because Afghanistan. We can't defeat a bunch of people living like cavemen armed with assault rifles what makes you think we could defeat ourselves? Though this really isn't the topic because it honestly is not something I would ever want to see, I just can't resist not rebutting that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts