Obama Just pwned at Monopoly!
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
Thank you for correcting the reference!
@gayrilla: I still love ya, want to cuddle?
But just to get something straight. Your saying when the military comes to your front door with tanks and you tell them that you won't let them in to take over your factory that they will just sit there until you give them 'permission'?
Maybe.
No.
What I am saying, is that when they come to take my stuff, they will be using force, or the threat of force, because I do not recognize ANY legitimacy by ANY government to rule me, legal or otherwise.
Like the Constitution, these laws are just pieces of goddamned paper, nothing more, unless one believes they actually have some moral authority when a politician signs them.
And JFYI, I would never own a factory. Anything you own in the physical world is an easy target for thieves and their millions of "citizen" followers.
Interesting history lesson, thanks. But please reference the 3rd Amendment to the Constitution of the USA... Seems our forfathers didn't take a liking to those British customs you're stuck with over there. (I wish Obomba felt similar!)
@Rexabit: Yep, it really snuggles up tightly to the NDAA, as if to completely redefine the entire landscape of the USA for wartime. Some would even say that ACTA was its' online counterpart too.
Anyone here know how to make a pretty good little film out of graphs and quotes? One with real production value? I think I've got a great idea for one that's sure to get shitloads of YT views.
PM Me if you wanna.
Disclaimer: And perhaps might get your on Obomba's naughty list too though.
PM Me if you wanna.
Disclaimer: And perhaps might get your on Obomba's naughty list too though.
You feel that way because mainland USA has never been in a Total War situation where your food supply is cut off because of siege by sea and you are being bombarded relentlessly by air.
People keep saying that Britain is obsessed with WW2 but that's because we were under Total War conditions for four years (while much of the continent surrendered, precisely to avoid the hideous privations of Total War - life went on nicely if you were nice to the occupying Nazis). In London, the bombing got so bad, there was nowhere for people to be rehoused, so for two solid years, people actually went into the London underground every night and slept on the hard freezing cold platforms. Then they got up in the morning, washed their faces, and went to the surface to work in the munitions factories.
Imagine if you were going through all that, and then you found out that some guy named Luke was not contributing to the war effort and selfishly hoarding his property and money while he expected his compatriots to starve and at the same time man the defences to save him! "Luke" would have been lynched!
Part of the reason the govt enforced a strict rationing and focus on the war effort was because laissez-faire during WW1 had been a total failure with loads of people dying unnecessarily. Approval ratings for the govt during WW2 were high because they did their job, which was to keep people from starving and keep the Huns from invading.
If the USA was in a Total War situation, would you really shrug and say, nothing to do with me, and just try to carry on as though nothing was happening?
I'll be honest, that's a major problem for us over here. I can't sleep, because there's 4 marines lying in my bed.
Funny thing is Guerilla, a lot of people agree with you regarding the rule of law (which isn't anything new, Nietzsche was the one who opened my eyes to the illegitimacy of the rule of law) and other topics. The problem with what you are saying isn't that you aren't right; it is that no one argued against it.
You obviously have an ego problem, you just assume you are the only human being that knows things and you talk down to everyone because of it. Everything you phrase is as if you were talking to a 'system believer'.
Look at your comments in this thread, they aren't even really relevant to the thread. They are just you acting like a 'prophetic guru' who is here to teach the sheeple.
You are smart, but your ego is making you drift from this planet and just talk down to people. You think you are being smart in doing so, but in reality you are just show your sickness to the world (an ego-related personality disorder)
You have become like the annoying university professor, where if your group is talking about how someone had an accidental abortion, the guy will come up and start preaching about how anti-abortion people are idiots, without even understanding that everyone in the group already agrees with this. He just starts preaching a certain script based on the topic, without addressing the topic being talked about. This professor is forgetting that communication is a two way street and by behaving as he does, he is actually going against the purpose of communication and instead is just talking to stroke his ego.
Actually, Britboy, I was talking about my forefathers, who wrote that rule in 1786 after driving out a homeland invasion. THEY felt that way after being occupied. Save your socialist talking points for someone with 1/10th my IQ, K?
LULZ. "Luke" would have been the fuck out of there before the first bomb landed on British soil. All the smartest people fled. Sounds like your family didn't.
BWAHAHAHA!
Hint for all confused socialists: Laissez-faire doesn't "fail." Governments fail. There's a difference.
Oh the Irony! You obviously haven't read my 4K post. Here you go.
I'll give you this though, of all the posts I've read today, yours made me LOL the loudest. Thanks for that. (But I'd probably take Guerilla's advice if I were you anyway.)
Actually most Brits stayed and fought. Americans though are descended from "immigrants" aka "people who run away whenever there is trouble". So I can well believe you would run off to somewhere else which you imagine is better, as fast as your little legs can take you!
There comes a point where you can't run any further, you run out of places you can hide. When you have to stand your ground and fight. When you have to choose between liberty and property and realize liberty is more important (property can always be restored to you after the war).
BTW I read your Thailand thread. You've sure chosen a corrupt place to run to. They make Americans and Brits look like boy-scouts.
LOL at your goading attempt. Why not just call me a "Chicken?"
If you believe in the pursuit of happiness and you strive to be free, one day your little mind will wake up to the fact that no one place is perfect and it's only healthy to move around the world and see everywhere. In fact you learn a lot that way, so I highly advise you to do so.
And by the time you're of the mindset that a home is just where you're currently paying the rent, nationalism becomes totally unnecessary. You can appreciate the cuisine on this continent, the investments on that continent, the women on that continent, and so on. Each location will just offer a piece of your overall preferences.
When bad times come to one of them, like the US is headed for, it's time to find a new source for that one avenue of your life... Why go fight a war or put your families' LIVES at risk by staying in a warzone for something like your favorite cuisine?
I've yet to see it happen to anyone but the uneducated poor.
A major part of your problem is, of course, that you think you have liberty while you live under a government in the first place!
If you would have read to the end of that thread you'd see where we put that sad argument to rest.
The corruption in America is 10 times worse as it affects every tiny facet of life here. In thailand? It pretty much just means the government isn't as efficient as it should be and cops expect $20 to get you out of a ticket every now and then. That's nothing really, just a different system of doing things.
BTW, not that I want to distract anybody with the actual topic of the thread, but after skim reading that doc, is it me, or does it actually give more power to department directors? As mentioned, there were past laws that gave the prez the kind of power this doc mentions, but I don't know any laws giving department directors anywhere near this much power?
People found it hard to hide in WW2 - for example, there is the famous story of a ship, the St Louis, which sailed from Hamburg to the USA carrying Jewish refugees, which got all the way to the USA and got refused entry there and in Canada, so came back to Europe, where we Brits took them in.
Lots of Jewish and Spanish people got into Britain during WW2 because Labour party MPs put up personal money and guarantees to sponsor their entry. Lots of these refugees were educated but no-one else would help them.
Don't believe that just the "uneducated poor" get refused entry. Sometimes it's just because people don't like the look of your face.
As for the question of "do we have liberty under a govt in the first place", I'd say yes. We do control our govt - we were the first European country to commit regicide (beheading Charles I for not taking notice of Parliament) and by and large govts have bowed to the public will at elections ever since.
After WW2, property got restored immediately after VE day, and elections were held within 3 months of VE day.
Our elections are short (max 6 weeks, mostly 3 weeks), there is no unlimited TV ads or anything like that - parties go door to door asking for votes and have to spend time getting shouted at by voters for their pains. Every single politician gets actual eggs thrown at them at some point, which they accept with good grace (the humiliation is part of the ritual). We get outraged that MPs try to claim for 89 pence bath plugs, and force MPs who tried and got denied claims for duck houses to step down (never mind they didn't get the money, it's outrageous they even tried to claim).
The biggest scandal in recent times involves a foreigner, Rupert Murdoch, bribing the police and hacking into phones, and all are slowly being brought to book.
I know you think that corruption in Thailand amounts to bribing police $20, but the article I linked to suggests 30-50% kickbacks on all business projects. That's worse than anything in Europe and North America.
I suspect most cannot even perceive it, including you.
That's not quite true. And I'd like to deal with something you've done twice now that is beneath an honorable level of discussion.
If you don't like my argument, refute or ignore it. If you don't like me, ignore my posts. But don't try to take on my substantive posts by attacking me personally.
You don't know me, you don't know anything about my motivations. Making claims to the contrary makes you look small and petty. Like someone who has an inability to control what he reads and what he says.
If you respond to me in the future in the same way, I will put you on ignore, and then you will have to pursue an audience of people who care what you think about me, which I suspect is even smaller than the audience who cares about what you think about anything else.
To make it clear, engage me substantively, or not at all. I really don't give two shits about what you or pretty much anyone else here think about me as a person. It's irrelevant.
Jewish refugees at a time America was trying to stay out of WWII? Is that really your big example? LULZ. I think you know why this example is pure shite and are just trying to test me. Try again... Or better yet; don't waste our time and accept the fact that it's better to be mobile.
But the Brits let them in, didn't they? That just means that they were able to get in somewhere afterall, but were too stupid to realize that they shouldn't have gone to the USA in the first place. You gave evidence to how wrong you are yourself.
There will always be places to go until we're under a 1 world government. When that happens, depending on the government, bloodshed may become an acceptable option. I'm not going to risk my families' lives until then, call me crazy if you want.
With all due respect given to the brits of that time, governments change from administration to administration. Times were much better under Clinton here, and even under W here than they are now. Certainly you don't believe that Tony Blair allowed you to live as freely as they did during the time following the first regicide?
If you are being taxed at all, you're not really free. I'm not free that way either, because I pay taxes here, which saddens me to think I'm just paying off the guns that are going to be used to kill innocent Iranians... But I do it nonetheless because I know anywhere I move to I'll be paying taxes there too because all governments are at their root evil. It's a fact you can't hide from. Learn about Anarchy and you'll see what I mean.
So you think that article knows more about it than the several people in that thread living there for years and myself? That piece blows it all out of proportion... Silly stuff like overpaying for a baggage carousel at the airport... Thais laugh about that on a daily basis, it's almost entertainment over there.
I thought you were going to at least talk about the big problems there like their redshirt revolutions that keep popping up every few years... At least people die during that stuff.
Meanwhile, the US is doing things so evil that they have to pass law like the Patriot Act, the NDAA, & ACTA to suppress our speech about it and legalize snatching ppl off the street when word gets out. We offensively invade and overthrow nations all over the globe whenever they put our unethical petrodollar scheme up to the light.
Our laws are piling up so high it's impossible NOT to be doing something illegal at any hour of the day. Forget about changing this failed system, because our votes are totally nullified in multiple ways so the guy who's always elected is never who the people wanted. Our educational system is so pathetic that 90% of the country has no idea things have gotten worse at all. Nor will the Media tell them so. The media, including the BBC, spouts propaganda 24/7 on every network we can receive here.
Good luck on comparing that 1984 scenario with Thailand to any educated people that have traveled there. It's far past laughable.
No, we were much MUCH freer under Tony Blair than we were after the first regicide!!! The regicide happened because Charles I believed in the divine right of kings, and it was one of the first steps towards Parliament taking power away from the King. However parliament under Cromwell was a dour cheerless police state - he was a religious nut and closed all the theatres etc. The monarchy got restored because James I allowed people to have fun. And even then, parliament was only elected by squires, most people (including small businessmen who were known as tradesmen then) didn't have the vote.
Universal franchise didn't happen till the 1920's and even then stuff happened that makes you gawp today, eg when George V was dying in the 1920's, instead of letting him come to his end naturally, they gave him a lethal injection to end him in time for the newspaper printing schedules!!
That would be illegal now, thanks to Tony Blair's Human Rights Act. We reached our peak of freedom, with privacy acts etc under Blair in the period 1997-2001. He was even running surpluses and paying down debt. Then 9/11 happened, and he got seduced by Bush into war, and some of the gains we made in freedom and happiness got rolled back because he got the taste for war and wanted to blow billions on it. I still miss the early Tone.
In Britain we have the rule that "No parliament binds it's successors", so no matter what happens it's worth fighting on because you can reverse stuff you don't like.
I'm sure Americans could reverse the Patriot Act if they got sufficient people elected to Congress to make it happen - after all, it's not as though it was an amendment to your Constitution. Why not just stand for election yourself to get rid of it?
I bet you've kept your American passport despite your professed love for Thailand. It's too risky to trust to a Thai govt in a country that doesn't accept foreigners as equals. Admit it, at the back of your mind you like the idea you can run home to Uncle Sam if things go wrong.
You're missing my point. There is more to communication than what you say. There is the way you say it. Everything you say, you say in a condescending and patronizing tone. That hampers communication. I'm not refuting your argument. I'm giving you advice.
I'm sure you have heard someone talk in a condescending and patronizing way. Explaining things to people they already know. No matter how smart and intelligent the message they have, if they give it in that matter, it rarely gets far on fertile ground. In fact, it tends to have the opposite effect; galvanizing people against your argument because of the haughty and pompous way of delivery.
I only point this out to you because I rather like your posts. You have something to say and aren't brain dead. But god damn do you come off like an a-hole when you say it. This hurts your message.
Your haughtiness even blinds you from friendly advice, seeing everything as a challenge to your great knowledge, instead of the art of learning together as humans.