Thread: Is america a free country?

The constitution is a pretty awesome document. Too bad nobody reads it.

The sad fact is that our original "relative freedom" was based on faith in we the people. When the banking establishment started to collaborate with other interests we simply allowed it; it was our duty to prevent it. To uphold the constitution and the bill of rights requires education and will; two things that can easily be swayed in most people by using their own greed against them. Many of our current politicians are tyrants according to the original documents, yet hardly anyone has the knowledge to see this.

People just want to sit around in a pit of gluttony. Hence, the lapels always win.

Originally Posted by stonedape

Give up man. You don't know what your talking about.

Anarchy with law???What? THis makes no sense.

Do you know what =/= means?

Originally Posted by stonedape

I'm not just giving my veiw on anarchy, I'm giving the intellegint version of anarchy. No one is suggesting we just get rid of laws today, right now. Why does everyone think that anarchy means the bull punk rock version? People who haven't at least read a book or something about anarchy are not going to be able to have an intelligent discussion on the subject.

You have repeatedly made the assumption that anarchy would be established against the will of the people. This completely condricts the entire idea. Anarchy is esentially people governing themselves through strong communities and family values. People making good deciscions on their own, based on morals guidelines rather than law. We have come to rely so much on laws now, that people don't have any morals. People will lie to get ahead in this country. This will basically destroy this country if we do not do something about it. You cannot trust people anymore, because if you can legally do something its ok in this country. Doesn't matter if you screw a bunch of people out of their money. I'm suggesting that we do somethings to reform the government now, before some fucked up shit happens. The economy is going to collapse sometime over the next 4 years, and we will invade Iran. These are bad things that will most likely happen because we have a faulty electoral system.(yes nitsuJ the electoral system does have something to do with freedom.)

So you're telling me if the U.S. became an anarchist country it wouldn't be against my will now? Because, I for one, don't want anarchy. Yeah, sure, some people might be able to live in anarchy and be "nice," but what about the rest? Anarchy has no laws in it, you can't expect everyones going to make "good decisions." If anarchy was the cure to crime we'd have it established by now.

Originally Posted by stonedape

But honestly, I don't have time right now to explain anarchy to you, and it seems like you don't want to even attempt to understand it so I don't really wanna waste my time. Stop argueing about something other than what I'm talking about. No one else has put in a major arguement for anarchy, or a sytem or theory on how anarchy would function. All other arguements for anarchy did not say how anarchy would work, they only stated problems with the current system.

read something about the Hopi Indians, or the anarchist society established in spain a while ago.

Well considering anarchy has no government, or laws, I don't see a need in having it. I don't trust people enough to make the "right decisions." If you/they have a problem with the current government you'd be better suited to go live in the Republic of Cuba, or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

Justin and friends, please educate yourself on anarchy. At least read the wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

And watch this guy's video (if you have the attention span, which I seriously doubt):

Posting a wikipedia article when I can find one to make my own points clear, and posting someone's interpretations of anarchy doesn't help any. If you have an anarchy, you have no government and no laws. Maybe, JUST MAYBE, people will make moral decisions on how to live in an anarchist place, but I highly doubt it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy

1. "Absence of government; a state of lawlessness due to the absence or inefficiency of the supreme power; political disorder."
2. "A theoretical social state in which there is no governing person or body of persons, but each individual has absolute liberty (without the implication of disorder)."
3. "Absence or non-recognition of authority and order in any given sphere."

If anarchy was declared tomorrow, you wouldn't have someone saying "Okay guys this isn't the punk-rock version of anarchy so get along." There's going to be no laws and no government organizations to stop them, so have at it.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchy

1 a: absence of government b: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government 2a: absence or denial of any authority or established order b: absence of order

I know anarchy is without government and law, and people expect each other to live in "peace and harmony," but do you really expect everyone in an anarchist country will do that? Really, to be totally anarchist, you can't have laws of any kind or that wouldn't be totally free. So therefore, you have people getting out of prisons looking to do whatever they please. You live in a world were evil is present, not absent (talking about the world in general, not an anarchist world).

So, in other words, you didn't watch the video or even read the article.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

So, in other words, you didn't watch the video or even read the article.

Well, considering the public can edit Wikipedia articles, and I found one that made my points clear that there is no law and government in an anarchist community, and I'm dial-up, no I didn't.

If anarchy has laws, it's not anarchy.

Is anarchy without government and law? I'd like to know what you think, because if it's not without government and law, then it's not anarchy.

Anarchy doesn't get "declared". The fact that you keep repeating this proves that you do not understand what you are talking about at all. The point of bringing up anarchy was to show that this is not a Free(anarchy) country. We should call it what it is, an oligarchy. Lets get off this topic, I don't wanna talk about anarchy with someone who hasn't tried in any way to understand it.

Lets go back to a subject that I think you understand at least a little better. The electoral process in this country is running us into the ground. If you need an example we elected bush 2 times. How do you think that this has no effect on our freedoms? The patriot act, the war, wiretapping? These are all serious infringements on our freedom. The original arguement was that our freedoms are being taken away, right now.

EDIT:Anarchy has no laws, yes we know justin. That doesn't mean you understand the concept. I'm suggesting no laws, only moral guidelines passed on by wise people.

Originally Posted by stonedape

Anarchy doesn't get "declared". The fact that you keep repeating this proves that you do not understand what you are talking about at all. The point of bringing up anarchy was to show that this is not a Free(anarchy) country. We should call it what it is, an oligarchy. Lets get off this topic, I don't wanna talk about anarchy with someone who hasn't tried in any way to understand it.

EDIT:Anarchy has no laws, yes we know justin. That doesn't mean you understand the concept. I'm suggesting no laws, only moral guidelines passed on by wise people.

So you expect all people in anarchy to follow "moral guidelines passed on by wise people?" I don't deny some will, but just because you're in an anarchy doesn't mean everyone will. There's no laws, people will be able to do as they please. You can have a "moral" anarchy, but the "punk-rock version" is going to coincide with it.

Originally Posted by stonedape

Lets go back to a subject that I think you understand at least a little better. The electoral process in this country is running us into the ground. If you need an example we elected bush 2 times. How do you think that this has no effect on our freedoms? The patriot act, the war, wiretapping? These are all serious infringements on our freedom. The original arguement was that our freedoms are being taken away, right now.

"The electoral process in this country is running us into the ground. If you need an example we elected bush 2 times."

Looks like we're running ourselves in the ground from your statement.

Besides having the choice of who to elect, that's a freedom as far as I'm concerned. People are still able to worship whatever they please, still a freedom. People are still able to have protests, still a freedom. People are still able to write about whatever they want, still a freedom.

You've yet to prove to me that people's freedom of religion, speech, and press have been taken away. I know America isn't totally free because I can't go out and smoke refer in front of a police station, not that I'd care to anyways. Drugs shouldn't be legalized, and if they are they should be for at least 19+.

What type of freedom do you want? Name some things you'd like to have that you can't have right now.

I want the type of freedom that the founding fathers wanted. Yes, I do want the freedom to do any drug I choose. But this isn't the main reason I want change in our current government. Freedom isn't about having things, it's about being able to express yourself and live life. Yes, you can do this to an extent in this country, I know, I realize that I have a lot of freedom in this country. I want more freedom, because we are currently losing freedoms. We are currently exchanging our freedoms for conveinience as a country.

I want to live in a democracy or a republic. A type of government where people control the government, not the other way around. We live in an oligarchy. Big business has such a big influence on peoples lives. I know, people can resist all this influence if the really want to, right. But they can't. Constant advertisement. Labels on everything. Always running from one thing to the next. No one really has time to think anymore. I do, because I avoid mainstream culture, but most people don't. Most people can't. I dare anyone in this thread to stop watching tv for a month. Most people can't do this, they are too afraid they'll miss something.

If you wanna debate on drugs we can do this but I can't debate 5 different topics in the same thread.

We elected bush because the people were tricked into thinking he would be a good president. He fucked up and made himself look like a complete idiot for his first term, and yet he won again. I think it's because people have been slowly dumbed down in this country and been made to act like children. We made an impulsive decision because we were afraid of terrorism, well I wasn't but I think most people were. This "threat" is constantly shown on tv to make people more afraid so that they will vote for anyone who is tough on terrorism. This is what I call the media having too much influence on election results.

If the electoral process is working, please explain how bush got elected twice. One time maybe, but twice? Twice? That man is either completely retarted or diabolically evil.

As for anarchy goes, it all depends on the individual people taking personal responsibility for what they do. If suddenly tomorrow it was no longer against the law to kill, rape, and steal, I don't know about you, but I would still not kill, rape, or steal. Yes, there are some people who would, these are the people who have not been taught morals. Personally, I don't live by the law, I find many of the laws absurd. I just make damn sure I don't get caught breaking any of them. The laws I break are mostly traffic, free speech and drug related. It's probably not in my best interest to divulge this, but I trust you guys Basically, I live my life according to what I think is right / moral. I ask, "who is the government to decide what's right for the people?" If not politicians, but people were in charge of the government, I think we would see a lot of changes for the better.

In the end, it just comes down to convenience. People will generally do what they want to do regardless of the law. The more the government tries to crack down on stuff, the more secretive that stuff must become. People right now, (even though it is ILLEGAL) rape others, kill people, steal things etc. Making those things illegal is like a "no duh" solution. But the people who break the law would be doing that to begin with anyways. Laws just make it inconvenient to do certain things.

If everyone were taught morals, there would be no need for laws. Currently, (and obviously) not everyone was taught morals, so laws were created as a way to deter people from doing certain immoral things.

I think the idea of anarchy is fantastic. However as a species, we are not mature enough to put it into practice yet. Hopefully with the easier access to information currently, people will be able to stop all the bullshit and just get along.

I agree, but I think that anarchy could be acheived as a society within 100 years. We just need to make adjustments in the current government. If we really fixed the education system, things would change rapidly. I think this will happen within 30 years. Maybe not, it depends on what happens in the next few years.

That and legalize LSD. That would fix a lot of problems. Especially if they trained people in how to use it.

Originally Posted by stonedape

I want the type of freedom that the founding fathers wanted. Yes, I do want the freedom to do any drug I choose. But this isn't the main reason I want change in our current government. Freedom isn't about having things, it's about being able to express yourself and live life. Yes, you can do this to an extent in this country, I know, I realize that I have a lot of freedom in this country. I want more freedom, because we are currently losing freedoms. We are currently exchanging our freedoms for conveinience as a country.

If you're so upset with it, why not move? As far as I'm concerned you're able to do whatever you please in this country, legal or illegal, just don't get caught if it's illegal. If drugs are ever legalized, it'll only be marijuana. All the other illegal drugs out there are garbage.

[I'll make a thread about the drug topic.]

Originally Posted by stonedape

I want to live in a democracy or a republic. A type of government where people control the government, not the other way around. We live in an oligarchy. Big business has such a big influence on peoples lives. I know, people can resist all this influence if the really want to, right. But they can't. Constant advertisement. Labels on everything. Always running from one thing to the next. No one really has time to think anymore. I do, because I avoid mainstream culture, but most people don't. Most people can't. I dare anyone in this thread to stop watching tv for a month. Most people can't do this, they are too afraid they'll miss something.

Well, they're just too dependent on "entertainment." I could go a year and more without TV because nothing on it peaks my interest. If I watch TV it's usually on a music channel or on a football game or I'm watching a dvd, other than that my TV isn't turned on.

I don't really see how "mainstream culture" is influencing people's lives, probably because no one I know is influenced by it around here.

Originally Posted by stonedape

We elected bush because the people were tricked into thinking he would be a good president. He fucked up and made himself look like a complete idiot for his first term, and yet he won again. I think it's because people have been slowly dumbed down in this country and been made to act like children. We made an impulsive decision because we were afraid of terrorism, well I wasn't but I think most people were. This "threat" is constantly shown on tv to make people more afraid so that they will vote for anyone who is tough on terrorism. This is what I call the media having too much influence on election results.

Everyone is "tricked" into electing a president. Some people now believe Bush was the best president ever, more than likely. It's all a matter of opinion. They (presidents) promise to give things to the people that they can't do without the permission from Congress (I.E. lower gas prices nation wide). This is a problem I have with people bitching about the president (not just Bush, but any president) not lowering gas, it's not up to him, it's up to Congress. Granted he could suggest to Congress they drop gas prices, but unless they make that into a bill it isn't happening.

Originally Posted by stonedape

If the electoral process is working, please explain how bush got elected twice. One time maybe, but twice? Twice? That man is either completely retarted or diabolically evil.

Considering the electoral press is used to elect a president, it's obviously working. The question you need to be asking is why people are electing retards into office. You can vote for whoever you want to, if you want to vote for yourself to be president, you can.

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

Well, they're just too dependent on "entertainment." I could go a year and more without TV because nothing on it peaks my interest. If I watch TV it's usually on a music channel or on a football game or I'm watching a dvd, other than that my TV isn't turned on.

I don't really see how "mainstream culture" is influencing people's lives, probably because no one I know is influenced by it around here.

I feel the same way. Most of what's on TV is crap so I just don't watch it anymore. I'd have no problem going a year or more without it.

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

Everyone is "tricked" into electing a president. Some people now believe Bush was the best president ever, more than likely. It's all a matter of opinion. They (presidents) promise to give things to the people that they can't do without the permission from Congress (I.E. lower gas prices nation wide). This is a problem I have with people bitching about the president (not just Bush, but any president) not lowering gas, it's not up to him, it's up to Congress. Granted he could suggest to Congress they drop gas prices, but unless they make that into a bill it isn't happening.

The problem I see with this system, is that the most powerful corporations are able to sway congress to make certain decisions in their favor. Also, the people who think bush is the best president ever most likely watch too much TV.

Originally Posted by nitsuJ

Considering the electoral press is used to elect a president, it's obviously working. The question you need to be asking is why people are electing retards into office. You can vote for whoever you want to, if you want to vote for yourself to be president, you can.

Why do we need an electoral press to elect a president? Are regular citizens unfit for that duty? It's true you can vote for whoever you want to, but if it's not the main republican or democratic candidate, your vote won't matter. But still, I'd rather throw my vote away on a qualified candidate than give it to the lesser of two evils. As silly as it may seem, I believe that one day people will get their shit together enough to make their own decisions.

I think the reason people are electing retards into office, is because they don't know any better. This being the result of the inability to make their own decisions combined with being told what to think from the media.

You know what people, I'm sick of reading the anarchy argument in 30 different posts just said in slightly different tones. I'm through with this thread! There is no point in arguing with people who are so set in their different ways! This thread is all about arguing with idiots who don't listen to each other, about things that will never happen!

Originally Posted by 5triker

You know what people, I'm sick of reading the anarchy argument in 30 different posts just said in slightly different tones. I'm through with this thread! There is no point in arguing with people who are so set in their different ways! This thread is all about arguing with idiots who don't listen to each other, about things that will never happen!

No, please stay and argue with us endlessly in circles

Lol!

I mean.... I'm not actually here.... !

Read Plato's "republic" search it on google, and you will see the fallibility with a pure democracy. A nation needs its sovereignty, or it will fail. It was a democracy which elected a man who wiped over 6 million jews.. Ambitous leaders can manipulate the minds of hopeless people, that is why greece was in constant war until they established a republic like government.

Freedom rests on options. One of the options that gives you the most freedom is security.

Beautiful people are more free than ugly people,
rich more than poor,
powerful more than weak,
young more than old,
healthy more than sickly.

Just like that song:

"Everyone is equal,
but some are more equal than others"

Originally Posted by Kromoh

Just like that song:

"Everyone is equal,
but some are more equal than others"

And we all know now much sense songs can make... . This is a prime example of stupid lyrics that don't make any sense, its a complete oxymoron, lol.

Originally Posted by 5triker

And we all know now much sense songs can make... . This is a prime example of stupid lyrics that don't make any sense, its a complete oxymoron, lol.

So you're saying you don't understand what those lyrics were trying to convey?

Originally Posted by Sandform

So you're saying you don't understand what those lyrics were trying to convey?

Of course i know what they are suggesting, they just don't make much sense. The artist is just trying to be ironic, they are saying that everyone thinks they are equal. But the people who blatantly are more powerful than the rest are being referred to as 'more equal' to make everyone feel easy about their lives ^^. It has a lack of true meaning though...

Originally Posted by 5triker

Of course i know what they are suggesting, they just don't make much sense. The artist is just trying to be ironic, they are saying that everyone thinks they are equal. But the people who blatantly are more powerful than the rest are being referred to as 'more equal' to make everyone feel easy about their lives ^^. It has a lack of true meaning though...

But if his point is given to you accurately, it has done its job and you're merely harping on the medium that was used to get that point accross.

Originally Posted by Sandform

But if his point is given to you accurately, it has done its job and you're merely harping on the medium that was used to get that point accross.

Okay

Lolz! Didn't mean to start an argument !