Perhaps one must come to grips with thinking about living without government. Since the day I was born, I never recall making a contract with government of any kind that would allow them to be my master.
I like your idea and analysis predicated on basic facts. The non agressional principle. This basic reality reminds me of Henry David Thoroughs math reality " Simplify, Simplify, Simplify. I think if we can forgough the convolution that many people like to throw into the ether, we can truly find basic solutions to problems we see as complex. I will try to look past the spin and focus in on Solutions instead of confusions given out by the many.
Yeah, there are a lot of different belief systems, and a lot of froufrou in the world. That is all well and good. But there is only a small number of sine qua non principles that MUST be followed. That is my focus.
I see where your focus is. I read another post that I thought was brilliant that you wrote about system fails being monarchial 1.0, democracy 2.0, and 3.0 being accountable only to the people. I had one question, is the order that would occur be spontaneous order because that happens naturally when people don't have a focus point. I'm a big fan of 3.0 being my overall viewpoint on that.
On the macro level, yes—spontaneous order is the way to go. People should be free to be the architects of their own lives and choices, and large systems should be allowed to arise and unfold through organic processes and voluntary choices.
On the micro level, you are free to plan your own life as much as you wish. Or to plan your business's activities similarly carefully. You can have as much control as you choose over your own life, so long as you do not impose control on another.
Must be followed lol, your ignorance is only topped by your arrogance. There is no "must" the choice of callously turning aside and letting junkies die because of muh freedom. That is a choice not to save them from themselves not an a-prori necessity.
It's hard, (ain't it hard?) to be sure what's serious, sarcastic or good old fashioned shitposting these days. I went over to Mr. Raven's substack to see if I could get a better handle on where he's coming from. Still not sure but I'd recommend checking out his papercut (Laser cut?) art line, quite impressive.
I have been on Substack for just over 19 months. I was very proud of the fact that I had never blocked anyone. I talk and reason and even stay calm while people are being jerks, and it usually works well enough so that we can either reach common ground or at least agree not to talk further. I am proud of that as well.
But yesterday, I lost my blocking virginity and blocked Mr. Raven. He's a Jew-bashing, strawmanning troll whose dial is permanently set to asshat. Everyone I know and love here on SS already has him blocked. I tolerated him for far too long.
Yes, his art is cool. He also does music, I think. I guess it takes all kinds in this world!
Welcome, brother, to the elite club of Mr Raven blockers. Dude is intense. I give people much benefit in the face of much doubt, and that dude took more than I could offer. I think he's a profoundly broken human being.
I gave him every chance over the years to debate honestly. Nothing doing. Then I tried asking him to just stop commenting here. Nope. Then I ignored him.
Finally, it became clear that the block button exists for a reason, and I was only holding out to keep my streak alive of never having blocked anyone.
And, like many an older virgin no doubt experiences, I thought, “Hey, that was easy. Why did I wait so long?”
“All of our systems will eventually become tyrannical because they are all built on fundamentally tyrannical premises.”
⬆️
This.
It’s like “curing” cancer — we can cut it out, irradiate it, stab it, inoculate it, whatever — but unless its fundamental environment (premise) changes, it’ll just recur or reform in another guise. Instead make choices/actions to create an environment wherein cancer can no longer thrive.
Well said. I had a long discussion with someone who is arguing that we can somehow get back to the original vision of the Constitution. But not only is that not possible, we would not want to even if we could. It's a smaller tumor, but it's still cancer.
That’s a tough one — I get that argument, I do. The Constitution is a sacred American cow, but for good reason. I believe there are aspects of the Constitution founded on universal principles, but at the same time, context (victim/victimizer colonialist environment, hijacking those principles from the very people it oppresses) matters. There are kernels of truth in everything, even the most abominable lies. Cancer can’t exist without latching onto some form of truth. The Constitution, for its time and within its context, had a lot of truth.
Tacitus, in the first century, divided it into “auctoritas” (leadership by merit) and “potestas” (rule by compulsion).
I did not say that I would never choose to grant authority to a worthy leader. When I studied karate, I willingly granted the sensei complete authority to tell me what to do. If he told me to hold my arms out straight until the ceiling fan stopped spinning, and it took ten minutes and my arms screamed in pain, I did it. If he yelled at me for doing something wrong, I tried to do better. I consented to his authority. To his leadership.
My point was that he was not born to impose that authority against my will.
I agree the Non-Agression Principle is foundational and axiomatic. I also say that it is incomplete, and vulnerable, without it's twin, the Self Defence Principle.
The system seems to believe that everyday civilians are "too stupid" to think for themselves and make the big decisions that shape our world. It's even been talked about in certain videos that have been leaked over the years, *cough Obama.
The fact is that the public is quite intelligent and although they may not have the courage to act against authority, they do know what is going on.
How do these leaders know that the public is too stupid to make these kinds of decisions when they've never been given the chance? That's like agreeing to go on a date with someone and then cancelling before you've even had the chance to meet them.
Slowly but surely, people are waking up to the power that is their own autonomy. If someone is trying to control you relentlessly, it's time to step back and think about why. How much of a threat do you pose on them? Why would you try to control a "weak" person?
Let us even stipulate, for the sake of argument, that some people aren't very smart. Since the median IQ is around 100 in the U.S., that is not entirely an unreasonable notion. Even still, what is going to allow people of every intelligence and ability level to rise to their highest height and achieve their maximum level of success? The infantilization of government or the testing ground of freedom?
Some people will fall through the cracks no matter what the system. But in freedom, everyone has to find a way, which ultimately will make more people stronger and more effective.
Also, who says that just because one person has a mansion and another only has a single-wide, that there is some sort of problem. So long as the person with the mansion did not initiate force against anyone, or have a third party (*cough, government) rig the game for him, so what? Do the best you can with what you've got. If that's a single-wide, so be it. I could live in a single-wide. I don't want to and I don't have to, but it's not an indignity. It is what it is.
Profound perspectives🔥 Don't fall for anything that you've been submitted into. Even possums know that. The human natural instinct does too but when attacked it's natural to *defend* and a possum will rip your fkn eyes out for that matter.
What's been described here in the essay is about abusing one's nature and anyone can attack and anyone can defend. The psychology of the issues are clear.
Just because you can, doesn't necessarily mean you should.
Right⁉️
Now, how to go about fixing those who crossed the proverbial line is going to be interesting. And looking for another person or thing to hoe that road hasn't been the answer, ever.
"It takes a village". Interesting how the imperial-perpetuating nimrods use the same montra, isn't it.
Consequently or hypothetically speaking, why would a village have a difficult time realizing, that if they just stop what they've been doing for thousands of years and recognize the fact that they are no longer in the stone ages, things aren't as scarce as was once depicted from inside the castle walls. 🦾✊💯
It all comes down to choices. We have unlimited choices.
We are our own worst enemies when limiting our perceived choices based on supposed authorities.
Seth said it best -- "You are your own Authority!"
We often don't see our choices because we limit what we believe is possible, and that is often a result of our belief in outside authorities.
In all cases, victim and perpetrator roles are a choice. There are no accidents.
This is one of those consciousness-raising elements that needs to be included in the plan.
We are not born to be forced !
Henry David Thoreau .
🔥🧡🔥
100%
Perhaps one must come to grips with thinking about living without government. Since the day I was born, I never recall making a contract with government of any kind that would allow them to be my master.
And if others don’t have a problem with it, that’s their business. They can stay. But I resent the fact that I was never asked. And I want out.
Hey, pardon the influx, but I do believe that a W-4 was a contract.
This principal can certainly be proven. . . it's just not supported by any government on earth.
And by extension a majority of the governments citizens.
You just said three true things.
Sound reasoning; reads like libertarian authors such as Spooner or Hoppe.
You honor me with the comparison. I should only hope to be worthy of it.
Be the leader in your own life.
Yes!
Do you think some people are afraid to?
I think it doesn’t occur to them that it’s possible!
Maybe we could collaborate on a short series about how to become the leader in your own life? DM me if you think it has legs.
I like your idea and analysis predicated on basic facts. The non agressional principle. This basic reality reminds me of Henry David Thoroughs math reality " Simplify, Simplify, Simplify. I think if we can forgough the convolution that many people like to throw into the ether, we can truly find basic solutions to problems we see as complex. I will try to look past the spin and focus in on Solutions instead of confusions given out by the many.
Yeah, there are a lot of different belief systems, and a lot of froufrou in the world. That is all well and good. But there is only a small number of sine qua non principles that MUST be followed. That is my focus.
I see where your focus is. I read another post that I thought was brilliant that you wrote about system fails being monarchial 1.0, democracy 2.0, and 3.0 being accountable only to the people. I had one question, is the order that would occur be spontaneous order because that happens naturally when people don't have a focus point. I'm a big fan of 3.0 being my overall viewpoint on that.
On the macro level, yes—spontaneous order is the way to go. People should be free to be the architects of their own lives and choices, and large systems should be allowed to arise and unfold through organic processes and voluntary choices.
On the micro level, you are free to plan your own life as much as you wish. Or to plan your business's activities similarly carefully. You can have as much control as you choose over your own life, so long as you do not impose control on another.
That's good. I'm on board with that 100%.
Must be followed lol, your ignorance is only topped by your arrogance. There is no "must" the choice of callously turning aside and letting junkies die because of muh freedom. That is a choice not to save them from themselves not an a-prori necessity.
It's hard, (ain't it hard?) to be sure what's serious, sarcastic or good old fashioned shitposting these days. I went over to Mr. Raven's substack to see if I could get a better handle on where he's coming from. Still not sure but I'd recommend checking out his papercut (Laser cut?) art line, quite impressive.
I have been on Substack for just over 19 months. I was very proud of the fact that I had never blocked anyone. I talk and reason and even stay calm while people are being jerks, and it usually works well enough so that we can either reach common ground or at least agree not to talk further. I am proud of that as well.
But yesterday, I lost my blocking virginity and blocked Mr. Raven. He's a Jew-bashing, strawmanning troll whose dial is permanently set to asshat. Everyone I know and love here on SS already has him blocked. I tolerated him for far too long.
Yes, his art is cool. He also does music, I think. I guess it takes all kinds in this world!
Welcome, brother, to the elite club of Mr Raven blockers. Dude is intense. I give people much benefit in the face of much doubt, and that dude took more than I could offer. I think he's a profoundly broken human being.
💯
I gave him every chance over the years to debate honestly. Nothing doing. Then I tried asking him to just stop commenting here. Nope. Then I ignored him.
Finally, it became clear that the block button exists for a reason, and I was only holding out to keep my streak alive of never having blocked anyone.
And, like many an older virgin no doubt experiences, I thought, “Hey, that was easy. Why did I wait so long?”
“All of our systems will eventually become tyrannical because they are all built on fundamentally tyrannical premises.”
⬆️
This.
It’s like “curing” cancer — we can cut it out, irradiate it, stab it, inoculate it, whatever — but unless its fundamental environment (premise) changes, it’ll just recur or reform in another guise. Instead make choices/actions to create an environment wherein cancer can no longer thrive.
Well said. I had a long discussion with someone who is arguing that we can somehow get back to the original vision of the Constitution. But not only is that not possible, we would not want to even if we could. It's a smaller tumor, but it's still cancer.
That’s a tough one — I get that argument, I do. The Constitution is a sacred American cow, but for good reason. I believe there are aspects of the Constitution founded on universal principles, but at the same time, context (victim/victimizer colonialist environment, hijacking those principles from the very people it oppresses) matters. There are kernels of truth in everything, even the most abominable lies. Cancer can’t exist without latching onto some form of truth. The Constitution, for its time and within its context, had a lot of truth.
"for its time and within its context"
—Sure! But people are clinging to that as if it is impossible to do any better.
If you believe no has authority over you, how can you become a leader of men?
Alexander the great was born with authority, Ceasar wasn't.
More complex than suggested.
Tacitus, in the first century, divided it into “auctoritas” (leadership by merit) and “potestas” (rule by compulsion).
I did not say that I would never choose to grant authority to a worthy leader. When I studied karate, I willingly granted the sensei complete authority to tell me what to do. If he told me to hold my arms out straight until the ceiling fan stopped spinning, and it took ten minutes and my arms screamed in pain, I did it. If he yelled at me for doing something wrong, I tried to do better. I consented to his authority. To his leadership.
My point was that he was not born to impose that authority against my will.
I agree the Non-Agression Principle is foundational and axiomatic. I also say that it is incomplete, and vulnerable, without it's twin, the Self Defence Principle.
100 percent. I am getting to that :-)
Cool, looking forward to it!
Also, your title for this one made me wonder if you’re familiar with Larken Rose’s essential speech: http://larkenrose.com/tmds-blog/1894-youre-not-the-boss-of-me.html
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8518D6E8DC877009&si=arBj86VRfzgVF0-k
I have not seen/heard it, but I am looking forward to it—thanks!
The system seems to believe that everyday civilians are "too stupid" to think for themselves and make the big decisions that shape our world. It's even been talked about in certain videos that have been leaked over the years, *cough Obama.
The fact is that the public is quite intelligent and although they may not have the courage to act against authority, they do know what is going on.
How do these leaders know that the public is too stupid to make these kinds of decisions when they've never been given the chance? That's like agreeing to go on a date with someone and then cancelling before you've even had the chance to meet them.
Slowly but surely, people are waking up to the power that is their own autonomy. If someone is trying to control you relentlessly, it's time to step back and think about why. How much of a threat do you pose on them? Why would you try to control a "weak" person?
Let us even stipulate, for the sake of argument, that some people aren't very smart. Since the median IQ is around 100 in the U.S., that is not entirely an unreasonable notion. Even still, what is going to allow people of every intelligence and ability level to rise to their highest height and achieve their maximum level of success? The infantilization of government or the testing ground of freedom?
Some people will fall through the cracks no matter what the system. But in freedom, everyone has to find a way, which ultimately will make more people stronger and more effective.
Also, who says that just because one person has a mansion and another only has a single-wide, that there is some sort of problem. So long as the person with the mansion did not initiate force against anyone, or have a third party (*cough, government) rig the game for him, so what? Do the best you can with what you've got. If that's a single-wide, so be it. I could live in a single-wide. I don't want to and I don't have to, but it's not an indignity. It is what it is.
Good read. Thanks Christopher.
Another minor typo
"It written into the very fabric of reality."
Aw jeez. Thank you, bro.
Looks like I picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue!
LOL
Your writing always lights a fire in me, Chris. Love your work.
Thank you, and glad to have you here. Please feel free to send more people my way!
Profound perspectives🔥 Don't fall for anything that you've been submitted into. Even possums know that. The human natural instinct does too but when attacked it's natural to *defend* and a possum will rip your fkn eyes out for that matter.
What's been described here in the essay is about abusing one's nature and anyone can attack and anyone can defend. The psychology of the issues are clear.
Just because you can, doesn't necessarily mean you should.
Right⁉️
Now, how to go about fixing those who crossed the proverbial line is going to be interesting. And looking for another person or thing to hoe that road hasn't been the answer, ever.
"It takes a village". Interesting how the imperial-perpetuating nimrods use the same montra, isn't it.
Consequently or hypothetically speaking, why would a village have a difficult time realizing, that if they just stop what they've been doing for thousands of years and recognize the fact that they are no longer in the stone ages, things aren't as scarce as was once depicted from inside the castle walls. 🦾✊💯
Brilliant Christopher! I much appreciate how you get to the essence of matters so succinctly!
Thx!