Originally posted by King Ronald
.
K King Ron,
Im English BTW and a "Thatcher child" born into and grew up knowing nothing but Thatcherism. Poor single parent family (im sure you know how we they
were disdained at that time). Thus i feel that personally knowing poverty as i did for a long time i can speak on that supposedly compassionless
"greed is good" Thatcher/Reagan epoch without accusations of priviledged arrogance.
We had mass privatisation in Britain during the Thatcher years and it's brought us a bunch of disparate, corrupt and ineffective companies screwing
around with vital networks people need on a day to day basis.
We didnt have privitisation per se though (im assuming your talking about the rail network) we had corporatist, third way, public private partnership
franchise BS! For example if you watch the news reguarly you will have seen the government bailouts of shareholders and government (taxpayer) money
going to a supposedly private company for upgrades because of the economic consequences of a potentially non functioning rail network.
Now what is the result? The service is perpetually crap, the franchise holder knows the goverbstards will bail them out with taxpayer money because we
have entrusted our lives to BIG government and run to them when anything goes wrong. So there is little responsibility on the shoulders of a
supposedly private company. This is not capitalism its corporatism, in a capitalist system an incompetent rail operator would go bankrupt, the irate
customers would go
catch buses or carpool or whatever and a rail service would only come back into existence when a competent operator took over the ruins of the
bankrupt company.
As an aside rail seems to be a tricky buisness for laisez faire capitalism to resolve, even frontier America railroads were given vast swathes of
federal land contrary to Ayn Rands posit.
Surely a system of heavily monitored yet centralized governance for things like medicine, housing and transport would be useful? It's all very well
for you Americans with masses of space and resources, but in an island economy like Britain, things need conserving, manpower needs organizing and
resources need to be allocated effectively.
Even NWO economists will tell you government hasnt got a damn clue about whats best for "society" (or at least how best to achieve it).
Not trying to sound patronizing, but anyone who has studied a little economics would understand that a free market (even a pseudo free market like we
have) is superior to bureaucratic vote winning demagogues flights of fancy. See Adam Smiths "invisible hand" eg a buyer and seller both get what
they consider worth from a house deal, they know best NOT some govenrnment suit in an a office appropriating houses to give to folk, this is why you
have neighbourhoods of empty government housing some places and high demand others. Anyway thats an economic thing which should make way for the
salience of liberty, specifically property rights (inc taxation) which are fundamental to human being itself. As for the poor, one word -
PHILANTHROPY.
And on that note, quote time
"It is often easier for our children to obtain a gun than it is to find a good school."
Joycelyn Elders
"Maybe that's because guns are sold at a profit, while schools are provided by the government."
David Boaz
"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."
P.J. O'Rourke
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."
P.J. O'Rourke
"An election is nothing more than an advance auction of stolen goods."
Ambrose Bierce
"Every individual necessarily labors to render the annual revenue of society as great as he can. He generally neither intends to promote the public
interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. He intends only his own gain, and he is, in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to
promote an end which was not part of his intention."
Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations
"If you think of yourselves as helpless and ineffectual, it is certain that you will create a despotic government to be your master. The wise despot,
therefore, maintains among his subjects a popular sense that they are helpless and ineffectual."
Frank Herbert, The Dosadi Experiment
"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away."
Barry Goldwater
"National Health Insurance means combining the efficiency of the Postal Service with the compassion of the I.R.S. .... and the cost accounting of the
Pentagon."
Louis Sullivan/Connie Horner quoted by Novak in _Forbes_
Also - I love the idea of self-policing communities under no jurisdiction from a police force, but what about:
a) Organized criminal activity terrorising isolated areas.
b) Corrupt militia groups harming, not helping locals.
A. Anarcho-Capitalism, basically private policing.
This requires a reformation of law to justice. Justice is the commonly agreed upon punishment of offenders this is where natural law comes in, in
short dont do unto others as you would not have done unto you. Everyone worldwide regardless of culture generally agree on these fundemental laws,
hence NATURAL law. See:
www.jim.com...
An interesting case was Iceland from the 10th to 13th centuries, law was completly private by all accounts it was a prosperous and enlightened
society.
As for the poor who otherwise would not be able to obtain justice well the money lies on the perpetrators head thus it can be sold to a private party.
This may sound like the wild west and in many ways it is but the fact is the wild west had a FAR lower crime rate than modern American cities.
I'm probably being ignorant here, but you don't half hear some things about American militia forces camped out in nuclear bunkers in the middle of
nowhere, armed to the teeth and praising God for the Aryan race......I'd sure want a formalized military force if those guys cam a knocking.
Thats like saying all blacks are gang members doing drive by shootings or all muslims are suicide bmbing jihadists. Sure there is some wackos out
there with odd views same everywhere but when have you heard of them attacking anyone? A lot less than the ATF, FBI attacking free people minding
their own buisness thats for sure WACO?
IGNORE THE MEDIA NWO PROPOGANDA!
Call them nazis wow! Thats original this is a whole other story infriltraion from feds and such. Fear not though these
PATRIOTS are first on the NWO hit list as with all gun owning patriots militia or not, they will be dead soon enough Waco style. RIP.
Check out their websites find out about them first, just a suggestion try googling Michigan milita. Also a lot of these folks are christians
(demonised group nowadays) clued up on the NWO they aint starting trouble they are preparing to defend themselves as is their NATURAL RIGHT. Good
luck to them i say.
BTW the guy from the Oklahoma bombing, he came from the CIA's big book of loner extremist patsys. Oklahoma bombing = NWO/Clinton/CIA job. Of course
the focus went on militias and their like after that.
In conclusion then, am I right in understanding what your saying as being "No need to go too far left, we just need a kind of moderated capitalism
combined with anarchistic/libertarian elements" (i.e. the no police thing)? I would agree with that, but question specific aspects of that out of
fear (if i'm being honest) that extremist groups (such as terrorists, fascists etc.) would screw everything up for the majority.
Well the thing is you cant just implement what i would like to see because of the NWO coup de tat that occured a century+ ago, and they have had
almost limitless resources to subvert society ever since.
But progression to a libertarian society (which inevitably is economically based on REAL capitalism) is what i would wish for, societal conformity
would be based on natural law and thanks to anarcho-capitalism victim crimes would have JUST punishments whilst victimless crimes such as smoking weed
being gay or whatever would not be punished as they would be economically unviable to a prospective prosecutor much less enforcable without big
government laws.
One major problem would be societys debased morality which has been subverted through attacks on religon, the sexual liberation of the 60's (lack of
family structure, "i want" sexual culture, etc) corporatist greed and the rest.
This has been the work of the NWO no doubt , just as religon was obliterated from communist nations, the only way to restore this is through free
choice of education for parents (private of course) and maybe philantropic grants to morally good causes.
Terrorists would hardly prosper in such a non-antagonistic society and any that did pop up would be dealt with HARSHLY mwahahah.
As addendum - surely a society that forces everybody to live well is better than how you make out?
What is wrong with "forcing" people to eat well, live rightly and healthily and promote a particular way of living (provided the "way" isn't
extremist)?
It doesnt work thats the first problem never has and can only work with TOTAL and ABSOLUTE tyranny. You cant force people not to take drugs for
example you can only "lawfully plunder" (Frederik Bastiats correct take on taxation) their money for FUTILE advertising campaigns on drugs and
FUTILE law enforcment. Which results in the non drug taking society now addicted to their own drug (big government) demanding MORE action. Its an
absurdity and we havent even touched on the human right to self determination.
As for government "force" ummm no thanks!
"If you protect a man from folly, you will soon have a nation of fools."
- William Penn
(This is getting heavy now!)
Yes it is getting heavy, this is a good thing but somewhat daunting also in that to even comprehend the NWO agenda and its operations at an above
superficial level we need to both rid ourselves of the pre-conditioning that has been omnipresent throughout our lives and read oft weighty
economic/jurisprudential/social sciences/history etc tomes of either the NWO affiliated/usefull idiot academics with over critical reasoning or the
hidden treasures which refute their blatantly (you would think...) absurd dogma (central banking, political correctness, etc).
With the proliferation of mindless entertainment (football not included
) the number of average joes reading this stuff has diminished
exponentially, for example; back in the late 1700's in America "Blackstones commentaries on the laws of England" was something of a best seller it
concerned 'common law' (read; a consensus of the people of what is justice ie "justice must be seen to be done" not LAW but JUSTICE FFS!) this was
when law was not formally laid down nationally as it is now by elites. The founding fathers of the US understood this and knew that liberty and the
republic would only survive through citizens knowledge on such matters, (of course morality and the will to fight to defend liberty were imperative
also).
Phew! That took ages i bet the King doesnt even read this reply after all that
