Cliven Bundy v. Feds

[Mountaineer]

Quit obeying land-use regs... cut off city water and city sewer.  Go piss in your front yard.

One small thread-hijacking quibble: cutting off city sewer and going with a private septic system is actually likely to be an amazingly good investment considering city sewer prices in most places I've investigated. I have a private septic tank and thank my lucky stars. No pissing in the front yard required.

Now you have gone and done it!  You reminded me of the truism that one cannot win a pissing contest with a skunk.  The question relevant to this thread is, "who is the one and who is the skunk?" (generically speaking of course). 

... Mountaineer

[Stewardship]

Should anyone engage in political activism?

Yes.

If they do, should they focus on what will work to maximize their cause, or what will be the most philosophically correct?

They should focus on maintaining their integrity.  If I'm for legalization of all drugs because I feel adults have the right to put whatever they want into in their own bodies whether its harmful or not, then I should not go around touting legalization of only marijuana because it's less harmful than cigarettes and alcohol.

If I believe gun ownership is a God-given right, then I should not go around begging the government to grant me the privilege of owning only certain types of guns upon completion of licenses, registration, background checks, and fee payments.

If I believe taxation is theft, then I should not go around advocating lower taxes (still theft), as opposed to no taxes (no theft.)

If I believe the state is evil, and the cause (not the solution) of problems in society, then I should not seek a remedy through the state.

To do otherwise is counter-productive, dishonest, and discrediting.

No, to do otherwise is far MORE productive (the whole point of compromise), and there's nothing dishonest about saying "this isn't perfect but it's a great step in the right direction."

It is a step in the wrong direction in my examples above.

Marijuana may now be legal, but we are now determining legality of drugs based on how harmful the drug is.
I can now carry a concealed handgun, but I am now acting like gun ownership is a government-granted privilege.
Taxes may now be lower, but we are now legitimizing theft by the state.
We may have our state "remedy," but we are now dealing with the state like it is good and the solution (not the cause) of problems in society.

This isn't compromise.  This is selling out.  And misrepresenting yourself to manipulate others is dishonest.  It is fraud.  And that unfortunately is politics, and why anarchists and others choose to opt out.

[Stewardship]

I'd just like to point out that it's possible to discuss ideas while still being friendly and acting like a human being.

Says the assassin.

[Kshartle]

I'd just like to point out that it's possible to discuss ideas while still being friendly and acting like a human being.

Says the assassin.

yeah...note the latest post on the morality thread

[Xan]

Yes, look what he's turned me into!

No matter how many times the holes in his "logic" are pointed out, he just keeps coming back.  It's like he forgets about them.  And EVERY SINGLE topic has to come back to his philosophy, which he doesn't even recognize is a philosophy, but thinks is some kind of all-governing truth.

Sure, he's human, I suppose; although it's really a lot like talking to a Turing bot.  These forums were a much nicer place before he came around.  He chased off Gumby, for example.  I'd certainly rather have Gumby here than Kshartle, given the choice.

I'm not seeing the relevance to my latest post on the morality thread.  Your premises are vague and useless, and your proof will be too.  I don't think that's a personal attack.

[Kshartle]

It is a step in the wrong direction in my examples above.

Marijuana may now be legal, but we are now determining legality of drugs based on how harmful the drug is.
I can now carry a concealed handgun, but I am now acting like gun ownership is a government-granted privilege.
Taxes may now be lower, but we are now legitimizing theft by the state.
We may have our state "remedy," but we are now dealing with the state like it is good and the solution (not the cause) of problems in society.

This isn't compromise.  This is selling out.  And misrepresenting yourself to manipulate others is dishonest.

Nicely put.

This is exactly my point. It is playing the game of the people who want to take from you and on their terms. You will not win your freedom by agreeing to fewer beatings. You simply give up the moral high ground of resisting your slavery (sold out).

[Xan]

Don't fall for it, Stewardship; you'll cross him one day soon, on some minor (you think) point, and he'll throw you to the wolves.  Suddenly you'll be Stalin himself.  It's happened before.

[Kshartle]

Yes, look what he's turned me into!

Gee I didn't realize I had that much influence on you.

I'll do you a favor and not read your posts, since they are so often just personal attacks on me not so subtley shoved in.

[moda0306]

Yes.
They should focus on maintaining their integrity.  If I'm for legalization of all drugs because I feel adults have the right to put whatever they want into in their own bodies whether its harmful or not, then I should not go around touting legalization of only marijuana because it's less harmful than cigarettes and alcohol.

If I believe gun ownership is a God-given right, then I should not go around begging the government to grant me the privilege of owning only certain types of guns upon completion of licenses, registration, background checks, and fee payments.

If I believe taxation is theft, then I should not go around advocating lower taxes (still theft), as opposed to no taxes (no theft.)

If I believe the state is evil, and the cause (not the solution) of problems in society, then I should not seek a remedy through the state.

To do otherwise is counter-productive, dishonest, and discrediting.

No, to do otherwise is far MORE productive (the whole point of compromise), and there's nothing dishonest about saying "this isn't perfect but it's a great step in the right direction."

It is a step in the wrong direction in my examples above.

Marijuana may now be legal, but we are now determining legality of drugs based on how harmful the drug is.
I can now carry a concealed handgun, but I am now acting like gun ownership is a government-granted privilege.
Taxes may now be lower, but we are now legitimizing theft by the state.
We may have our state "remedy," but we are now dealing with the state like it is good and the solution (not the cause) of problems in society.

This isn't compromise.  This is selling out.  And misrepresenting yourself to manipulate others is dishonest.

What about personal decisions on how to deal with government?  What if I pay the taxes the law asks me to pay?  What if I drive no-more than 5-over the speed limit to avoid getting pulled over?  What if I pay the city for water/sewer to my house?  What if I take a driver's license exam?

Am I a sell-out?  If not, why not?

I'm not advocating lying, but even if a politician had to to get elected... If a politician has to lie to get more people to vote or him and achieve maximum freedom possible for his constituents, is he so much different than the guy who lies to the Nazi SS when they come looking for the Jews hiding in his attic?  He's just lying to the powers that be (including statist voters) to maximize the situation for people he cares about given the realistic constraints that he has.  TONS of people did this during the holocaust. (uh oh... did I just initiate Godwin's Law in a way?).  They made ANY sacrifice they could to cling to WHATEVER hope they could to give them, their families, or people they were harboring a chance at freedom someday... and for many, that someday occured!

Working within a system you disagree with isn't selling out.  It is being an adult.

[Stewardship]

Don't fall for it, Stewardship; you'll cross him one day soon, on some minor (you think) point, and he'll throw you to the wolves.  Suddenly you'll be Stalin himself.  It's happened before.

Good thing I'm arguing for ideas rather than for people!

[Kshartle]

Don't fall for it, Stewardship; you'll cross him one day soon, on some minor (you think) point, and he'll throw you to the wolves.  Suddenly you'll be Stalin himself.  It's happened before.

Good thing I'm arguing for ideas rather than for people!

You'll find if your ideas differ from everyone else you will be a depression candidate in need of serious life-coaching and re-programming! You need to get with the program and agree to join in the political process to make a change buddy! Nevermind the results or your personal disgust at the concept. Don't be a martyr driving your car into the boulder!

The discussion of ideas will make people uncomfortable when their positions become shaky and the subject will be changed to you, your life, your discussion style, anything but the topic. 

[Xan]

When you define "not in accordance with reality" to mean anything that differs one iota from what you have determined (through EXTREMELY flawed means) to be the One Truth (which, by the way, is NOT demonstrated in reality), and then pursue a months-long campaign to beat everybody over the head with it, then yes, your mental state will be questioned.

For example, when you worship logic and believe that anybody who doesn't is an idiot, but you don't know the FIRST THING about logic (such as the words "deduction", "induction", and "axiom") then you just MIGHT be a narcissistic blowhard.  (To use the technical term.)

[Stewardship]

What about personal decisions on how to deal with government?  What if I pay the taxes the law asks me to pay?  What if I drive no-more than 5-over the speed limit to avoid getting pulled over?  What if I pay the city for water/sewer to my house?  What if I take a driver's license exam?

Am I a sell-out?  If not, why not?

I'm not advocating lying, but even if a politician had to to get elected... If a politician has to lie to get more people to vote or him and achieve maximum freedom possible for his constituents, is he so much different than the guy who lies to the Nazi SS when they come looking for the Jews hiding in his attic?  He's just lying to the powers that be (including statist voters) to maximize the situation for people he cares about given the realistic constraints that he has.  TONS of people did this during the holocaust. (uh oh... did I just initiate Godwin's Law in a way?).  They made ANY sacrifice they could to cling to WHATEVER hope they could to give them, their families, or people they were harboring a chance at freedom someday... and for many, that someday occured!

Working within a system you disagree with isn't selling out.  It is being an adult.

Working within a system you disagree with isn't by itself selling out, nor is it activism.  However, if you wish to engage in activism, you can quickly turn any one of those daily activities into activism.  Don't file your taxes.  Drive as fast as you deem appropriate and then don't pay your speeding ticket.  Don't pay water/sewer and then piss and bathe outside.  Drive without a license.  Run for office and not lie (these are the candidates I seek for my vote.)  Spit in the face of a Nazi Gestapo agent.  When militarized men come to vandalize your property and take your cattle, go with your friends to go get your cattle back.  You get the idea...

[moda0306]

Don't fall for it, Stewardship; you'll cross him one day soon, on some minor (you think) point, and he'll throw you to the wolves.  Suddenly you'll be Stalin himself.  It's happened before.

Good thing I'm arguing for ideas rather than for people!

You'll find if your ideas differ from everyone else you will be a depression candidate in need of serious life-coaching and re-programming! You need to get with the program and agree to join in the political process to make a change buddy! Nevermind the results or your personal disgust at the concept. Don't be a martyr driving your car into the boulder!

The discussion of ideas will make people uncomfortable when their positions become shaky and the subject will be changed to you, your life, your discussion style, anything but the topic.

1) You don't present your ideas as "ideas," but instead Fundamental Moral Truths that are OBVIOUS and cannot be violated under ANY circumstances.

2) Nobody's telling you that you HAVE to be part of the political process.  But we will describe accurately the health of how you approach politics (avoid it and adjust your life around it like a boulder, become active in it in the most likely-to-succeed-at-some-benefit way possible, leave altogether, rebel in some fashion, or some combination of the bunch).

Of course, what's MOST interesting is that you sell out WHILE insulting others for selling out.  You pay your taxes.  You obey traffic laws.  You listen to police.

3) It's not about your position vs our position on a matter.  Most of us have a very HB'esque way of advising people, and we'd give the same advice to the most liberal activist.  Hell, personally, I even think most of the CONSTRUCTIVE political activism is still mostly a waste of time.

And speaking of "changing the discussion," the basis of almost every opinion you espouse here is based on the fact that you JUST KNOW that self-ownership is morally proven, as well as how that ownership wiggles its way through all the intricacies of life and economics, yet you've only recently finally made an attempt to actually use reason/logic to PROVE what you have said is SO self-evident, and you're at 20-some-odd premises.

Admit it... actually having to apply LOGIC to your assertions was "uncomfortable," so you avoided it.  We don't mind these discussion, K.  Please don't act like it is US that is truly trying to avoid the CORE discussion, here.

[Xan]

Rough day over here.  Sorry for losing it, everybody.  Kshartle, I can't say that I'm glad you're here, but please don't let my opinion on that get to you (not that you need me to tell you that).

[Kshartle]

You listen to police.

No I never really liked Sting.

[moda0306]

What about personal decisions on how to deal with government?  What if I pay the taxes the law asks me to pay?  What if I drive no-more than 5-over the speed limit to avoid getting pulled over?  What if I pay the city for water/sewer to my house?  What if I take a driver's license exam?

Am I a sell-out?  If not, why not?

I'm not advocating lying, but even if a politician had to to get elected... If a politician has to lie to get more people to vote or him and achieve maximum freedom possible for his constituents, is he so much different than the guy who lies to the Nazi SS when they come looking for the Jews hiding in his attic?  He's just lying to the powers that be (including statist voters) to maximize the situation for people he cares about given the realistic constraints that he has.  TONS of people did this during the holocaust. (uh oh... did I just initiate Godwin's Law in a way?).  They made ANY sacrifice they could to cling to WHATEVER hope they could to give them, their families, or people they were harboring a chance at freedom someday... and for many, that someday occured!

Working within a system you disagree with isn't selling out.  It is being an adult.

Working within a system you disagree with isn't by itself selling out, nor is it activism.  However, if you wish to engage in activism, you can quickly turn any one of those daily activities into activism.  Don't file your taxes.  Drive as fast as you deem appropriate and then don't pay your speeding ticket.  Don't pay water/sewer and then piss and bathe outside.  Drive without a license.  Run for office and not lie (these are the candidates I seek for my vote.)  Spit in the face of a Nazi Gestapo agent.  When militarized men come to vandalize your property and take your cattle, go with your friends to go get your cattle back.  You get the idea...

Yes, I'm sure the Jews that survived the holocaust would have been SO grateful if the people hiding them in their homes would have spit in the face of the Gestapo. 

And, I'm equally confident that you don't pay your taxes, don't pay speeding tickets, piss and bathe outside, etc. 


You're basically coming up with a remarkably arbitrary, unproductive, and likely hypocritical level of "rebellion," beneath which you deem to be "selling out."

[moda0306]

You listen to police.

No I never really liked Sting.

Funny.  Seriously.  And I can't stand The Police (the band).

However, I'm still interested in a response to my overall point .

[Stewardship]

Working within a system you disagree with isn't by itself selling out, nor is it activism.  However, if you wish to engage in activism, you can quickly turn any one of those daily activities into activism.  Don't file your taxes.  Drive as fast as you deem appropriate and then don't pay your speeding ticket.  Don't pay water/sewer and then piss and bathe outside.  Drive without a license.  Run for office and not lie (these are the candidates I seek for my vote.)  Spit in the face of a Nazi Gestapo agent.  When militarized men come to vandalize your property and take your cattle, go with your friends to go get your cattle back.  You get the idea...

Yes, I'm sure the Jews that survived the holocaust would have been SO grateful if the people hiding them in their homes would have spit in the face of the Gestapo. 

Perhaps that was a bad example, but I meant as opposed to taking orders and going obediently and quietly to a concentration camp.

And, I'm equally confident that you don't pay your taxes, don't pay speeding tickets, piss and bathe outside, etc. 

I'm not sure why you would be.  Even if I didn't, it doesn't mean I'm not an activist in other ways or don't have plans for it if I'm able.

You're basically coming up with a remarkably arbitrary, unproductive, and likely hypocritical level of "rebellion," beneath which you deem to be "selling out."

Would you say the same about the students in Les Miserables who took up arms against their government, refused to surrender even when there was no hope of victory, and ultimately resulting in the loss of their own lives?  I think Victor Hugo was trying to show us that there is a greater victory to be had here.

We all sell out to some extent.  Some sell out more than others.

[moda0306]

Working within a system you disagree with isn't by itself selling out, nor is it activism.  However, if you wish to engage in activism, you can quickly turn any one of those daily activities into activism.  Don't file your taxes.  Drive as fast as you deem appropriate and then don't pay your speeding ticket.  Don't pay water/sewer and then piss and bathe outside.  Drive without a license.  Run for office and not lie (these are the candidates I seek for my vote.)  Spit in the face of a Nazi Gestapo agent.  When militarized men come to vandalize your property and take your cattle, go with your friends to go get your cattle back.  You get the idea...

Yes, I'm sure the Jews that survived the holocaust would have been SO grateful if the people hiding them in their homes would have spit in the face of the Gestapo. 

Perhaps that was a bad example, but I meant as opposed to taking orders and going obediently and quietly to a concentration camp.

And, I'm equally confident that you don't pay your taxes, don't pay speeding tickets, piss and bathe outside, etc. 

I'm not sure why you would be.  Even if I didn't, it doesn't mean I'm not an activist in other ways or don't have plans for it if I'm able.

You're basically coming up with a remarkably arbitrary, unproductive, and likely hypocritical level of "rebellion," beneath which you deem to be "selling out."

Would you say the same about the students in Les Miserables who took up arms against their government, refused to surrender even when there was no hope of victory, and ultimately resulting in the loss of their own lives?  I think Victor Hugo was trying to show us that there is a greater victory to be had here.

We all sell out to some extent.  Some sell out more than others.

It depends on what their alternative was.  I probably would have been more easy on them if they were calling other people with families "sell-outs" for not wanting to become martyrs.

It matters that you don't do that stuff because you're being hypocritical.  You're calling others sellouts for not fully dropping trou in front of the government, when you don't either, and even your proposed level of rebellion (as risky as it is) is hugely short of the real thing.

[Kshartle]

Of course, what's MOST interesting is that you sell out WHILE insulting others for selling out.  You pay your taxes.  You obey traffic laws.  You listen to police. When the bank clerk hands money to the robber pointing the gun is she selling out? I do those things because the alternative is being kidnapped and put in a cage. I will stop having money robbed from my check if you'll send me money. I'll stop obeying the traffic laws if you come drive me around. Sound good?

3) It's not about your position vs our position on a matter.  Most of us have a very HB'esque way of advising people, and we'd give the same advice to the most liberal activist.  Hell, personally, I even think most of the CONSTRUCTIVE political activism is still mostly a waste of time. A constructive waste of time?

And speaking of "changing the discussion," the basis of almost every opinion you espouse here is based on the fact that you JUST KNOW that self-ownership is morally proven, as well as how that ownership wiggles its way through all the intricacies of life and economics, yet you've only recently finally made an attempt to actually use reason/logic to PROVE what you have said is SO self-evident, and you're at 20-some-odd premises. 80% of them are just an attempt to stop the argument that nothing is really true, God doesn't need to be the answer to all our problems and there's a difference between statements of opinion and statements of fact. We haven't gotten anywhere because some people need the most basic concepts imaginable explained in unbelievable detail. Not trying to point fingers, but if I were laying this out to just Tech for example I would be at the same place with 3-4 at most since the others are so obvious and he wouldn't go to the ridiculous religious or "nothing is really real" arguments.

Admit it... actually having to apply LOGIC to your assertions was "uncomfortable," so you avoided it.  We don't mind these discussion, K.  Please don't act like it is US that is truly trying to avoid the CORE discussion, here. It's uncomfortable because it takes 8 pages to agree on a morality free adjective definition of the word "right". And yes, when after you guys discuss some problem like immigration for 10 pages and I drop in and point out how the use of violence (government) to solve the problem is actually the cause of it and will backfire further, the topic is changed to me and the life-coaching begins.

Ok. I'm not going to respond further on this thread man because the other one is really draining on a number of fronts. I may change my approach on it a little and certainly will stop responding to personal insults.

BTW-to the best of my memory I've never called you a sell out. I've always maintained that libertarians were more of an impediment to liberty than the most hard-core statist. I've explained that belief in detail. The intent is never to insult people who call themselves libertarians, it's to share my unique (I think) perspective on a discussion board.

Someone who fancies themselves an anarchist who engages in political activism is a hypocrite though. An anarchist who pays taxes to avoid being kidnaped is not, anymore than the girl handing over the money at the bank is an accomplice to the robbery.