Changing Faces

[anileve]

First of all, your views are biased, because you clearly view US as an evil superpower which is there only to destruct. For every one American soldier, they kill two dozen Iraqis, I can see how that is rational. Not to mention that they plan attacks on Red Cross which is also helping injured Iraqi civilians, that’s also very rational. People have lived under constant fear and control, they had a spinal cord to rely on and a dictatorial brain to make all of the decisions for them. Pull out your spinal cord and disable your brain, we’ll see how you function. People not used to managing their own life and making independent decisions would be disoriented if the central power which dictated their life collapses. Which is precisely what happened. At the time of the heavy bombing Iraqis did not hold such contempt for Americans it is only later on that they developed this disdain.

Once again, this is evident in the former Soviet Union, when it collapsed. There was a sense of chaos because there was no knowledge of how to function independently, thus heavy corruption sprouted. It took them a while to stabilize the economy and the government, it’s almost a natural order in situations such as this. Same happened with Heidi when it gained its independence, where are they now? That’s why when certain countries are screaming to break off, I always say that they will not succeed. It takes a concise planning before such strong positions are assumed, many nations don’t see beyond the main goal of detachment. Same happened with Iraqis.

I don’t know why we are discussing it in this thread, but I guess you can implement the same concept there. Concise preparation and a gradual exposure and to freedom or liberty is necessary for a smooth transition that would eradicate the ultra-conservative platform.

[Anonymouse]

Where are you getting those mythical figures from? Your claims are completely vague and blurry and you just whop them to state a point.You can thank the Govenrment for that, for it is precisely Government which caused exactly what you are describing. It is precisely too much power by the State that leads people to situations like that, and having just finishied Soviet History, it was hardly "chaos", only from the perspective of the State, because the State no longer had a monopoly on power, it was divided. The Soviet Union as well is a case of where too much government caused such problems. And history is always written by armchair historians for the State. Let's see what Butler Shaffer says better than I can.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer62.html

[patlajan]

Oh noooo, I will do no such thing. In fact I thank you for telling me, because now I understand why your posts carry no relevance to the topic.



Correction just one at the moment...for making such a brilliant observation.

Aaah yes. And that is the sound of you running out of constructive things to say.

[patlajan]

Where are you getting those mythical figures from? Your claims are completely vague and blurry and you just whop them to state a point.You can thank the Govenrment for that, for it is precisely Government which caused exactly what you are describing. It is precisely too much power by the State that leads people to situations like that, and having just finishied Soviet History, it was hardly "chaos", only from the perspective of the State, because the State no longer had a monopoly on power, it was divided. The Soviet Union as well is a case of where too much government caused such problems. And history is always written by armchair historians for the State. Let's see what Butler Shaffer says better than I can.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer62.html

Damn right. And free the children! Free them now ! No more teachers no more books ! No more pencils dirty looks !

[anileve]

Where are you getting those mythical figures from? Your claims are completely vague and blurry and you just whop them to state a point.You can thank the Govenrment for that, for it is precisely Government which caused exactly what you are describing. It is precisely too much power by the State that leads people to situations like that, and having just finishied Soviet History, it was hardly "chaos", only from the perspective of the State, because the State no longer had a monopoly on power, it was divided. The Soviet Union as well is a case of where too much government caused such problems. And history is always written by armchair historians for the State. Let's see what Butler Shaffer says better than I can.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/shaffer/shaffer62.html

I didn’t read the entire article, but I grasped one quote that was completely false and it seems that anarchists base their arguments around this same belief “We have been well trained in the proposition that others will take the responsibility for our behavior, and that our only role is to conform ourselves to these mandates.” On a contrary, we have been well trained to take the responsibility for our actions because one cannot rely on the moral behavior of the fellow human. The argument Shaffer is quite similar to the ranting of all anarchists, it’s based on empty philosophy without any solid substance because it is anything but practical.

But anyway, I don’t want to get into another cyclical discussion about anarchy. I just wanted to ask one question: Is there an eminent nation in the present which successfully practices anarchy?

You and patlajan are on the other side of the ocean with your replies, both considering your comments very constructive and relevant. The question was in reference to suavely introducing nudity to the public which was so prudent previously and how to avoid such opposition or exaggerated behavior.

As for the media pat, I used to think that the media gives people what they want to see, however recently I understood that it’s a process of conditioning. The media feeds people what they think is more profitable and advantageous to them, and the audience accepts it as the norm. So you see, if you teach a child through imagery accompanied by messages of persuasion he will soon look for those elements in his life, even though he had no knowledge of the subject prior to that.

==========

And Anon, the figures are not mythical, see for yourself.

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Three car bombs shook the northern Iraqi cities of Baqouba and Mosul on Tuesday, killing at least 14 Iraqis and one U.S. soldier. At least 126 people were wounded, including 10 U.S. soldiers.

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_bombing_060804,00.html

[Anonymouse]

I didn’t read the entire article, but I grasped one quote that was completely false and it seems that anarchists base their arguments around this same belief “We have been well trained in the proposition that others will take the responsibility for our behavior, and that our only role is to conform ourselves to these mandates.” On a contrary, we have been well trained to take the responsibility for our actions because one cannot rely on the moral behavior of the fellow human. The argument Shaffer is quite similar to the ranting of all anarchists, it’s based on empty philosophy without any solid substance because it is anything but practical.

But anyway, I don’t want to get into another cyclical discussion about anarchy. I just wanted to ask one question: Is there an eminent nation in the present which successfully practices anarchy?

You and patlajan are on the other side of the ocean with your replies, both considering your comments very constructive and relevant. The question was in reference to suavely introducing nudity to the public which was so prudent previously and how to avoid such opposition or exaggerated behavior.

As for the media pat, I used to think that the media gives people what they want to see, however recently I understood that it’s a process of conditioning. The media feeds people what they think is more profitable and advantageous to them, and the audience accepts it as the norm. So you see, if you teach a child through imagery accompanied by messages of persuasion he will soon look for those elements in his life, even though he had no knowledge of the subject prior to that.

==========

And Anon, the figures are not mythical, see for yourself.



http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...060804,00.html

The fact that you did not read the entire article yet choose to rub out one quote, and I do not know from where, as "false" simply because it does not meet your criteria of what things ought to be, is a contradiction in a sense. The fact that you label the philosophy as "empty" without knowing its core, is another testament to your ignorance of the matter at hand, for you as an "individualist" should know quite well what the philosophy here is. The philosophy is not about "practical" for the only people who argue about "practicality" are utilitarians, Statists, and people who do not value individuals, and believe in coercion. It is not surprising that many people do not find libertarianism "practical' for it is an ethical stand, no wonder people cannot grasp it.

[anileve]

You've plucked only one minor point of my post, the quote was wrong. Why is it important? Well because the theory is built upon a fallacy. He assumes that since the message is such then we imagine it difficult to swerve towards a more independent self-functionality. I am basically saying that it's the opposite that we were taught, at least I speak for the majority, where the message is to rely on yourself.

Anyway please answer my question: "Is there an eminent nation in the present which successfully practices anarchy?" Please don't ignore it only to offer a rebuttal of what I have written above. I also hope you looked at the article to which I posted the link. Do those figures still look mythical to you?