Russian analyst predicts 'breakup' of USA; France surrenders

[Death Aflame]

you just did the their thing again tbh

No excuse, but I am quite sick at the moment, hence me spending so much time on these boards.

Edit: hopefully edited out the 'theirs', I am a moron.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

DA, your main problem I think is your apparent intelligence of applied philosophy juxtaposed against your INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS lack of any political science background. I think you should take some poli sci classes.

 

[seedofvengeance]

Feel free to lynch me for fucking up their, there, and they're.

First, they aren't my ideas, merely a reproduction of a 100+ years of political philosophy thought.

Appealing to tradition is a fallacy btw, but I bet you already knew that.

And why are you assuming that anarchist societies would have no control over chaos? Their are ways having legitimate authority in those cases. This is distinct from illegitimate authority.

Oh you mean legitimate authority, like where we vote on who gets the authority and what they're allowed to do... yeah that would be great. You would think somebody would have thought of that already...

 

[Zephyrus]

Jesus fucking christ stop fucking talking like this or I'm gonna kill you. You're turning into what Zeph was until recently.

At this point I've given up pondering any malevolent political agendas, and I'll assume they'll be irrelevant to me so long as I'm not involved in the process beyond casting my vote in a state that generally votes along my own party's lines.

I never professed to desiring a revolution. Revolution is the fantasy narrative that results in tyrannical states such as the Soviet Union.

And also, Anarchism is not some fringe ideal as your unfounded stereotype suggests, it is a highly active field of dissident political thought both within the academy (i.e. where dinosaurs like Noam Chomsky reside) and without.

Guess what, most humans are lazy. They'd rather have a sovereign manage their security than looking after their own asses on some libertarian principle. Get real.

Oh.. you mean like uncivilized tribes? Like the Indians... that seemed to work for them. They never fought each other, their societies advanced remarkably, and they were never over run by a more powerful society.
I see what you're saying now.

Technological advancement shouldn't be a measure to decide which civilization is "better". Native American societies didn't advance as far as Europeans because they had more resources to keep them happy, while in Europe the dearth of resources forced technology to "progress" as a means of keeping millions of people alive. People are happy not because they have better technology, but because they have food on the table by whichever means they can attain it. If there's plenty of resources, then there's no need to advance technology.

They were overrun because a society used to competing for resources found a ton of resources (America) and instinctively made a mad dash for them.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I think that attempting to deduce which country is "scientifically BETTER" is a hilarious thing to do. It just proves that humans are incredibly weird.

 

[seedofvengeance]

DA, your main problem I think is your apparent intelligence of applied philosophy juxtaposed against your INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS lack of any political science background. I think you should take some poli sci classes.

This.
Anarchy is an unachievable ideal given the inherit flaws in humanity.

 

[Zephyrus]

Sorry if my ranting transcends relevance. I'm bored.

 

[Dak]

dakryn, you're randomly fostering paranoia which is NOT what the country fucking needs right now so go back into your bomb shelter bunker and read more conspiracy theories

How is pointing out the shit that is public information (laws and news from major sources such as CNN/Reuters etc) "fostering paranoia"? Official government reports don't need seperate "conspiracy theory" write-ups. Everything I have listed is straight off of [mainstream] sites.

Currently I am providing exactly what this country needs as a volunteer military member (of the Marines no less) in a time of war and have been providing that for 4 years so far and have a year left. What have you done for the country in "this climate"?

I prefer to avoid personal attacks but if you want to make one it deserves one.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

oh no it's the old "i'm helping the country WHAT ARE YOU DOING SITTING ON YOUR ASS ON THE INTERNET LIKE ME PERHAPS" argument. I'm scared of your volunteer abilities! Anyway, I think you're just being silly, and especially so because you're volunteering to help the country you're claiming is EVIL AND OUT TO GET US WITH CRAAAAZY CAMERAS EVERYWHERE AND OMG FASCISM.

 

[Zephyrus]

This.
Anarchy is an unachievable ideal given the inherit flaws in humanity.

Indeed. In terms of evolution our top priority is security by the easiest means possible. We're more likely to maintain our lives under a tyrant than in a state of nature, because the former better guarantees our opportunities to reproduce.

 

[seedofvengeance]

Technological advancement shouldn't be a measure to decide which civilization is "better". Native American societies didn't advance as far as Europeans because they had more resources to keep them happy, while in Europe the dearth of resources forced technology to "progress" as a means of keeping millions of people alive. People are happy not because they have better technology, but because they have food on the table by whichever means they can attain it. If there's plenty of resources, then there's no need to advance technology.

They were overrun because a society used to competing for resources found a ton of resources (America) and instinctively made a mad dash for them.

Which is why I used the term "more powerful" rather than "better." I think it's pretty obvious that a society's power is directly affected by its development and use of technology.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

You mean "power" =/= "better" necessarily!? YOU'RE UNAMERICAN.

 

[Death Aflame]

DA, your main problem I think is your apparent intelligence of applied philosophy juxtaposed against your INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS lack of any political science background. I think you should take some poli sci classes.

Why don't you just tell me what I am missing? Or better yet confront my arguments directly with your own knowledge of political science. I am open to change my mind if I see reason for it but so far I have seen nothing but ignorance toward what anarchist societies actually entail.

 

[Zephyrus]

Which is why I used the term "more powerful" rather than "better." I think it's pretty obvious that a society's power is directly affected by its development and use of technology.

Again, it's all Darwinian. Natural selection is an arms race between species, but humanity's flaw is that it exercises such competition within its own species, between civilizations.

 

[Zephyrus]

Why don't you just tell me what I am missing? Or better yet confront my arguments directly with your own knowledge of political science. I am open to change my mind if I see reason for it but so far I have seen nothing but ignorance toward what anarchist societies actually entail.

Please give us a step-by-step Anarchist Manifesto as you deem realistically feasible.

 

[Death Aflame]

Oh you mean legitimate authority, like where we vote on who gets the authority and what they're allowed to do... yeah that would be great. You would think somebody would have thought of that already...

Did you vote the individual police officers into office, or for who arrested you?

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Why don't you just tell me what I am missing? Or better yet confront my arguments directly with your own knowledge of political science. I am open to change my mind if I see reason for it but so far I have seen nothing but ignorance toward what anarchist societies actually entail.

Uh, your line of thinking is just really fucking far off and completely not realistic at all? I dunno, I'm stumped here, you totally have me beat on the internet.

 

[Zephyrus]

Shh, shh, let the idealogue speak. Plato had an audience, let's give Death Aflame his.

 

[Cythraul]

Guess what, most humans are lazy. They'd rather have a sovereign manage their security than looking after their own asses on some libertarian principle. Get real.

Actually, under a minimal (read: libertarian) state, you wouldn't necessarily have to "look after your own ass". It's not like there wouldn't be a protective agency under such a system.

 

[Dak]

oh no it's the old "i'm helping the country WHAT ARE YOU DOING SITTING ON YOUR ASS ON THE INTERNET LIKE ME PERHAPS" argument. I'm scared of your volunteer abilities! Anyway, I think you're just being silly, and especially so because you're volunteering to help the country you're claiming is EVIL AND OUT TO GET US WITH CRAAAAZY CAMERAS EVERYWHERE AND OMG FASCISM.

So the answer is nothing? Sure I am on the internet, but I can called up at any time get deployed in 48 hours or less. You would see something on the news anywhere from a day or two to weeks later that something happened and go back to the internet.

You find out a lot of stuff in the military that you don't get otherwise and it changes your perspectives.

Regardless of what certain people are doing to ruin what was a good thing doesn't negate a responsibility to serve the fellow citizens in some capacity for freedoms enjoyed until they no longer exist.