• Welcome to New Hampshire Underground.
 

News:

Please log in on the special "login" page, not on any of these normal pages. Thank you, The Procrastinating Management

"Let them march all they want, as long as they pay their taxes."  --Alexander Haig

Main Menu

Many yearn for freedom, but have no where to turn

Started by David, January 23, 2008, 10:06 PM NHFT

Previous topic - Next topic

David

It occured to me earlier today that there are actually billions of people that want freedom, but because the gov't structure is the only way they know to organize society, and in many cases it is the only one they will trust, they end up with something very similar to what they were challenging.  All the organized resistance in the last century, resulted in a slightly less dangerous gov't, but the result has been somewhat shortlived. 
The need has never been higher for a workable alternative to gov't than now.  Theories and past examples will not work, as there is no way to prove it.  No one, will endanger their lives challenging gov't for something that they do not firmly believe.  And believing usually means seeing. 


kola

I agree David. That is why I keep bringing up the questions regarding what can we do and are there any solutions.

So fornow, I resort to just taking care of me and seperating from the system (as much as I can)

There is power in numbers but it is the FEAR that keeps people from banding together and creating positive change. 

It seems hopeless and that disturbs me.

Kola


Ron Helwig

Quote from: kola on January 23, 2008, 11:38 PM NHFT
I agree David. That is why I keep bringing up the questions regarding what can we do and are there any solutions.

So for now, I resort to just taking care of me and separating from the system (as much as I can)

What can we do? We can build non-governmental solutions to problems that people insist only government can solve:

  • create our own money - like some are trying to do with shiresilver.org
  • build our own or enhance existing non-government charities
  • create or enhance existing "regulation agencies" like UL and the group that does kosher certification
  • create our own media or improve on media that is currently whoring the government line
  • ... fill in your own

This is a call to all anarchists to show that anarchy works by example.

If you want people to believe that government is not needed, prove it. Create the solutions, don't just talk about it. Pick one and run with it.

I think part of the problem is that we all want all the solutions to be implemented, and it is too big a task for one person, so we tend to not get started. Well, screw that - pick one thing you are really interested in and work on that one thing. My big thing is money, so I am working on trying to prove that a free market, non-governmental currency system is workable. If you truly believe in freedom, you have to believe that others will handle the rest on their own accord.

In other words; don't just try to run and hide, shut the fuck up, and do something positive.

dalebert

I think you have the right idea, Ron. It's difficult because the government doesn't appreciate it when people threaten their monopolies but we should start. Even when the government tries to horn in, that's a media opportunity that should be taken advantage of to reach people about what's going on.

dalebert


Kat Kanning

What monkey?  Or is this one of those I-don't-really-want-to-know things?

srqrebel

Quote from: David on January 23, 2008, 10:06 PM NHFT
It occured to me earlier today that there are actually billions of people that want freedom, but because the gov't structure is the only way they know to organize society, and in many cases it is the only one they will trust, they end up with something very similar to what they were challenging.  All the organized resistance in the last century, resulted in a slightly less dangerous gov't, but the result has been somewhat shortlived. 
The need has never been higher for a workable alternative to gov't than now. 

:clap:

Well said!

Quote from: David on January 23, 2008, 10:06 PM NHFT
Theories and past examples will not work, as there is no way to prove it.  No one, will endanger their lives challenging gov't for something that they do not firmly believe.  And believing usually means seeing. 

Of course, theories have to be acted upon in order to obtain results, and there are no past examples of genuine, 100% free market-based voluntary societies to point to.

This experiment would merely establish a pocket of anarchism within an aggression-based society.  It is most certainly true that no one will endanger their life for something they do not firmly believe -- so when outsiders observe the inevitable aggression it will draw from the prevailing crime syndicate, why would they want to endanger their lives by following suit?

David


David

Quote from: kola on January 23, 2008, 11:38 PM NHFT
I agree David. That is why I keep bringing up the questions regarding what can we do and are there any solutions.

So fornow, I resort to just taking care of me and seperating from the system (as much as I can)

There is power in numbers but it is the FEAR that keeps people from banding together and creating positive change. 

It seems hopeless and that disturbs me.

Kola


My sentiments also.   :(

Quote from: MobileDigit on January 23, 2008, 10:42 PM NHFT
What do you suggest?
It may be a crappy idea, but it is what I have. 
Most believe, in the usa anyway that the constitution is some sort of 'social contract'.  Of course it isn't, but the idea that it is somehow legitimizes the gov't. 
A while back I found a website called contract for liberty.  It was exactly that.  (it seems to be gone now) The basic idea here http://wiki.freetalklive.com/Contract_for_liberty
It isn't gov't that I actually hate, it is their violence, and threats that I vehemently hate.  So if it would be possible to create a working  governing group, or club, that functions without the very things that make traditional gov'ts so bad, I would be happy.  Instead of an investment club, it would be a governing club. 
Any pet issue that someone has can be included in their little 'club', welfare, care for the old and or disabled, free (to the user) school, etc. 
The authoritarians could make one that has their idea of authority and freedom as they see it to their hearts content.
A person choosing to submit to something I would find objectionable is not bad, so long as they don't hurt me or encroach on me. 

If a real alternative to gov't can be found, then the near religious belief in gov't can maybe be cracked. 

John Edward Mercier

Quote from: David on January 25, 2008, 09:08 AM NHFT
Quote from: kola on January 23, 2008, 11:38 PM NHFT
I agree David. That is why I keep bringing up the questions regarding what can we do and are there any solutions.

So fornow, I resort to just taking care of me and seperating from the system (as much as I can)

There is power in numbers but it is the FEAR that keeps people from banding together and creating positive change. 

It seems hopeless and that disturbs me.

Kola


My sentiments also.   :(

Quote from: MobileDigit on January 23, 2008, 10:42 PM NHFT
What do you suggest?
It may be a crappy idea, but it is what I have. 
Most believe, in the usa anyway that the constitution is some sort of 'social contract'.  Of course it isn't, but the idea that it is somehow legitimizes the gov't. 
A while back I found a website called contract for liberty.  It was exactly that.  (it seems to be gone now) The basic idea here http://wiki.freetalklive.com/Contract_for_liberty
It isn't gov't that I actually hate, it is their violence, and threats that I vehemently hate.  So if it would be possible to create a working  governing group, or club, that functions without the very things that make traditional gov'ts so bad, I would be happy.  Instead of an investment club, it would be a governing club. 
Any pet issue that someone has can be included in their little 'club', welfare, care for the old and or disabled, free (to the user) school, etc. 
The authoritarians could make one that has their idea of authority and freedom as they see it to their hearts content.
A person choosing to submit to something I would find objectionable is not bad, so long as they don't hurt me or encroach on me. 

If a real alternative to gov't can be found, then the near religious belief in gov't can maybe be cracked. 
The Authoritarian Model stems from the Parent/Child relationship. The child is supported, and thus the parent has control over them. Children would grow and become more self-sufficient and the 'control' would diminish. Unfortunate many children now move from parental support to government support.

The 'governments' authority is force (might makes right). Constitutions (even the local Native Americans had one before Europeans arrived) are 'social contracts' limiting that authority. A King (sovereign) only remained King if his might was enough to hold the lands, and life, from outside force.

David

The constitution never was a 'social contract', contract means choice. 

Maybe a possible way to 'market' or sell, anarchy, is to promote the contract for liberty idea as a social contract that really gives you a choice.  It would differ from gov't in that there would be no initiation of force.  This may work because most people genuinely believe the gov't is a social contract.  Of coarse the gov't benefits enormously from that belief.   

Caleb

Quote from: John Edward Mercier on January 25, 2008, 05:53 PM NHFT
The Authoritarian Model stems from the Parent/Child relationship. The child is supported, and thus the parent has control over them. Children would grow and become more self-sufficient and the 'control' would diminish. Unfortunate many children now move from parental support to government support.

::) I love unsupported statements.

srqrebel

Quote from: Caleb on January 28, 2008, 11:26 AM NHFT
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on January 25, 2008, 05:53 PM NHFT
The Authoritarian Model stems from the Parent/Child relationship. The child is supported, and thus the parent has control over them. Children would grow and become more self-sufficient and the 'control' would diminish. Unfortunate many children now move from parental support to government support.

::) I love unsupported statements.

The factual basis of this statement is actually pretty self-evident.

The AMOG is most definitely supported by the Parent/Child relationship: Each of us is conditioned as an easily impressionable child to suppress our inherent self-authority and right to exercise our own judgement in all things, and instead submit to the "higher authority" and "better judgement" of others (parents, teachers, clergy, and other "experts").  While this is a natural condition for a young child, since it shields the tender child from the harmful (even fatal) results of uneducated bad choices, the AMOG makes it possible for the individual to remain unnaturally dependent on others once an adult, instead of learning to exercise his own inherent authority and judgement.

Cattle are a good analogy for this.  It is perfectly natural for a newborn calf to be dependent upon its mother for nourishment.  Eventually, the mother's milk dries up, and the growing calf must learn to fend for itself.  However, it is possible to keep the calf dependent on milk into adulthood, and beyond -- by simply substituting a lactating surrogate.

The AMOG serves as this unnatural surrogate, that keeps humans dependent upon the "better judgement" of others, instead of learning to exercise their own judgement and operate on their own authority the way nature intended.

Do you need an "expert" to support this observation for you?  :icon_pirat:

John Edward Mercier

The cattle analogy goes even further. Cattle is highly dependent on the feed and protection provided by the rancher. As you move to a more natural state you get bison.

Government is not a 'social contract'; it is a party to that contract. It subjects the 'might makes right' of majority democracy to restraints. Without it, individuals would be 'tread upon' to a much greater degree.