WoW! I got banned from FTL

[NJLiberty]

The difference between the USA during the American Revolution and the Confederacy during the Civil War was that the Confederacy was advocating and practicing slavery while everybody else was trying to get rid of slavery. That's what the difference is.

Luke,

As Caleb said there were a lot of slave holders in the colonies, north and south, with more in the southern colonies of course. There were still slaves being held in the "north" during the Civil War as well. Slavery did not become a big issue during the Civil War as far as recruiting and such until they started having a hard time finding volunteers. Then there was a major shift from preserving the Union to freeing the slaves. The recruiting ad my great-great-grandfather responded to didn't mention slavery at all. It was all about preserving the Union and that was in the summer of 1862. On the other side of the coin, the literature that was being distributed in the South that convinced my wife's family members to join the fight against the Union was all about retaining their rights, and the freedom to have a government of their choosing. The word slavery isn't mentioned because for many in the South slavery wasn't a primary issue since they owned no slaves. For many their concern was the incredible shift in power to the northern states, and how that power was being used against them in a wide variety of ways. You might want to spend some time reading original source material before you claim the war was about slavery. The war was fought about a much more complex issue than that, though you would never know it from modern texts.

I'm curious how you know that the Founding Fathers intended the word inalienable to have a flexible definition. They were generally pretty careful with the words they selected. What is your source for that information?

As far as the draft is concerned, one can only believe in the draft if one believes that the individual is the property of the state. I agree with Caleb here, there would be no purpose to drafting me into the United States military because it would be counterproductive. I would not serve them in any capacity. Now that being said, if there arose a time that I felt that my family, my friends, my neighbors, etc. were in danger of being harmed by an invading army, I'd be the first one to go meet them at the beach. I have no qualms about fighting or killing or dieing to defend my family, or helping my friends defend theirs if it comes to that. If you mean sacrifice is a good thing in that respect I would have to agree with you.

George

[dalebert]

Arguing for a draft on the basis of need. That sounds like socialism style slavery. Poor people need your money. Only it's really a much worse form of slavery than that. Risking your life and even dying to protect others is noble, but being forced to risk or sacrifice your life for others is quite possibly the worse type of slavery imaginable, much worse that being forced to work on a farm or in a factory while others partake of the fruits of your labor.

[Caleb]

I'm curious how you know that the Founding Fathers intended the word inalienable to have a flexible definition. They were generally pretty careful with the words they selected. What is your source for that information?

He doesn't have one.  And I suspect he doesn't really care. From what I've gathered, and correct me if I am wrong Luke, he seems to view the Founders' main significance as being the framework of government that they left us, but doesn't really care much about their ideas. When I told him that Washington was a pothead, he responded that the world of the founders was a world of "thuggery, lawlessness, rebellion, anarchy, and organized crime", which spirit had apparently influenced the Founders, causing them to adopt these horrible positions such as tolerance of drugs. If that is your viewpoint, it's hard to see how you can possibly accept the Constitution as sacrosanct, but somehow that's a leap that Luke is able to make. It would seem to me that it would logically follow that if the worldview of the founders was one predisposed to "thuggery, lawlessness, rebellion, anarchy, and organized crime" then that viewpoint would have also been the basis on which they organized their government and the constitutional framework for that government, meaning that the Constitution is just a god-damned piece of paper, as W so eloquently described it.

[Luke S]

The difference between the USA during the American Revolution and the Confederacy during the Civil War was that the Confederacy was advocating and practicing slavery while everybody else was trying to get rid of slavery. That's what the difference is.

Not so. First of all, the US was itself a slave nation. Not all the slave states seceded, and the emancipation proclamation freed only those slaves that were in the seceding slave states. Second, think about this for a moment:  The United States was not the only nation that had to deal with the unjust system of slavery. Can you name any other country that solved its slavery problem via a bloody war?

Well guess what. They had a chance to solve the slavery problem in the way that all those countries had solved their slavery problem, but they did not select that option. The option that the South selected was the "bloody war" option, so that's the option that unfortunately had to happen. If they had selected a different option, then we could have done that other option, but it was their choice whether they wanted to do it peacefully or whether they wanted to do it kicking and screaming and unfortunately they chose kicking and screaming.

The US could have purchased all the slaves for a fraction of the cost of the war.

No that's not correct, because they would have either not sold them or just found more slaves once they had sold them.

[Free libertarian]

 Luke, the original draft of The Declaration of Independence was printed on hemp paper. Wonder if GW would want to smoke that in one of his staff meetings?
" Condi, don't bogart that G-D piece of paper, me and Dick want a toke!"

  All kidding aside, you can't be serious that you think GW is a good president? How do you explain his
"missing" driving records, military records and that "mission accomplished" day he stood on the flight deck pretending he was a fighter pilot?
Luke if you're not just some comedian having a good laugh at our expense, I'm really sorry that you
are a GW Bush fan, really I am.  I can't imagine how you came to the conclusion GW has done anything
in his entire life to warrant respect, but I suppose if you can forgive him all of his drug transgressions,whoring around and generally being a spoiled little silver spoon frat boy you have a greater capacity for forgiveness than me.    I'd have trouble pissing on him even if he was on fire, so I do not share your opinion of his uh place in history as a great President.

Speaking of the draft...how did your patriotic boys GW and Cheney manage to avoid Vietnam?
Are you one of those who thinks war is for poor kids and Senators sons should be exempt from the draft?
Also do you intend to "serve your country" in the middle east by joining the military? 
Or should college kids be exempt fro mthe draft too?

   
     

[K. Darien Freeheart]

Luke, you love the USA so much you'd die defending it, right?

If the USA is so good in the eyes of the rest of Americans, why is it that the only way you believe a military can be supported by force? If people love their country, shouldn't they be willing to defend it?

And if being willing to defend your country with violence greats "good will" how do you justify getting rid of Iraqi good will by meddling with their nation?

If people must die for you to have the country you desire, I hope you forever remain homeless and alienated.

[J’raxis 270145]

They had a chance to solve the slavery problem in the way that all those countries had solved their slavery problem, but they did not select that option. The option that the South selected was the "bloody war" option, so that's the option that unfortunately had to happen.

Urrh? The South chose to secede. The United States started the war to forcibly return them to the Union.

But, you are half right: Every other nation abolished slavery peacefully, and the U.S. chose not to select that option—but it was the U.S. government, not the C.S. government, that made that choice.

[Caleb]

Exactly! In Luke's topsy turvy world, the aggressor is the victim. It's like a man who beats up his girlfriend, then asks her "why'd you make me do that, baby?"

[Luke S]

Luke, the original draft of The Declaration of Independence was printed on hemp paper. Wonder if GW would want to smoke that in one of his staff meetings?
" Condi, don't bogart that G-D piece of paper, me and Dick want a toke!"

  All kidding aside, you can't be serious that you think GW is a good president? How do you explain his
"missing" driving records, military records and that "mission accomplished" day he stood on the flight deck pretending he was a fighter pilot?
Luke if you're not just some comedian having a good laugh at our expense, I'm really sorry that you
are a GW Bush fan, really I am.  I can't imagine how you came to the conclusion GW has done anything
in his entire life to warrant respect, but I suppose if you can forgive him all of his drug transgressions,whoring around and generally being a spoiled little silver spoon frat boy you have a greater capacity for forgiveness than me.    I'd have trouble pissing on him even if he was on fire, so I do not share your opinion of his uh place in history as a great President.

Oh my God you're right, I forgot completely about his drug transgressions!!

But the fact is that the transgressions did not occur during his presidency, nor did any of the other transgressions that you wrote about. What I wrote before was strictly an evaluation of him as a president.

Speaking of the draft...how did your patriotic boys GW and Cheney manage to avoid Vietnam?
Are you one of those who thinks war is for poor kids and Senators sons should be exempt from the draft?

No I don't think that Senators' sons should be exempt from the draft. I don't think that at all.

Also do you intend to "serve your country" in the middle east by joining the military? 
Or should college kids be exempt fro mthe draft too?

The problem there is that my parents told me that I was absolutely forbidden from joining. I'd be tough for me to ignore them in that regard, because I love and respect them very much. I suppose one day I might have to though, on account of all the liberals that have said I'm hypocritical for supporting Bush and the military but not joining it. But I thought that at least I would wait until I was out of college. That's going to be in 2 weeks, so I might be doing just that in 2 weeks.

Oh, and to make it perfectly clear, if there were a draft I would certainly go. I wouldn't even try to "draft dodge" or anything like that. My great aunt who lives in Canada said that if there were ever a draft she would harbor me over in Canada, and my parents said that they would get me to her in Canada, but I would refuse all their efforts to do that. I would go.

[Luke S]

On another note I listened to chapter 3 of "The Market for Freedom", and I heard the part about the poor black man selling sandwiches, and having spent a lot of time in Detroit throughout my life, that example really grappled my heart, because that's a typical scene from Detroit, folks. I remember one guy who would sell roses on the side of the street, and he would always be there selling roses, and he always had very tattred clothes, and he seemed very poor, and I doubt he had all the government licenses and blah blah blah he needed to sell the roses either.

A lot of people in Detroit have the "police vs. citizenry" view that libertarians seem to have, even though they're not libertarians at all. In fact they are very socialist, but still they have the "police vs. citizenry" view.

Anyway, you and that author are absolutely right that government regulations have been strangling the private sector, and you're absolutely right that it's killing our economy.

[Free libertarian]

 So Luke,
your favorite President was a dope smoker, his Vice President is a draft dodger and war profiteer and GW never was "really" in the military but he gets to play soldier when he wants to wear cool flight uniforms on aircraft carriers.  

If this is a free country and we outlawed "involuntary servitude" how do you explain the draft? Isn't that contradictory?  I mean with 700 bases in 130 different countries maybe you can change your parents minds about you voluntarily  joining the military we clearly need more cannon fodder to police the world.
 Luke if a foreign army was occupying our country would you quit school and defend your country?
 

[Luke S]

These "defense companies" that were discussed in Ch. 8 absolutely send chills down my spine, to tell you the truth. They're private armies by any other name. And if you thought that police corruption and police brutality was bad, just wait until these private armies are put in charge of law enforcement, it'll be 5 times worse.

Private armies owned by rich businessmen for the purposes of "business protection" and "personal protection of the businessman", which is basically what this book is suggesting we have in this society again, have been responsible for some of the worst abuses and usurpations that have occurred against people throughout United States history, especially against their own laborers, and against the poor.

You think they won't act as thugs? Guess what guys, they have throughout history whenever they've been implemented. And they've been far worse thugs than any police department that we have right now in present day America.

Throughout US history while they were allowed to exist they were responsible for a reign of terror against laborers, the poor, and anybody else who dared stand in the path of or protest against those who employed them. I hate excessive laws, but I absolutely can't blame the government for outlawing those mercenary scum.

[Dylboz]

That is what the United States' Army is, thugs acting to protect rich businessmen, they are the mercenary scum you despise. In a free society, there would be NO restrictions on my ability to raise my own opposing army, or acquire advanced defensive hardware capable of resisting them. There would be no monopoly on organizing military defenses, and that's the point "Market for Liberty" makes. In fact, what the book ACTUALLY advocates is that everyone will get to buy into or organize their own defensive organization. That means it's subservient to its customer's demands, or it gets fired. The second half of your statement about abuse and usurpation is that those "private armies" were up against citizens who were legally and economically deprived of the means to self-defense, just as Americans are today, under the guise of "common sense gun control" and a generously subsidized military-industrial-security complex. A free market would be very, very different.

What blows my mind is you think that the government army is immune to the corruptive pressures you describe, and you imagine that the U.S. military has somehow NOT been a "terror against laborers, the poor, and anybody else who dared stand in the path of or protest against those who employed them." That is what is happening in Iraq. That is what is happening here in the militarization of the "civilian" police and the drug war. Plus, they've hired Blackwater and Custer Battles (on both fronts) to help!

[Luke S]

  Luke if a foreign army was occupying our country would you quit school and defend your country?

I know what's coming next after that question Free Libertarian. You think I don't know what's coming next, but actually I do.

Because truth be told, I saw a video today of the Mexican army going across into the Southwest on US soil on Youtube. And it turns out that they frequently invade to help drug smugglers smuggle drugs. And all that's left to fend them off I suppose are a bunch of vigilantes and nationalists because the National Guard is in Iraq and the US Army is mostly in Iraq.

There's a great big problem actually with serving the USA in that sort of capacity, which is that lately the government has been stabbing even their own servicemen in the back. I've even heard of cases where Border Patrol servicemen have been criminally charged for shooting back at illegal immigrants who shot at them first, or for shooting at illegal immigrants when they were in a situation where protocol told them that they were supposed to be shooting. In other words, servicemen are left out to dry because politicians want the Hispanic vote and politicians want the PC crowd's vote.

So if you weren't even a Border Patrol agent, let's say you were a Texas rancher with a ranch on the border and all of the sudden here comes the Mexican Army across the border with machine guns and drugs and you and your wife take your guns and you try to shoot at them and they shoot at you, and then then even if you survive that and they go back across the border from whence they came, next thing you know, you're in jail under the charge of "Illegally shooting at the Mexican Military". And you're in a US jail, not even a Mexican jail.

They've stabbed their own folks so many times in the back for those Hispanic votes, and they hardly even care about defending that border to tell you the truth. It's everybody BUT them who has to feel the consequences of the Mexican Army invading and bringing in drugs and illegal immigrants, not them. It's them who has to feel the consequences of whether or not they get the Hispanic vote, and that's the principle they operate on, not on the principle of the safety of the United States of America. And then they go and sabotage those people who do operate on the principle of the safety of the United States of America.

[Tom Sawyer]

Luke is now channeling Jane.