Survive!

[Lex]

what i'm trying to do is find connections in these groups. it's a shame (i think) that we're focusing more on what makes us different instead of on the things that make us similar.

Like what?

Stealing transcends all differences. We have people of different religions, different nationalities, different ideas about how to achieve our goals but there are a few things that hold us all together: We are against stealing (in fact, that's probably the #1 reason 99% of people are on this forum) and we are against killing (unless in self defense).

Your mentality (stealing is OK) is why we are here today on this forum trying to figure out how we can stop all of this sensless theiving, corruption and dishonesty.

Steal this book? No thanks, I'll get it the honest way if I need it.

[Jason Rand]

i seriously cant argue with people who say that i'm saying more than one thing at a time. the bottom line is, the book is a project, it's a living document, and the result it undetermined. if you want to add your two cents based on the spirit of the original, please do so. if not, good luck with everything.

The spirit of Hoffman's original, as I understand it, is to celebrate and cultivate a culture of stealing and sustained guerilla warfare on the institution of property.  Maybe I have it all wrong but that's my take.

Firsty, I would be interested to know what you consider the spirit of the original to be, and why.  The reason I am being critical is that when you ask for contributors in the "spirit of the original", it sounds to me that you are trying to create a new and improved handbook for waging war on the institution of property.  Certainly you can understand my reaction, no?
 
If you do not approve of stealing in all the myriad forms encouraged in Hoffman's book, then please explain why you chose this book to 'update' as a 'living document' and not any other?  (That's why I asked earlier, what, exactly, you find appealing about this book.)

If you do approve of stealing, then why not just say so and explain your thought process?

Seriously, I'd like to know where you're coming from on this.

[firsty]

i seriously cant argue with people who say that i'm saying more than one thing at a time. the bottom line is, the book is a project, it's a living document, and the result it undetermined. if you want to add your two cents based on the spirit of the original, please do so. if not, good luck with everything.

The spirit of Hoffman's original, as I understand it, is to celebrate and cultivate a culture of stealing and sustained guerilla warfare on the institution of property.  Maybe I have it all wrong but that's my take.

Firsty, I would be interested to know what you consider the spirit of the original to be, and why.  The reason I am being critical is that when you ask for contributors in the "spirit of the original", it sounds to me that you are trying to create a new and improved handbook for waging war on the institution of property.  Certainly you can understand my reaction, no?
 
If you do not approve of stealing in all the myriad forms encouraged in Hoffman's book, then please explain why you chose this book to 'update' as a 'living document' and not any other?  (That's why I asked earlier, what, exactly, you find appealing about this book.)

If you do approve of stealing, then why not just say so and explain your thought process?

Seriously, I'd like to know where you're coming from on this.

your interpretation of hoffman's introduction is incomplete at best.

Steal This Book is, in a way, a manual of survival in the prison that is Amerika. It preaches jailbreak. It shows you where exactly how to place the dynamite that will destroy the walls. The first section-SURVIVE!-lays out a potential action program for our new Nation. The chapter headings spell out the demands for a free society. A community where the technology produces goods and services for whoever needs them, come who may. It calls on the Robin Hoods of Santa Barbara Forest to steal from the robber barons who own the castles of capitalism. It implies that the reader already is "ideologically set," in that he understands corporate feudalism as the only robbery worthy of being called "crime," for it is committed against the people as a whole. Whether the ways it describes to rip-off shit are legal or illegal is irrelevant. The dictionary of law is written by the bosses of order. Our moral dictionary says no heisting from each other. To steal from a brother or sister is evil. To not steal from the institutions that are the pillars of the Pig Empire is equally immoral.

Community within our Nation, chaos in theirs; that is the message of SURVIVE!

stealing from moral citizens and landowners and providers of goods and services is NOT condoned.

here is another key quote from hoffman's introduction:

Section three - LIBERATE! - concerns itself with efforts to free stuff (or at least make it cheap) in four cities. Sort of a quick U.S. on no dollars a day. It begins to scratch the potential for a national effort in this area. Since we are a nation of gypsies, dope on how to move around and dig in anywhere is always needed. Together we can expand this section. It is far from complete, as is the entire project. Incomplete chapters on how to identify police agents, steal a car, run day-care centers, conduct your own trial, organize a G.I. coffee house, start a rock and roll band and make neat clothes, are scattered all over the floor of the cell. The book as it now stands was completed in the late summer of 1970. For three months manuscripts made the rounds of every major publisher. In all, over 30 rejections occurred before the decision to publish the book ourselves was made, or rather made for us. Perhaps no other book in modern times presented such a dilemma. Everyone agreed the book would be a commercial success. But even greed had its limits, and the IRS and FBI following the manuscript with their little jive rap had a telling effect. Thirty "yeses" become thirty "noes" after "thinking it over." Liberals, who supposedly led the fight against censorship, talked of how the book "will end free speech."

as you can see, hoffman intended this to be a work-in-progress, and the "fuck this city" sections are meant as handbooks for living cheap in major metropolitan areas, as those are the parts of the country where revolutionaries will necessarily meet at certain points on the road, for gatherings, communities, and demonstrations.

we support bringing down the system as it stands. it doesnt mean that we oppose all forms of ownership of capitalism. it simply means that what is happening right now isnt working, and that we intend to prove it by bringing it down.

from a libertarian standpoint, i view the document as a way to expose the greedheads for who they are and what they are - we are ruled by an executive branch and legislative branch that is fully in the hands of the corporations, who are the ones defining where our tax dollars go. we have a law enforcement group, supported by moralists in the judicial branch (from top to bottom), who uphold unconstitutional laws, enforce laws that are a waste of time and effort, serving merely waste $$$ and clog prisons, enabling real criminals to endanger the property of individuals and the true free market of small business.

[Lex]

stealing from moral citizens and landowners and providers of goods and services is NOT condoned.

What about immoral citizens and landowners and providers of goods and services? Is it OK to steal from them? If so, under what moral grounds is it moral to steal from them? How do you determine if the person you plan to rob is moral or not? Whose morals are you using as a guide, the theifs or the victims?

I think the only outcome of your efforts is that a lot of people who read this stuff and try it will either end up shot or in prison.

[tracysaboe]

your interpretation of hoffman's introduction is incomplete at best.

So what is the complete interpretation.

Tracy

[firsty]

your interpretation of hoffman's introduction is incomplete at best.

So what is the complete interpretation.

Tracy

hi tracy. i posted quotes from the original text with some comments that i hoped would clarify things.

[Jason Rand]

In the introduction to "Steal This Book" Hoffman wrote:

"Our moral dictionary says no heisting from each other. To steal from a brother or sister is evil. To not steal from the institutions that are the pillars of the Pig Empire is equally immoral."

Who is considered a 'brother and sister' and where are the 'pillars of the 'Pig Empire'?  It is easy enough to discern by looking at the kinds of theft that Hoffman encourages.  In the very first chapter Hoffman details several scams by which a person can cheat a restaurant and get a meal without paying for it.  One of those scams is to slip a cockroach into the plate after eating part of the meal, then feign shock and disgust and refuse to pay the bill.  This kind of fraud is a form of stealing.

If Firsty's is going to continue to insist that "stealing from moral citizens and landowners and providers of goods and services is NOT condoned", then he will have to explain what is immoral about owning and operating a restaurant.  Or, for that matter, owning and operating a grocery store, or clothing store.  Hoffman gleefully encourages people to steal from all of these businesses.  Apparently these are pillars of the "Pig Empire", whatever that means.

Firsty, do you think it is right to steal from these businesses as Hoffman apparently does?

[firsty]

the targeted corporations are those which take advantage of people, those who are part of the oppressive nature of corporate-government.

stealing is a small part of the book.

take a breath.

[Lex]

the targeted corporations are those which take advantage of people, those who are part of the oppressive nature of corporate-government.

Elaborate on how these corporations take advantage of people and how that is immoral but stealing is not immoral.

stealing is a small part of the book.
take a breath.

It makes up a quarter of the title of the book, i'd say that's a big part ;-)

[firsty]

the targeted corporations are those which take advantage of people, those who are part of the oppressive nature of corporate-government.

Elaborate on how these corporations take advantage of people and how that is immoral but stealing is not immoral.

stealing is a small part of the book.
take a breath.

It makes up a quarter of the title of the book, i'd say that's a big part ;-)

precisely. the original book was expressly not for profit. it was created and distributed with the higher goal of free exchange of information.

as far as elaborating on how corpgov oppresses people, i mean, really? i guess if you need that kind of elaboration, then you're probably not going to be someone likely to participate in it. i dont know how to elaborate other than to say that, because the govt in america is so tightly aligned with the corporation (as opposed to the individual), pretty much any major corporation is an oppressor. i'm not talking about small businesses which hire and sell to their community. i'm talking about any corporation which hires and fires on whims, fails to provide the minimal of health insurance, benefits from tax breaks which dont go back to the community but rather to fund the military, etc.

etc.

etc.

i have a feeling that what i'm opposed to is the corporate govt society we live in. and others are opposed to the manner in with govt treats corporations and individuals. instead of saying that i'm fighting the connection that govt has with corporations, what i'm actually fighting is both govt and corporations. if the two of them want to straighten things out and get to a system where things are fair based on free market capitalism, then, great. but what i'm saying is that the govt will never allow that to happen, and corporations will never lobby for it to happen.

my idealism has its limits.

neither the govt nor big business will EVER change its model unless its profits are threatened, and they would need to be threatened beyond the point at which their control over laws would fix things for them.

[Lex]

precisely. the original book was expressly not for profit. it was created and distributed with the higher goal of free exchange of information.

as far as elaborating on how corpgov oppresses people, i mean, really? i guess if you need that kind of elaboration, then you're probably not going to be someone likely to participate in it. i dont know how to elaborate other than to say that, because the govt in america is so tightly aligned with the corporation (as opposed to the individual), pretty much any major corporation is an oppressor. i'm not talking about small businesses which hire and sell to their community. i'm talking about any corporation which hires and fires on whims, fails to provide the minimal of health insurance, benefits from tax breaks which dont go back to the community but rather to fund the military, etc.

etc.

etc.

i have a feeling that what i'm opposed to is the corporate govt society we live in. and others are opposed to the manner in with govt treats corporations and individuals. instead of saying that i'm fighting the connection that govt has with corporations, what i'm actually fighting is both govt and corporations. if the two of them want to straighten things out and get to a system where things are fair based on free market capitalism, then, great. but what i'm saying is that the govt will never allow that to happen, and corporations will never lobby for it to happen.

my idealism has its limits.

neither the govt nor big business will EVER change its model unless its profits are threatened, and they would need to be threatened beyond the point at which their control over laws would fix things for them.

You remind me of a doctor that will talk to you about your symptoms and causes of the symptoms but proceed to only treat the symptoms. Corporations are nothing but symptoms of government. It is completely pointless to complain and hate corporations because as long as there is government sustaining them you are kicking yourself. Everytime liberals steal, picket, etc a corporation the corporation will call on the police to catch the thiefs or disperse the picketers (me and you pay for the police, housing and feeding of the radicals) and at the end of the year the corporation will deduct the losses of theft from their taxes (which you and me will cover for) and if you really screw with them and their losses are huge then they'll get subsidies from the government (paid for by me and you). Thus, the more you try to fight corporations the more you are hurting yourself. Go after the cause, government, and the symptoms, corporations, will vanish overnight. Corporations will become just plain old businesses the moment they no longer have government backed protection and they will have no choice but to restructure and streamline themselves to survive. Corporations will no longer have the government insurance that they have to today, they can't screw up and ask for help, they can't default on their debts by filing bankruptcy, they can't poison and kill people and have the board members ammune from these actions.

[firsty]

i appreciate the debate, but the issue is completely arguable. i would say that govt and big business have a cooperative partnership. in fact, right now, i think we're seeing a great (terrible) example of how the problems in govt can be seen as symptoms of big business problems. politicians are literally owned by big business. the govt may be designed in such a way as to encourage that, but it's still the big business who's in business to maximize its profits and despite that bottom-line focus, they still have plenty of cash to make sure the govt does what big business wants it to do.

i blame both. i dont blame the relationship between the two. i dont blame one more than the other. i blame both.

[tracysaboe]

It makes up a quarter of the title of the book, i'd say that's a big part ;-)

Steal This Book

By word count it takes up a third.

By letter count it takes up a tad more. (5/12 -- 7/14 if you include the spaces.)

Tracy

[Lex]

Steal This Book
By word count it takes up a third.
By letter count it takes up a tad more. (5/12 -- 7/14 if you include the spaces.)

I see your math isn't that much better than your spelling 

1  S
2  t
3  e
4  a
5  l
6 
7  T
8  h
9  i
10s
11
12B
13o
14o
15k


There are 15 letters (including spaces) in the phrase "Steal This Book".

With spaces: 5/15 is 1/3 or 33.33%
Without space: 5/13 is 38.46%

[firsty]

eek.