Previous Page «

In every practice you find a shadow. But purity is not reviling any part of life.

Rule of Law in Anarchy


Here is an interesting fact. Before this age of nations, in the feudal era (feudal = war) there was war, but the total body of deaths is dwarfed by just the Vietnam war and that wasn’t even considered a world war. Where is this noble rule of law that lets people live free? My father was compelled into military service.  Why can our government draft if you are a US citizen?

The government decides what freedom we have, so it really isn’t freedom. Yes. In a centralized system, those who achieve financial power have a vested interest in suppressing rivalry. There is no real power to the people. It is power to the rich.

That’s global corporatism. Yes, and anarchism is globally rejected. Money is a medium that by itself is a unifying factor. It is not sustained by agreement. It’s sustained by law that governs trade.

Well, they can try. It really depends on how people choose to take their power back or not. If corporations hadn’t been given human rights, we might have more balance. Well… “Dyslexics of the world unite” is what I say.  We united in a way that made there cease being a “we”. If the government has been given carte blanch to investigate any information, then likewise we should have the same. The hacker ethic, which most think relates to piracy but does not, is centrally freedom of information. So if we are going to allow our government freedom of information to take and examine any and all at will, why aren’t we also requiring information access? The internet is a great example of an anarchy that the governments are trying to squash.

How can we stop the government? There is a legal principle. Silence is implied agreement. If you will not speak to your innocence, you accept guilt. So on a grass roots movement we can refuse to be silent, and question, and break things down socially on a local level.  In a representative government, your vote is your representatives responsibility. The other idea is rhetoric. We are in a republic. It’s a literal fact.

Ghandi was in a sense an anarchist and he had no one attack anybody, and England was driven out of control of India. With intention and attention only.

England may be the first to become an anarchy. They don’t respect anyone in their parliament. Indeed, and many of even the classical anarchist thinkers were English though later in England’s history.

There are people who believe in an idea they call tyranny of the masses. That only an elect few can be trusted with the public interest.  But the moral decay, the fads, almost everything about the eighties, wasn’t because people got together and said we want this. Reagan, those in power at the time, arrived at an all time high, plateaued in their sway over people and this is why Republicans promise money. It gets people very controllable. They accept “that prosperity” and not their personal property as they define it. Rome ruled all of the world it knew of by bread and circuses.

There were more poor and homeless under Reagan than ever before, more sick and dying, and everyone ignored them. I actually heard on TV a Republican state governor said he wouldn’t accept stimulus package money, because “it would require they extend unemployment benefits to people who aren’t willing to work”. Hmm, whose bottom line is he talking about?

Does true freedom exist? It does in the bounds of agreement. You will never be without any constraining influence even if your own conscience. If in some way the world would become an anarchy with a snap of my fingers, people would not start killing their babies or raiding their neighbours homes and killing them. That is not what anarchy is about. Maybe some worry about people taking more then their share, which is again not what anarchy is about. They would have to take more than their share without agreement. It would be self policing, and simple in how it self polices.

Example. Will you make agreements with someone you know does dirty deals? Ah, but with our government you are in multiple dirty deals, and you have no choice. This is why they don’t like the mafia, too much competition. They work the same way.

The idea of telling them how to spend the tax money you specifically give is a good one I think. It should be a check box form. Yes. That would be tax collection by agreement. Taxes were suppose to be a temporary war measure. Our temporary war measures are a joke. If a Greek God governed the United States, it would be Aries. :lol: The rhetoric in the movie ‘300’ supported that crap. We don’t have propaganda films anymore, they just call it the entertainment industry.

Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.

Travis Saunders
Dragon Intuitive


If you enjoyed this page:
Keep Reading »

Leave Your Insight