Things are getting interesting at Occupy Wall Street

[LAGC]

Pigs are trying to ram a garbage truck through right now to dispose of their tents and encampments, but protesters are holding the line. Authorities have shut down most of the live protester cam feeds except for this one:

http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution

Could mean they are about to make their move.

Some protesters are talking about physically disrupting Wall Street's operations later this week: blocking entrances, stopping people from doing business inside. This is starting to get serious.

The civil disobedience is escalating, I don't think they have enough jail space to hold them all, depending on how many participate. They're going to have to start housing them in sports stadiums or something. And when they all fill up?

SHTF.

[Kadmos]

Couldn't help but to watch for a few minutes. Guy stated that the cops deployed the LRAD system, but had to turn it off because they couldn't help but also affect the other police as well.

Then it was several members of OWS trying to get the guy to turn off the camera, seems like they are all paranoid that they are infiltrated by cops

[mriddick]

Doesn't sound all that interesting, sorry it really doesn't... They are going to fail, they have no plan and they can't stop wall street with blocking a few doors.

[LAGC]

Doesn't sound all that interesting, sorry it really doesn't... They are going to fail, they have no plan and they can't stop wall street with blocking a few doors.

We'll see. Each time the authorities try to evict them, they just come back stronger the next day. The fall of the Soviet Union started out small too. But the protests grew and grew, buildings were occupied, commerce was paralyzed, government could no longer function.

I don't see them going away until major changes happen, major concessions from corporate America.

[CigarGuy]

Pigs are trying to ram a garbage truck

I don't think it's fair to call the protestors "pigs", but, whatever!

[El Laton Caliente]

I don't think it's fair to call the protestors "pigs", but, whatever!

They pissed and shit where they slept... I think it would be fair. Hell, they even proved some pigs were more equal than others...

[El Jefe]

We'll see. Each time the authorities try to evict them, they just come back stronger the next day. The fall of the Soviet Union started out small too. But the protests grew and grew, buildings were occupied, commerce was paralyzed, government could no longer function.

I don't see them going away until major changes happen, major concessions from corporate America.

You are fucking delusional. A few non working, non bathing freaks aren't going to change anything. This was all just a diversion to get the public off Obama's plummeting poll numbers. Obviously it has failed.

Now that the weather is cooling off, they should break out the fire hoses and soak these freaks down about 3 or 4 times a day. I'd say drenching these hippies at midnight when it's in the mid 30's would separate the wheat from the chaff. :yeah:

[LAGC]

Well, they cleared Zucotti Park. But only to clean it up, it will be occupied again by tonight.

March going on right now with churches and labor groups joining in:

http://www.ustream.tv/TheOther99

EDIT TO ADD: A judge just ruled that the police eviction was illegal, they are on their way back now.

[CigarGuy]

Heard they were no longer able to camp out there overnight.
Also heard they are going to "disrupt" the subway system leading down to
Wall Street Thursday morning. THAT will piss off some people..........

[El Jefe]

Too bad NYC doesn't have a mayor. The dumbass who supposedly is mayor, must be too concerned with gun shows in Arizona.

[bum_whisperer]

Well, they cleared Zucotti Park. But only to clean it up, it will be occupied again by tonight.

March going on right now with churches and labor groups joining in:

http://www.ustream.tv/TheOther99

EDIT TO ADD: A judge just ruled that the police eviction was illegal, they are on their way back now.

Your movement has proclaimed they want the abolishment of private firearm ownership. Since you are one of them, you must want that too, no?

[Sergis Bauer]

The fall of the Soviet Union started out small too. But the protests grew and grew, buildings were occupied, commerce was paralyzed, government could no longer function.

I had vowed not to respond to any of LAGC's threads, but this one is just too much. Dude, do you have the slightest idea of how the USSR came down? Were you alive then? If not, have you actually read anything on it, or did you get your information on History in the same place you get your political notions-- some place in your imagination?

Your post shows just what an incredibly misinformed dolt you are. I'm not going to get into the whole story of how the USSR collapsed, there are plenty of sources out there to learn about it, which you depserately need to do if you're going to reference it. The first irony, of course, is that the USSR was exactly the kind of elite-run socialist state the OWS folks are trying to create. The second irony is that what essentially brought the Soviet state down was the introduction of aspects of capitalist markets. Essentially, the people weren't satisifed with half measures, and wanted even more capitalism.

You couldn't have chosen a worse example, from your perspective. But ignorance is bliss, I guess.

[LAGC]

Your movement has proclaimed they want the abolishment of private firearm ownership. Since you are one of them, you must want that too, no?

That's a bold-faced lie. I heard Michael Reagan spouting that bullshit on the radio last night, there has been no official proclamation of anything of the sort from any General Assembly I've seen.

[LAGC]

Your post shows just what an incredibly misinformed dolt you are. I'm not going to get into the whole story of how the USSR collapsed, there are plenty of sources out there to learn about it, which you depserately need to do if you're going to reference it. The first irony, of course, is that the USSR was exactly the kind of elite-run socialist state the OWS folks are trying to create. The second irony is that what essentially brought the Soviet state down was the introduction of aspects of capitalist markets. Essentially, the people weren't satisifed with half measures, and wanted even more capitalism.

Most of the proclamations I've seen so far are against top-down economic decision making, where a few people make choices for the many. Sounds like the same chief complaint of the anti-Soviet protesters.

[El Laton Caliente]

Most of the proclamations I've seen so far are against top-down economic decision making, where a few people make choices for the many. Sounds like the same chief complaint of the anti-Soviet protesters.

WTF do they think a communist or socialist system does? It has always been a top down, centrally planned system in practice.

[bum_whisperer]

That's a bold-faced lie. I heard Michael Reagan spouting that bullshit on the radio last night, there has been no official proclamation of anything of the sort from any General Assembly I've seen.

From your movement's website:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-ows-demands/

[gpwasr10]

Ahhh.... the truth rears it's ugly head... LOL... fucking pinkos are so fucking weak.

[LAGC]

WTF do they think a communist or socialist system does? It has always been a top down, centrally planned system in practice.

I haven't heard any of the protesters arguing for such a system.

[LAGC]

From your movement's website:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-ows-demands/

Ah, so some INDIVIDUAL, speaking only for his self, comes out with a "list of demands" and posts it in the forum, and that some how makes it official?

You must have missed the: "This content is user submitted and not an official statement " right at the very top of the page.

At least now I know where Michael Reagan got his bullshit from, assuming he didn't post it as flame-bait himself.

[mrkalashnikov]

I don't think it's fair to call the protestors "pigs", but, whatever!

I believe the OP was calling the police pigs. Reference the "...but protesters are holding the line" part.

Or was that a tongue-in-cheek observation? :wink:

[Sergis Bauer]

Most of the proclamations I've seen so far are against top-down economic decision making, where a few people make choices for the many. Sounds like the same chief complaint of the anti-Soviet protesters.

I mean, really, just how stupid are you? Most of the proclamations I've seen have been against the profit motive in business, private ownership of land, and individual freedoms, or have been in favor of forced unionization, wage and price controls, and socialization of the health care system and/or the economy. These are exactly the things the USSR stood for. And the only way to implement such goals, as the Russians found out after their initial brief flirtation with localized workers' councils (Soviets), was by centralized, top-down decision making.

Again, if you don't understand history, don't quote it, punk.

[bum_whisperer]

Ah, so some INDIVIDUAL, speaking only for his self, comes out with a "list of demands" and posts it in the forum, and that some how makes it official?

You must have missed the: "This content is user submitted and not an official statement " right at the very top of the page.

Don't back track. You are all individuals and an unorganized, grabastic clusterfuck. If there was any disagreement on these demands, thye wouldn't have been posted for the world to see. The wishy-washy disclaimer proves that none of yu have the heart to stand behind what you're trying to make the world believe. All you want is my wealth to piss away on legalized drugs and subsidized housing to squat in because you are too stupid and/or too lazy to go out and earn for yourself. If you want my wealth, PM me and I'll give you an address you can come to and collect it. If you get it, you will have earned it because I'm not going to stand back and turn it over to you or any of your bum friends.

[LAGC]

Don't back track. You are all individuals and an unorganized, grabastic clusterfuck. If there was any disagreement on these demands, thye wouldn't have been posted for the world to see. The wishy-washy disclaimer proves that none of yu have the heart to stand behind what you're trying to make the world believe.

Did you not read any of the comments to that particular forum post? Hardly anyone was in agreement with him.


All you want is my wealth to piss away on legalized drugs and subsidized housing to squat in because you are too stupid and/or too lazy to go out and earn for yourself. If you want my wealth, PM me and I'll give you an address you can come to and collect it. If you get it, you will have earned it because I'm not going to stand back and turn it over to you or any of your bum friends.

Don't worry, unless you're part of the 1%, no one wants your petty wealth.

[El Laton Caliente]

I haven't heard any of the protesters arguing for such a system.

Who am I to believe, you or my lieing eyes? Those were not Communist Party USA and American Socialist Party banners I saw at the start of the OWS?

[LAGC]

Who am I to believe, you or my lieing eyes? Those were not Communist Party USA and American Socialist Party banners I saw at the start of the OWS?

Sure, all sorts of fringe groups are coming out of the wood-work and joining in -- its a big tent -- but the common goals of OWS are simply a more democratic form of governance, local control, not anything as centralized like the old Soviet Union was.

[bum_whisperer]

Did you not read any of the comments to that particular forum post? Hardly anyone was in agreement with him.



Don't worry, unless you're part of the 1%, no one wants your petty wealth.

I read quite a few of the comments in addition to other comments regarding sensationalized ows bum articles. Nobody is in agreement with your movement, as the commentary by non media is overwhelmingly negative.

If you only knew, you'd be on your way here. LOL!!

[Richard Simmons]

Judge just ruled that the protesters cannot bring tents and sleeping bags back to the park.

[bum_whisperer]

Now that the bums are out, the homeless can return. LOL!

[American Rage]

I haven't heard any of the protesters arguing for such a system.

It's why Marx labeled 'the protesters' "useful idiots"

Once they have achieved their goals, you'll find out just how useful you really are, this usually means they use you as a bullet stop, but sometimes your masters will simply allow you to starve.

[Helen Keller]

where's a "terrorist Incident" when you need one.

[American Rage]

Did you not read any of the comments to that particular forum post? Hardly anyone was in agreement with him.

Most of the comments I read that were against that shit list were from conservatives making fun of OWS. And again, your lack of reading comprehension is exposed.

[bum_whisperer]

Come on Mr. Ows, let's have some more debate about your communist bowel movement.

[LAGC]

Come on Mr. Ows, let's have some more debate about your communist bowel movement.

What more do you want me to add?? You probably think the minority of anarchists who do things like deflate the cops' tires and blockade the streets are representative of the entire crowd as well, eh? It's a broad-based movement...

[CigarGuy]

What more do you want me to add?? You probably think the minority of anarchists who do things like deflate the cops' tires and blockade the streets are representative of the entire crowd as well, eh? It's a broad-based movement...

At least you called 'em "cops'" today.......

[TomO]

Meanwhile, on Wall Street, smelly monkeys flinging shit at their keepers amuse Bankers.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BjfO-Zr0fjU/TpytX7Iq2hI/AAAAAAAAAFI/x4CeU3s2ilg/s1600/WallStreet-Champagne.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/02/article-2044277-0E2E279200000578-923_224x348.jpg

[Warthogg]

You are fucking...off Obama's...fire hoses....:yeah:


Yup


Wart

[FunkyPertwee]

...buildings were occupied, commerce was paralyzed, government could no longer function...



Yep. This is what they want. And this is what makes them enemy combatants in my opinion.

Certainly traitors at the very least.

[alismith]

We'll see. Each time the authorities try to evict them, they just come back stronger the next day. The fall of the Soviet Union started out small too. But the protests grew and grew, buildings were occupied, commerce was paralyzed, government could no longer function.

I don't see them going away until major changes happen, major concessions from corporate America.

One MAJOR difference between then and now is that the majority of the people, here, are armed and may just grant that "major change" happening. No matter what happened in the USSR uprisings, the majority of the Russian people were not armed and whatever happened, as a result of those protests, stood.

I seriously think that IF the changes you want so badly to happen, do occur, they will be very short-lived and the survivors will scatter quickly. Once law and order breaks down, a firestorm will arise, the likes of which haven't been seen since the Revolutionary War. The American People won't be fighting against a foreign country, but against those traitors who want to do away with the American System of government and the freedoms they are granted by our Constitution.

Your side does NOT have the WILL of the American People behind it. It is doomed to fail, even if it succeeds in bringing down our current system. The American System will not die as easily as you think. Nor, will it be peaceful.

You, and your cohorts, have chosen your paths. Your choice will predetermine your fate. It's a shame some people lack the common sense to realize this.

[bum_whisperer]

What more do you want me to add?? You probably think the minority of anarchists who do things like deflate the cops' tires and blockade the streets are representative of the entire crowd as well, eh? It's a broad-based movement...

They sure as fuck aren't policing their own so that kinda makes it like they condone it, doesn't it? They can't control themselves so they need babysat by the police on the taxpayers dime. Make sense or no?

[dishman]

Pigs are trying to ram a garbage truck through right now to dispose of their tents and encampments, but protesters are holding the line. Authorities have shut down most of the live protester cam feeds except for this one:

http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution

Could mean they are about to make their move.

Some protesters are talking about physically disrupting Wall Street's operations later this week: blocking entrances, stopping people from doing business inside. This is starting to get serious.

The civil disobedience is escalating, I don't think they have enough jail space to hold them all, depending on how many participate. They're going to have to start housing them in sports stadiums or something. And when they all fill up?

SHTF.

wow you are either very foolish or a troll..why dont you go join your unwashed brethren fighting against the "man"..lol..memo though..the real problem your bro's in arms have is with the gov...fanny may..etc..but i guess facts dont matter to the clued in unwashed crowd,just noise and look at me..i am an activist matters :-)

[alismith]

Did you not read any of the comments to that particular forum post? Hardly anyone was in agreement with him.



Don't worry, unless you're part of the 1%, no one wants your petty wealth.

This percent is way wrong. Not only are the "occupiers" deluded in thinking they are going to do anything worthwhile, but they are deluced in claiming they are the 99%. It would be more like 99% of the American people are against OWS and their Communist agenda, and another .895% are undecided. That leaves .005 in favor and those are the ones who are already trespassing and shitting on the Flag.

Claiming 99% in favor is just propaganda to delude those who are too dimwitted to look around and see what's really happening....people are laughing and shaking their heads, in disgust, at them.

I always wondered what those Special Ed kids did after they get out of school. Now, I know.

[PROBASCO]

These "people" for the most part, are union thugs or like Stalin had "useful idiots". They do not realize just how they are being used but they are gung ho for whatever their bosses tell them. They are advocating the destruction of the only things that make the economy work, companies or people with deep pockets. How many of them have donated the billion$ to charity like the "Walmart's" $215 million just last year, or evil Microsoft's $1,643,000,000 donations to various groups. Hate them all you want but they do more for the underdog that any government agency when totalled. But these union thugs want that money for themselves. That is their idealism, "more for me, less for the "corporations", even if the corporations provide jobs, and give back to the community. It's all about the GREED of the occupy crowd, The same greed they denounce wall street for. They are worse than the corporations because they try to hide their greed under a veil of fairness. what a crock of bull, no, what a crock of elephant shit.

[gearmonger]

I continue to hear commentators talk about how a "movement" like this is made possible in large part by social media. Social media, of course, being a product of the profit motive, does not exist for any reason that does not involve a decent return on investment. Without large corps like Apple, Microsoft, AT&T, Sprint, etc there would be no computer connected to the internet in Mom's basement for the jobless 35 year-old to even hear about a movement, let alone let him know where to go to be part of it. Oops, just had another problem-how can he get there? Surely not in a GM, Ford, Chrysler, Kia, Nissan.... guess he will have to walk if he doesn't want to be a hypocrite. Just gotta throw on the Nikes and head out the... whoops, big company, guess going barefoot is the only honest way to do this.

Sorry about the bad humor, this is the kind of confusion (as you know if you heard ANY of these people interveiwed) they must struggle with subconsciously while "changing the world".

[Sergis Bauer]

I continue to hear commentators talk about how a "movement" like this is made possible in large part by social media. Social media, of course, being a product of the profit motive, does not exist for any reason that does not involve a decent return on investment. Without large corps like Apple, Microsoft, AT&T, Sprint, etc there would be no computer connected to the internet in Mom's basement for the jobless 35 year-old to even hear about a movement, let alone let him know where to go to be part of it. Oops, just had another problem-how can he get there? Surely not in a GM, Ford, Chrysler, Kia, Nissan.... guess he will have to walk if he doesn't want to be a hypocrite. Just gotta throw on the Nikes and head out the... whoops, big company, guess going barefoot is the only honest way to do this.

Sorry about the bad humor, this is the kind of confusion (as you know if you heard ANY of these people interveiwed) they must struggle with subconsciously while "changing the world".

Along the lines of what you're saying:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2qqRFYv3ao&feature=share

[Ronwicp]

It wont be "interesting" until they start clubbing them hippies on a regular basis.

[LAGC]

I continue to hear commentators talk about how a "movement" like this is made possible in large part by social media. Social media, of course, being a product of the profit motive, does not exist for any reason that does not involve a decent return on investment. Without large corps like Apple, Microsoft, AT&T, Sprint, etc there would be no computer connected to the internet in Mom's basement for the jobless 35 year-old to even hear about a movement, let alone let him know where to go to be part of it. Oops, just had another problem-how can he get there? Surely not in a GM, Ford, Chrysler, Kia, Nissan.... guess he will have to walk if he doesn't want to be a hypocrite. Just gotta throw on the Nikes and head out the... whoops, big company, guess going barefoot is the only honest way to do this.

Sorry about the bad humor, this is the kind of confusion (as you know if you heard ANY of these people interveiwed) they must struggle with subconsciously while "changing the world".

First of all, welcome to the forum!

I agree with you that social media has been key to these movements.

But I really don't think its that hypocritical for protesters to utilize products and services provided by corporations, considering the fact that there's really no way NOT to in an economy such as ours where the private sector is allowed to have dominion over manufacture of most things. It would be like saying the TEA Partiers were being hypocritical for using PUBLIC roads and parks, since the government pays for their upkeep, not the private sector.

But really, I don't think many of the Occupy protesters really have a problem with most businesses. Just the money-grubbers who skim off the top, the gamblers and schemers who lord over the rest, and use their power to influence government policy to their favor, to the detriment of everyone else.

[Oswald Bastable]

It would be like saying the TEA Partiers were being hypocritical for using PUBLIC roads and parks, since the government pays for their upkeep, not the private sector.

You're an idiot. Where the hell do you think the money came from, used by the gov't. to build and maintain those roads? Oh, that's right, taken from people working in the private sector. The gov't. pays for nothing on their own, except that they take that money from private citizens and corporations.

And yes, the fleabaggers are completely hypocritical, wearing their capitalistically produced Sean Jean clothing, talking on their iPhones, facebooking, tweeting, etc., etc...all while decrying and trying to destroy that which they'd be lost without. Their hypocrisy is of a magnitude of multiple powers of 10, just as your intellect is on the order of the subatomic scale.

[LAGC]

You're an idiot. Where the hell do you think the money came from, used by the gov't. to build and maintain those roads? Oh, that's right, taken from people working in the private sector. The gov't. pays for nothing on their own, except that they take that money from private citizens and corporations.

Well, ultimately, the money comes from the Federal Reserve. It's silly to say the government doesn't produce anything. They provide lots of valuable services such as military and police -- without them, there would be no stable environment for businesses to prosper, not to mention roads and infrastructure for people to get around on. Even in the energy sector (which I think should be completely socialized) without government guarantees big projects like hydroelectric dams and nuclear power plants wouldn't be possible. The government creates far more than you realize, even in our predominantly capitalist society.


And yes, the fleabaggers are completely hypocritical, wearing their capitalistically produced Sean Jean clothing, talking on their iPhones, facebooking, tweeting, etc., etc...all while decrying and trying to destroy that which they'd be lost without. Their hypocrisy is of a magnitude of multiple powers of 10, just as your intellect is on the order of the subatomic scale.

Very few of them want to destroy corporations, just stop them from using their privilege to purchase favors from government.

[Oswald Bastable]

Well, ultimately, the money comes from the Federal Reserve.

Good to know. So then, all tax money taken from individuals, corporations, cooperatives, limited and full partnerships should be returned forthwith, yes? Along with all money taken over the last (almost) 100 years...correct? Because that money should have come from the fed reserve?

I was wrong about you lefty...your intellect isn't of a subatomic order, it's of a sub-subatomic order...in fact I'm sure the smallest and last to be found gluon has an intellect that surpasses yours in powers of 1000.

I won't even bother to ask you again, where the money gov't. spends comes from, for military and police, for energy projects, etc...you've answered it...it's from the Fed.

Good God, you are dumber than dog shit, or the micro-organisms that live within it.

[LAGC]

Oh please. You posited a classic "chicken and egg" scenario. Which came first?

THE PRIVATE SECTOR WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FUNCTION without a stable government allowing it to thrive! The government only taxes back money that it issues in the first place.

Pack your ass up and move to Somalia so you can see first hand the wonders of a 100% pure capitalist society without a meddlesome government getting in the way.

Libertarian paradise. I'm sure you'll just love it.

[Oswald Bastable]

Oh please. You posited a classic "chicken and egg" scenario. Which came first?

THE PRIVATE SECTOR WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FUNCTION without a stable government allowing it to thrive! The government only taxes back money that it issues in the first place.

Pack your ass up and move to Somalia so you can see first hand the wonders of a 100% pure capitalist society without a meddlesome government getting in the way.

Libertarian paradise. I'm sure you'll just love it.

It's pretty simple you dumb ass...the money came first, gov't. 2nd...but even a paramecium would be able to discern that.

Your example is flawed, as is your brain. There's nothing capitalistic (100% or otherwise) in Somalia...unless you consider a society ruled by theocratic principles capitalistic...but then, someone with the cranial capacity of the average earthworm would consider that a great example, wouldn't they?

[Kadmos]

It's pretty simple you dumb ass...the money came first, gov't. 2nd...but even a paramecium would be able to discern that.


Actually, I'm having a bit of trouble understanding that. Last I checked the money says "United States of America" on it..I have a difficult time believing that somehow money with that printed on it came before the United States was conceived.

My understanding is that our currency only has value because it's backed by the government, essentially by the fact that they will accept that currency in payment of our taxes.

Given the fact that our money is basically a coupon that you use to pay taxes it's very difficult to accept your premise that money came first.

Being rude to LAGC won't change that fact.

[Bluntforce]

Actually, I'm having a bit of trouble understanding that. Last I checked the money says "United States of America" on it..I have a difficult time believing that somehow money with that printed on it came before the United States was conceived.

My understanding is that our currency only has value because it's backed by the government, essentially by the fact that they will accept that currency in payment of our taxes.

Given the fact that our money is basically a coupon that you use to pay taxes it's very difficult to accept your premise that money came first.

Being rude to LAGC won't change that fact.

There had to be an agreed upon medium with an agreed upon value before any government could get past the small armed group banditry phase. Household goods, livestock, sexual favors, slaves, bushels of crops, quantities of spices, etc.,etc. Would quickly become too unwieldy.

A portable item and agreed upon value had to be invented or recognized to get government bigger than the distance you and your henchmen could pillage in a day.

[Kadmos]

There had to be an agreed upon medium with an agreed upon value before any government could get past the small armed group banditry phase. Household goods, livestock, sexual favors, slaves, bushels of crops, quantities of spices, etc.,etc. Would quickly become too unwieldy.

A portable item and agreed upon value had to be invented or recognized to get government bigger than the distance you and your henchmen could pillage in a day.

The Egyptians built pyramids, temples, and roads well over 1000 years before they had anything really close to "money". Pretty much all the really ancient societies had government well before the invention of coins. Coins didn't come around until about 700 BC, whereas government predates that by at least 2-3000 years

[Warthogg]

The Egyptians built pyramids, temples, and roads well over 1000 years before they had anything really close to "money". Pretty much all the really ancient societies had government well before the invention of coins. Coins didn't come around until about 700 BC, whereas government predates that by at least 2-3000 years

BUT there was much trading of asses......and the like. :baaa: :cool:


Wart

[Warthogg]

THE PRIVATE SECTOR WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FUNCTION without a stable government allowing it to thrive!




A stable government that allows the private sector to thrive is necessary and desirable.


Wart

[Kadmos]

A stable government that allows the private sector to thrive is necessary and desirable.


Wart

Desirable yes, necessary no. Many systems had very little private industry and worked well enough, feudalism for instance.

Of course those systems that didn't let the private sector thrive were also noticeably lacking in personal freedom.

[Warthogg]

Desirable yes, necessary no. Many systems had very little private industry and worked well enough, feudalism for instance.

Of course those systems that didn't let the private sector thrive were also noticeably lacking in personal freedom.

Next you'll disagree that asses were traded !!


Wart


I was thinking a bit more current than "feudal"........about the needs of our current economy.

[Kadmos]

Next you'll disagree that asses were traded !!


Wart


I was thinking a bit more current than "feudal"........about the needs of our current economy.

Well...the trading of ass is part of the worlds oldest profession.

Sorry, we were talking about which came first, money, government, or eggs, so I was sort of thinking on that thread.

[Warthogg]

Well...the trading of ass is part of the worlds oldest profession.

Sorry, we were talking about which came first, money, government, or eggs, so I was sort of thinking on that thread.

Actually I must agree. Not a necessity.


Wart

[Oswald Bastable]

Actually, I'm having a bit of trouble understanding that. Last I checked the money says "United States of America" on it..I have a difficult time believing that somehow money with that printed on it came before the United States was conceived.

And before that, before the US was the US, during it's making, it had the British Pound...without money or goods to give in trade, there can be no governmental creation.

[Kadmos]

And before that, before the US was the US, during it's making, it had the British Pound...without money or goods to give in trade, there can be no governmental creation.

Actually the Spanish Real was more common in the colonies, but that's not the point.

But note you now put it as "money or goods", which is in fact more accurate, the only thing you need to add now is "services", and it is services, not goods nor money, that is the real aim of government. Without the need for the services the government provides there would in fact be little need for government.

One might in fact argue that the reason we have so much government is because we require so much government to meet the service needs we desire. Cumbersome as it may be at times.

[Oswald Bastable]

Actually the Spanish Real was more common in the colonies, but that's not the point.

But note you now put it as "money or goods", which is in fact more accurate, the only thing you need to add now is "services", and it is services, not goods nor money, that is the real aim of government. Without the need for the services the government provides there would in fact be little need for government.

One might in fact argue that the reason we have so much government is because we require so much government to meet the service needs we desire. Cumbersome as it may be at times.

And how, pray tell, would any government be able to offer any services without some form of money or goods backing it, paying the people in government to provide those services?

[LAGC]

And how, pray tell, would any government be able to offer any services without some form of money or goods backing it, paying the people in government to provide those services?

Easy. If the government controlled the means of production, including farms, factories, etc. it could pay its servants from its own endeavors. No private sector necessary.

Capitalism needs government. But government doesn't need capitalism.

[Oswald Bastable]

Easy. If the government controlled the means of production, including farms, factories, etc. it could pay its servants from its own endeavors. No private sector necessary.

Capitalism needs government. But government doesn't need capitalism.

And without the means of production, farms, factories at the beginning, what does a government use to form, eventually taking over those means of production? When a government is just a thought or ideal, what do they use to turn that thought or ideal into a reality? Or do they just spring up overnight, fully formed, like mushrooms?

[Kadmos]

And how, pray tell, would any government be able to offer any services without some form of money or goods backing it, paying the people in government to provide those services?

Oswald, you already know this. You know your early American history pretty well.

Volunteerism!

Government exists by consent of the governed.

The people pledged their lives, their honor, their sacred duty, and yes their resources to band together to create the nation. By that agreement only did everything else form.

It's the same basic principal that we see in the dawn of civilization. All along the Nile villages began to give food to those villages who had a bad harvest from those who had a good one (the cooperative model of civilization). From that came those who could arrange the distribution, they became bureaucrats.

It's the same principal as when forming a camp or village, certain men will tend the fields, others will keep watch, etc. someone will organize.

This (and reproduction) is the basis of human civilization, not money, but the ability to work together to achieve common goals.

[Oswald Bastable]

Government exists by consent of the governed.

Only sometimes. If you're skeptical, just ask the denizens of any brutal dictatorship.


The people pledged their lives, their honor, their sacred duty, and yes their resources to band together to create the nation. By that agreement only did everything else form.

It's the same basic principal that we see in the dawn of civilization. All along the Nile villages began to give food to those villages who had a bad harvest from those who had a good one (the cooperative model of civilization). From that came those who could arrange the distribution, they became bureaucrats.

It's the same principal as when forming a camp or village, certain men will tend the fields, others will keep watch, etc. someone will organize.

This (and reproduction) is the basis of human civilization, not money, but the ability to work together to achieve common goals.

What you're speaking of is communal organization, not government. It is often a precursor to government, but is not a (or the) government. That comes later and has to be backed by something...invariably money or something that can be exchanged for money, i.e., goods (whether raw or finished).

[Kadmos]

Only sometimes. If you're skeptical, just ask the denizens of any brutal dictatorship.

And the dictatorship only lasts as long as the people allow it to. BTW a "brutal" dictatorship, is only brutal if you are on the shit end of the stick..from the other end it can be quite pleasant. One of the reasons dictatorships often do quite well.


What you're speaking of is communal organization, not government. It is often a precursor to government, but is not a (or the) government. That comes later and has to be backed by something...invariably money or something that can be exchanged for money, i.e., goods (whether raw or finished).

Is there a reason you are being so rigid in your thinking? Really, what is government but community organization on perhaps a large scale. Are you really so unimaginative that you cannot conceive of a form of government where the "rulers" and "implementers" are simply volunteers set to common goals.

The Athenian democracy was over 100 years old before they started to pay representatives to attend the meetings

[Oswald Bastable]

And the dictatorship only lasts as long as the people allow it to. BTW a "brutal" dictatorship, is only brutal if you are on the shit end of the stick..from the other end it can be quite pleasant. One of the reasons dictatorships often do quite well.

Then you must believe the unarmed and starving peasants of North Korea could rise up and defeat Ping Pong and the NK military at any time they wanted? But that of course, is beside the point, as you well knew throwing up this red herring. A dictatorship (by definition) cannot exist by the consent of the governed. It exists through fear, intimidation and violence against the governed. Or perhaps you believe the governed in such situations want and need to be raped, killed and tortured to give their consent?


Is there a reason you are being so rigid in your thinking? Really, what is government but community organization on perhaps a large scale. Are you really so unimaginative that you cannot conceive of a form of government where the "rulers" and "implementers" are simply volunteers set to common goals.

Is there some reason you are oblivious to both the obvious and the rational?

Community organization is a communal group who all agree to work together of their own free will...the needs and desires of all members are taken into account: compromises, exceptions, and changes are made to give everyone a voice and most of what they want.

Government is a body that creates and enforces rules and laws (sometimes for the common good, sometimes for its own good). Under every governmental system there will always be individuals who disagree with one or many of those rules or laws, and who effectively have little to no say in changing them, unless they can get enough of their peers to agree with their viewpoint (or have the force or influence to achieve their changes). Many under a governmental system get little of what they want, and the government (while they may pay lip service) could care less.

But, once again another red herring, since we were speaking of a "which came first" scenario...


The Athenian democracy was over 100 years old before they started to pay representatives to attend the meetings

So tell me, in year one of that democracy...what was used to create, foster and build it...once the community organization phase moved to full-fledged government? What gave the Greeks the ability to move from community organization to a democratic government? Who cares when they started to pay their reps to attend meetings...what did they use to provide the services that made the average Greek find those services useful? Was it standing about in some rudimentary Athenium flapping their gums that created roads so goods could move to the marketplace? Was it good intentions and ideals that created an army to protect Greek cities? Did people just volunteer, out of the goodness of their hearts, to haul trash from the cities?

No, it took money.

[Kadmos]

Then you must believe the unarmed and starving peasants of North Korea could rise up and defeat Ping Pong and the NK military at any time they wanted? But that of course, is beside the point, as you well knew throwing up this red herring. A dictatorship (by definition) cannot exist by the consent of the governed. It exists through fear, intimidation and violence against the governed. Or perhaps you believe the governed in such situations want and need to be raped, killed and tortured to give their consent?

I am quickly losing faith in your intelligence. Many, if not most, dictatorships have had elected leaders.

But yes, of course they could overthrow the government, many dictators have been cast out. Obviously there is a cost. Not so much in money, but in lives lost..and possibly anarchy.


Is there some reason you are oblivious to both the obvious and the rational?

Community organization is a communal group who all agree to work together of their own free will...the needs and desires of all members are taken into account: compromises, exceptions, and changes are made to give everyone a voice and most of what they want.


Sorry, but that is a ridiculous definition. Sure the idea is to achieve some level of peace, but also to achieve some goals. It really doesn't matter if people are given a voice or not. It's simply getting together a community to "do" something.


Government is a body that creates and enforces rules and laws (sometimes for the common good, sometimes for its own good). Under every governmental system there will always be individuals who disagree with one or many of those rules or laws, and who effectively have little to no say in changing them, unless they can get enough of their peers to agree with their viewpoint (or have the force or influence to achieve their changes). Many under a governmental system get little of what they want, and the government (while they may pay lip service) could care less.

Same thing, six of one, half dozen of the other. People getting together to achieve a goal.


You are trying to separate the idea of community organizing from the idea of government..its the same thing


But, once again another red herring, since we were speaking of a "which came first" scenario...



So tell me, in year one of that democracy...what was used to create, foster and build it...once the community organization phase moved to full-fledged government? What gave the Greeks the ability to move from community organization to a democratic government?

The desire to create something coupled with people willing to work toward the goal!



Who cares when they started to pay their reps to attend meetings...

It proves they were working together for over 100 years without payment. It proves the point.


what did they use to provide the services that made the average Greek find those services useful?

Cooperation.


Was it standing about in some rudimentary Athenium flapping their gums that created roads so goods could move to the marketplace?

Yes, along with work


Was it good intentions and ideals that created an army to protect Greek cities?

Yes along with work


Did people just volunteer, out of the goodness of their hearts, to haul trash from the cities?

YES!!!! That is exactly what they did! They had common goals so they got together and worked towards them. People gave their time to serve the community. Volunteer armies protected the state, volunteers paved the roads, volunteers built the temples.


No, it took money.

No, that came later. And when it did come, people volunteered their money to pay for public projects. Citizens were proud to help create a new better temple (or whatever) by paying for professionals to build it.

[El Laton Caliente]

I am quickly losing faith in your intelligence. Many, if not most, dictatorships have had elected leaders.


LMAO! Like Sadam Hussien got 100% of the vote? Or like the USSR where there was only the one canadate on the ballet to vote for? Chavez was elected the first general election, but has cancelled elections or jailed opposition since.

What planet are you living on?

[filthy phil]

there was a weapon developed that emits some kind of sound wave that makes people shit their pants. that'll make em leave:wink:

[FunkyPertwee]

there was a weapon developed that emits some kind of sound wave that makes people shit their pants. that'll make em leave:wink:

They already shit in public under their own volition. I don't think they'll mind.

[Bluntforce]

The Egyptians built pyramids, temples, and roads well over 1000 years before they had anything really close to "money". Pretty much all the really ancient societies had government well before the invention of coins. Coins didn't come around until about 700 BC, whereas government predates that by at least 2-3000 years

When the Pharaoh had Joseph store seven years of grain for the seven year long famine and then allowed Joseph to "sell" the Egyptians the grain, what the hell did they buy it back with?

Ancient coins are very rare, like ancient bronze statues. The coins are melted to make new currencies for new powers/regimes. Every ancient bronze statue that could be laid hands upon during the Renaissance was melted down to cast cannons.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just asking what did the Egyptians "buy" the grain back with?

The Egyptians also had a Treasury and a Treasurer, what did they control if not precious metals that could retain its value over time? Most other goods are perishable or otherwise degradable.

[LAGC]

When the Pharaoh had Joseph store seven years of grain for the seven year long famine and then allowed Joseph to "sell" the Egyptians the grain, what the hell did they buy it back with?

Dude, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but let me fill you in on a little secret: much of what is written in the Bible never happened.

[Kadmos]

When the Pharaoh had Joseph store seven years of grain for the seven year long famine and then allowed Joseph to "sell" the Egyptians the grain, what the hell did they buy it back with?

Ancient coins are very rare, like ancient bronze statues. The coins are melted to make new currencies for new powers/regimes. Every ancient bronze statue that could be laid hands upon during the Renaissance was melted down to cast cannons.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just asking what did the Egyptians "buy" the grain back with?

The Egyptians also had a Treasury and a Treasurer, what did they control if not precious metals that could retain its value over time? Most other goods are perishable or otherwise degradable.

First off, ancient coins are not at all rare, many millions still exist. They really aren't even all that collectible to be honest, most varieties of bronze and silver ones can be had for well under $30 or so.

As to Egyptian pre-currency, interestingly enough the most common standard was actually a "ration" of bread and beer! Common items were actually priced in how much bread and beer it would take to buy them, and then you could trade what you had for what you wanted based on that.

For what he actually bought them with, I don't recall off hand if it was mentioned, but it could have been any sort of item that the two parties agreed on, but it certainly wasn't coins.

It may have even been a weight of precious metal, but a weight is not a coin, it's a barter item.

To be a coin (or "money") it must be of a known denomination be that dollar or ducat, it has to bear some sort of mark, usually of government authority that guarantees its value. And most frequently the value marked should be higher than that of the value of the item without the mark..in order to keep it from being melted down

[gearmonger]

It would be like saying the TEA Partiers were being hypocritical for using PUBLIC roads and parks, since the government pays for their upkeep, not the private sector.
They are, really. In a truly free-market economy EVERYTHING must be privately owned instead of being "owned" by government and maintained by confiscatory taxes levied by bureaucrats who can ruin your life or imprison you for non-compliance. BTW, myself, and the other 53%ers (the actual taxpayers) pay for those roads.


But really, I don't think many of the Occupy protesters really have a problem with most businesses. Just the money-grubbers who skim off the top, the gamblers and schemers who lord over the rest, and use their power to influence government policy to their favor, to the detriment of everyone else. Again, confusion. DO NOT tell us how our corrupt government is the solution while explaining how collusion with our corrupt government is the problem. True Anarchists would rely upon themselves, support the NAP and stop putting us in chains by force of government

[LAGC]

BTW, myself, and the other 53%ers (the actual taxpayers) pay for those roads.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't most funding for the roads paid through the Federal gas tax? I think there's a lot more than just 53% of the populace paying those particular taxes -- basically everyone with a non-electric car or motorcycle, even taxi or bus fares pay gas tax. And the states take care of most of the rest, which often comes out of sales taxes (that everyone pays) or county highway district funds which everyone pays through property tax. That 53% figure is only those who don't pay Federal income tax. But there are a lot of other regressive taxes that even the poor have to pay, so 53% is a misnomer, to say the least.


Again, confusion. DO NOT tell us how our corrupt government is the solution while explaining how collusion with our corrupt government is the problem. True Anarchists would rely upon themselves, support the NAP and stop putting us in chains by force of government

Oh no you didn't! NAP, the so-called "Non-Aggression Principle?" Seriously?

Considering that every part and parcel of American land was stolen from the Natives by FORCE, I demand you surrender all private property rights this instant! You live on stolen land! Land stolen by FORCE! (At least most anarchists are consistent when they want to do away with all private property, which can only be guaranteed and protected through government FORCE!)

[Kadmos]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't most funding for the roads paid through the Federal gas tax?

You aren't wrong. It's nearly impossible to live in the US and not contribute to the federal taxes. Even illegals end up paying into the system one way or another.

[Oswald Bastable]

But yes, of course they could overthrow the government, many dictators have been cast out. Obviously there is a cost. Not so much in money, but in lives lost..and possibly anarchy.

How'd that work out in the Warsaw ghetto? The uprising at Birkeneau? In Iraq in GW1 when the coalition forces stopped advancing? The Libyans before Nato started bombing?

Obviously lives (even armed ones) are not always enough to oust a brutal dictator...not without outside help from a larger, better force. And you actually believe the starving peasants of NK could cast Ping Pong down, all by themselves? You are not just naive, you're delusional...



Sorry, but that is a ridiculous definition. Sure the idea is to achieve some level of peace, but also to achieve some goals. It really doesn't matter if people are given a voice or not. It's simply getting together a community to "do" something.

Community organizing (from Wiki)


Community organizing is a process where people who live in proximity to each other come together into an organization that acts in their shared self-interest. A core goal of community organizing is to generate durable power for an organization representing the community, allowing it to influence key decision-makers on a range of issues over time. In the ideal, for example, this can get community organizing groups a place at the table before important decisions are made. Community organizers work with and develop new local leaders, facilitating coalitions and assisting in the development of campaigns.

Seems even Wiki's idea parallels mine fairly closely.

Definition of GOVERNMENT (from Merriam Webster...would have used their definition of Community Organization as well, but that requires a paid account...debating you ain't worth the scratch)


1: the act or process of governing; specifically : authoritative direction or control

2 obsolete : moral conduct or behavior : discretion

3 a : the office, authority, or function of governing
...b obsolete : the term during which a governing official holds office

4 : the continuous exercise of authority over and the performance of functions for a political unit : rule

5 a : the organization, machinery, or agency through which a political unit exercises authority and performs functions and which is usually classified according to the distribution of power within it
...b : the complex of political institutions, laws, and customs through which the function of governing is carried out

6 : the body of persons that constitutes the governing authority of a political unit or organization: as
...a : the officials comprising the governing body of a political unit and constituting the organization as an active agency
...b capitalized : the executive branch of the United States federal government
...c capitalized : a small group of persons holding simultaneously the principal political executive offices of a nation or other political unit and being responsible for the direction and supervision of public affairs: (1) : such a group in a parliamentary system constituted by the cabinet or by the ministry (2) : administration 4b

At which point do these two overlap in such a way that anyone with even a modicum of rational intelligence can assert they are...


Same thing, six of one, half dozen of the other. People getting together to achieve a goal.



It proves they were working together for over 100 years without payment. It proves the point.

It proves nothing of the kind as regards where and how the ancient Greek government arose. or how they paid for all they did. It only proves their senators took 100 years to figure out they could benefit themselves from the public's largesse. Given the majority of them were already rather wealthy men (it was the same in the Roman government..both early and later) it is commendable they went that long without fleecing the people for a few more drachmas. To assert that a small minority of public officials going for 100 years without a paycheck from the government proves your point is not only absurd, it's near the height of hubris.


Cooperation.



Yes, along with work



Yes along with work



YES!!!! That is exactly what they did! They had common goals so they got together and worked towards them. People gave their time to serve the community. Volunteer armies protected the state, volunteers paved the roads, volunteers built the temples.



No, that came later. And when it did come, people volunteered their money to pay for public projects. Citizens were proud to help create a new better temple (or whatever) by paying for professionals to build it.

So, you would submit that the initial city-states of Greece came about in a fluffy Kumbayah atmosphere where people worked together in a socialist paradise to build roads, armies, etc.? That Athens and Sparta were built and maintained by people donating their labor without recompense, all for an idea that was not realized yet? That stone masons, farmers, soldiers, et. al. simply gave their labors to these tasks...and then went home and ate what? Mud? Grass? And the merchants sold what to all these people with nothing to spend?

[Oswald Bastable]

You aren't wrong. It's nearly impossible to live in the US and not contribute to the federal taxes. Even illegals end up paying into the system one way or another.

The federal gas tax only pays for a pittance of the roads we have.

[Kadmos]

How'd that work out in the Warsaw ghetto? The uprising at Birkeneau? In Iraq in GW1 when the coalition forces stopped advancing? The Libyans before Nato started bombing?

Obviously lives (even armed ones) are not always enough to oust a brutal dictator...not without outside help from a larger, better force. And you actually believe the starving peasants of NK could cast Ping Pong down, all by themselves? You are not just naive, you're delusional...

I'm not saying it's easy, I'm saying government rules because people allow it to.






At which point do these two overlap in such a way that anyone with even a modicum of rational intelligence can assert they are...

1,3,5,6 pay close attention to 5a





It proves nothing of the kind as regards where and how the ancient Greek government arose. or how they paid for all they did. It only proves their senators took 100 years to figure out they could benefit themselves from the public's largesse.

Athenian democracy. Look it up, there were no senators, there was no senate. It was rule by "the people", granted slaves and women weren't given a vote, but everyone else was.


To assert that a small minority of public officials going for 100 years without a paycheck from the government proves your point is not only absurd, it's near the height of hubris.


I am actually asserting that EVERY free male saw it as their duty to assemble and cast their vote on basically every issue.


So, you would submit that the initial city-states of Greece came about in a fluffy Kumbayah atmosphere where people worked together in a socialist paradise to build roads, armies, etc.? That Athens and Sparta were built and maintained by people donating their labor without recompense, all for an idea that was not realized yet? That stone masons, farmers, soldiers, et. al. simply gave their labors to these tasks...and then went home and ate what? Mud? Grass? And the merchants sold what to all these people with nothing to spend?

Athens yes, Sparta was slightly different (they required service, it wasn't so optional).

I really don't see what is so difficult to understand, you wake up, tend your animals, tend your fields, do whatever work you need to do..then later you meet up with the other men, decide the issues of the day, set up schedules, etc..

Then usually at times when there is little farm work necessary you give your time to public works, or you put your slaves to tasks of public works.

You or your slaves, build roads, town walls, temples, etc.

Is it so difficult to comprehend that people want to live in a nice place and are willing to put in their own actual work to make it nice, safe, successful?

Are you by any chance a Ferengi?

[Kadmos]

The federal gas tax only pays for a pittance of the roads we have.

Usually it actually pays for the bulk of highways and interstates, as well as mass transit. Generally, if I recall correctly it pulls in about 40 billion a year, which comes to within about 20% or so of what they generally spend...call it maybe another 7-10 billion in taxes from other sources. Not great but not horrible either.

Granted the 2005 infrastructure bill threw things out of whack, but 500 billion dollars is enough to make a dent in anyone's pocketbook

And of course most of the states also have gas taxes.

Two other things worth noting..first the fuel taxes aren't the only excise tax the federal government takes, they also take on alcohol, tobacco, tires, airline tickets and a few other things.

Secondly, when people say that some people pay 0% in taxes, even that isn't exactly true. The money is usually pulled from people's paychecks throughout the entire year, but only paid back once a year..with no interest. Essentially in these cases the government has the use of the money at 0% for a length of time

[Oswald Bastable]

I'm not saying it's easy, I'm saying government rules because people allow it to.

I'm sure that gives starving peasants under brutal rule, across the world, absolute solace. No doubt Burma will one day celebrate you as their liberator.

[QUOTE=Kadmos;183004]1,3,5,6 pay close attention to 5a

If you can't see that community organization is pre-government, there's no way I can force you to see it. However, I can now see your point. There is no difference between what took place prior to the Continental Congress and the time the burgeoning US government began levying tariffs on goods coming in to the country. No difference between the Nazi organizing movement and the administration of the Third Reich. No difference between Egypt's Arab Spring and what they have now...access to the Egyptian treasury and the ability to rule. I get it now...there's no difference...they are one and the same.


Athenian democracy. Look it up, there were no senators, there was no senate. It was rule by "the people", granted slaves and women weren't given a vote, but everyone else was.

Well damn...I used the wrong word for the reps of the Athenian government...good that you could use that pounce on, even though you knew what I meant. The fact they didn't pay themselves from the treasury for 100 years still stands and you know it. And it has nothing to do with what built or kept the government flowing for that period. That some higher level functionaries took no pay from the public treasury has absolutely nothing to do with the finances behind the government.


I am actually asserting that EVERY free male saw it as their duty to assemble and cast their vote on basically every issue.

Which has what to do with who got paid or where the money for roads and armies came from? I don't get paid for voting, do you?



I really don't see what is so difficult to understand, you wake up, tend your animals, tend your fields, do whatever work you need to do..then later you meet up with the other men, decide the issues of the day, set up schedules, etc..

Then usually at times when there is little farm work necessary you give your time to public works, or you put your slaves to tasks of public works.

You or your slaves, build roads, town walls, temples, etc.

Is it so difficult to comprehend that people want to live in a nice place and are willing to put in their own actual work to make it nice, safe, successful?

I see you have absolutely no idea what it takes to run a farm. The idea that there are times when there's little farm work is rather laughable. I also see you have a rudimentary idea of what it was like to live and survive in a pre-modern world (and for the average farmer today...in a post-modern world)...where daily toil from sun up until sundown was required by the average peon, just to survive from day to day. I'm sure the stone masons, craftsmen and artisans had far more time to devote to such things though. After all, we all know it was a cakewalk in pre-modern times. Most people were just lazing about for at least half the day, right?

I'm sure the more wealthy were happy to loan out some slaves now and again, on public works projects...after all, they work for peanuts. But I'm betting you dollars to donuts, there was something in it for them in doing so, whether money, influence or favor.

But hey, it's always easier to rule with less money when you have slaves, ain't it? The Egyptians found it easier in the public works department three centuries ago, the American south found it easier in the farming realm a couple decades ago. I'm sure community organizing was a whole lot easier with slaves...far less capital needed...unless you'd consider human sweat and labor a form of capital...but then, you wouldn't, would you?

[Ronwicp]

Can we still club the hippies?

[Kadmos]

I'm sure that gives starving peasants under brutal rule, across the world, absolute solace. No doubt Burma will one day celebrate you as their liberator.

I doubt it, I've done nothing for them that I am aware.

Some people are willing to do what is necessary to change it, others prefer the status quo. Either way, it's consent.




If you can't see that community organization is pre-government, there's no way I can force you to see it. However, I can now see your point. There is no difference between what took place prior to the Continental Congress and the time the burgeoning US government began levying tariffs on goods coming in to the country. No difference between the Nazi organizing movement and the administration of the Third Reich. No difference between Egypt's Arab Spring and what they have now...access to the Egyptian treasury and the ability to rule. I get it now...there's no difference...they are one and the same.

I'm not saying there aren't 1000 different types of governments, or that each don't have their unique attributes, I'm saying that at its essence government is about organizing the people.


Well damn...I used the wrong word for the reps of the Athenian government...good that you could use that pounce on, even though you knew what I meant. The fact they didn't pay themselves from the treasury for 100 years still stands and you know it. And it has nothing to do with what built or kept the government flowing for that period. That some higher level functionaries took no pay from the public treasury has absolutely nothing to do with the finances behind the government.


The wrong word leads to the wrong concept. You keep saying things like "higher level functionaries" which show you know nothing about that type of governance. For the most part there were no higher level functionaries, especially at first. The idea was actual democracy, the whole group voted. As in "Do we build ships?, a wall?, a temple?....or do we just hang out and get drunk?"




Which has what to do with who got paid or where the money for roads and armies came from? I don't get paid for voting, do you?

Kinda the point I'm trying to make, no one got paid..no money yet.



I see you have absolutely no idea what it takes to run a farm. The idea that there are times when there's little farm work is rather laughable.

Lived on one, thank you all the same. Amazing how much free time there actually is. A lot of time waiting for things to grow, or for winter to end, or sitting and watching cows eat and shit.

So please don't give me that crap, yes farming can be hard work, but it affords a lot more free time than most farmers claim.



I'm sure the stone masons, craftsmen and artisans had far more time to devote to such things though. After all, we all know it was a cakewalk in pre-modern times. Most people were just lazing about for at least half the day, right?

Where do you think such jobs came from? Some farmers or shepherds found that they had a knack for such things, spent extra time doing that type of work, got asked by others to help them with their projects, eventually one could make a living at it.


I'm sure the more wealthy were happy to loan out some slaves now and again, on public works projects...after all, they work for peanuts. But I'm betting you dollars to donuts, there was something in it for them in doing so, whether money, influence or favor.

There was something in it for everyone in the community...survival, a nicer place to live, arts, better trade options, etc. Civilization was the something in it for them...and at that time you didn't get it unless people were willing to put their work into it.

This may outright shock you, but some people are willing to volunteer their time to help others and the community. When we had the big flood here, guess it was around 93 or so, I personally went to the other side of the Missouri and helped build sandbag levies for no pay whatsoever...my house wasn't anywhere near the flood zone.

And when you don't have a giant government to build stuff, people actually get together and do public projects...without pay. Many actually even donate their own resources to help.

[Oswald Bastable]

Some people are willing to do what is necessary to change it, others prefer the status quo. Either way, it's consent.

Got it. It's consent when taxes go up by .03%. It's also consent when Uday rapes your mother and your sister, and forces you to watch at gunpoint, then kills you afterward. It's consent when 10% of your land is taken for a new road. It's also consent when your town is decimated by mustard or sarin gas. It's consent when you're shipped in cattle cars to concentration camps, and also when you're herded into showers dispensing zyklon B...I get it now.


I'm not saying there aren't 1000 different types of governments, or that each don't have their unique attributes, I'm saying that at its essence government is about organizing the people.

Got it. Organizing the people is what it's all about. Organizing them into the winners and the losers, those who live and those who die, those who will own and those who will be owned. Because slaves the world over have had so much say in their government (or community organization...or whatever). It's damn near the same thing.


The wrong word leads to the wrong concept. You keep saying things like "higher level functionaries" which show you know nothing about that type of governance. For the most part there were no higher level functionaries, especially at first. The idea was actual democracy, the whole group voted. As in "Do we build ships?, a wall?, a temple?....or do we just hang out and get drunk?"

Got it. The average, joe shit hauler, had every bit as much influence on the direction of society as those with land, wealth, money...in the direction of society. It always works like that doesn't it? Even in Colonial America...


Kinda the point I'm trying to make, no one got paid..no money yet.

Riiiiiight...


Lived on one, thank you all the same. Amazing how much free time there actually is. A lot of time waiting for things to grow, or for winter to end, or sitting and watching cows eat and shit.

So please don't give me that crap, yes farming can be hard work, but it affords a lot more free time than most farmers claim.

So you were out there? Day after day, pulling every weed that showed up because there were no herbicides? Day after day looking for insect infestations because there were no insecticides? Are you talking about modern farming? Or the backbreaking labor of day-to-day work required prior to modern society and better living through chemistry? If there's any "crap" being spoken of here, it's flying from the fingers on your keyboard.


Where do you think such jobs came from? Some farmers or shepherds found that they had a knack for such things, spent extra time doing that type of work, got asked by others to help them with their projects, eventually one could make a living at it.

Actually, such trades were usually passed down from father to son. Changing trades (farmer or shepherd to stone mason) was not very common, though I'm sure it did happen. Such trades were rather jealously guarded, primarily because they afforded a higher level of recompense. In the middle ages they became the trade guilds, today they are unions. The more things change, the more they stay the same, and there is nothing new under the sun.


There was something in it for everyone in the community...survival, a nicer place to live, arts, better trade options, etc. Civilization was the something in it for them...and at that time you didn't get it unless people were willing to put their work into it.

This may outright shock you, but some people are willing to volunteer their time to help others and the community. When we had the big flood here, guess it was around 93 or so, I personally went to the other side of the Missouri and helped build sandbag levies for no pay whatsoever...my house wasn't anywhere near the flood zone.

And when you don't have a giant government to build stuff, people actually get together and do public projects...without pay. Many actually even donate their own resources to help.

It's nice you can deny basic human nature in your rose colored view of the past...very comforting to you I'm sure. And I'm not saying in times of hardship or disaster that people aren't willing to go out of their way to give of themselves, selflessly...that's also a part of human nature...to band together in times of trouble. What I challenge is your Pollyanna belief that people can move from the starting point (working together at a common aim) to a governmental form of organization without something greasing the skids.

If your view were correct, communism would have already worked. Please, tell me...where has it worked?

[Kadmos]

Got it. It's consent when taxes go up by .03%. It's also consent when Uday rapes your mother and your sister, and forces you to watch at gunpoint, then kills you afterward. It's consent when 10% of your land is taken for a new road. It's also consent when your town is decimated by mustard or sarin gas. It's consent when you're shipped in cattle cars to concentration camps, and also when you're herded into showers dispensing zyklon B...I get it now.

Good, I'm glad you understand.


Got it. Organizing the people is what it's all about. Organizing them into the winners and the losers, those who live and those who die, those who will own and those who will be owned. Because slaves the world over have had so much say in their government (or community organization...or whatever). It's damn near the same thing.


Life ain't always easy. But yes that's the point of government.


Got it. The average, joe shit hauler, had every bit as much influence on the direction of society as those with land, wealth, money...in the direction of society.

Yes, that was the point of that system


It always works like that doesn't it?

No, all systems are generally different



Riiiiiight...

Yes for a rather long time though history money did not exist



So you were out there? Day after day, pulling every weed that showed up because there were no herbicides? Day after day looking for insect infestations because there were no insecticides? Are you talking about modern farming?

Yes, I am obviously talking about modern farming, I am not over 2,500 years old.

I hate to tell you this but even in substance farming it really isn't usually necessary to tend the crops all that closely. Many cultures tilled, then planted, then spent months away from the plantings, often great distances away, shepherding, following animal herds and hunting, etc.

Tell me, where are the coins of the American Indians? Few used anything even close to money, yet made large cities, built giant mounds, etc.


Actually, such trades were usually passed down from father to son. Changing trades (farmer or shepherd to stone mason) was not very common, though I'm sure it did happen. Such trades were rather jealously guarded, primarily because they afforded a higher level of recompense. In the middle ages they became the trade guilds, today they are unions. The more things change, the more they stay the same, and there is nothing new under the sun.

Are you not getting that I am speaking of the time leading up to that? Passing a trade from father to son was common even long into the ancient world, but it came from some place, it came from the spare time that farming afforded, the time to invent new tools, practice skills, be able to no longer have to live as nomads, build things.

I'm talking about the start. You are jumping all over the place. You act like I am arguing that money never existed, or somehow never needed to exist. I am simply saying government came long before money. This isn't rocket science. Jericho has been continuously occupied for over 10,000 years..money, in the form of coin, is only 2,700 years old...do you really think they had no form of government for all that time?




It's nice you can deny basic human nature in your rose colored view of the past...very comforting to you I'm sure.

I'm not trying to give some hippy dippy point of view, I'm talking about facts. Yes life was often quite brutal, but it doesn't change what came before something else.


And I'm not saying in times of hardship or disaster that people aren't willing to go out of their way to give of themselves, selflessly...that's also a part of human nature...to band together in times of trouble.

Oh good, you do seem to understand the basic concept...took you long enough.

Now, take it one step further...in the ancient world, ALL times were essentially just a hair's breadth away from "times of trouble". They understood that you needed an warriors to survive, so they formed militia...it wasn't a paid militia at first, it was the men doing what needed to be done for protection. Same goes for the city wall, everyone needed it, so they built it. Same goes for the temple, have to gain the favors of the gods so you all build one. None of this required money, it required cooperation.


What I challenge is your Pollyanna belief that people can move from the starting point (working together at a common aim) to a governmental form of organization without something greasing the skids.

It's not a big leap from one to the other, it only takes people voting, or choosing a leader, or a leader arising from natural ability or strength.

If you insist on making it about personal gain, then please attempt to understand that safety and a better community are often reasons enough

[1 Patriot-of-many]

where's a "terrorist Incident" when you need one.

LOL I was just thinking that the other day....where's a suicidal muslim when you need one?