RashyNullPlanet

There is no significant difference between this…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_ZWTx-QUj4

…and this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ljYNgLnpxM

The only difference between those two videos is who pays the perpetrators.

In both videos the murderers are obviously dedicated to the task of killing.

In both videos the murderers have abandoned their responsibility to determine right from wrong and are simply following orders from distant others.

In both videos the murderers act without fear of interference from bystanders.

In the first video, the murderers are a mob of men brutalizing a woman who dared violate their ridiculous insane sense of ownership of all women.

In the second video, the murderers are a mob of men brutalizing a mentally handicapped man who dared violate their ridiculous insane sense of self-importance.

In both cases, the murderers have abandoned their consciences, and persist in their brutality despite the obvious murder they’re committing.

The only discernible difference is that the murderers in the first video were a mere mob, and the murderers in the second video were a gaggle of tax-financed cops in “the land of the free, and the home of the brave.”

All those murderers are the worst kind of sub-human zealots. They crave violence and sadism, and they seek someone, anyone, to make their violence and sadism appear legitimate, so they don’t have to think for themselves or answer for their murderous actions. The mob latched onto religion. The cops latched onto worship of law.

From Wendy McElroy’s place:

If protection rackets represent organized crime at its smoothest, then war making and state making—quintessential protection rackets with the advantage of legitimacy…

There are a few critical words missing there. This is how it should read:

“If protection rackets represent organized crime at its smoothest, then war making and state making—quintessential protection rackets with the advantage of the appearance of legitimacy… ”

Don’t ever give an inch to such shoddy language. If war making and state making are truly legitimate activities, then what’s the point of the rest of the article?

Kyle’s “Cutting God in Half” reminded me of this draft of mine that’s been sitting idle for more than a year:

I tend to look at things as “either, or.”

For instance, a woman is either pregnant, or she isn’t. A man is either dead, or he isn’t.

“Either, or” is usually my first test to sort out right from wrong.

Interactions between humans are either voluntary or they’re not. There is no in-between. When you buy something, that’s a voluntary interaction with the seller. When someone steals something from you, that’s an involuntary interaction between you and the thief.

There are only two ways for me, and everyone else, to get something from someone else: trade for it, or steal it.

There are only two ways for me, and everyone else, to interact with other humans: reason or force.

I’ll draw a line on Kyle’s Paper: “gnaws at my life.”

Martin encourages more of the same futile actions that enthroned the one who would be God-Emperor of Terra.

There is no way around it: “No nation in world history has ever voted its way out of straits like these, and this one won’t, either.“

Billy asks:

What might possibly make you look like a nail to some commissar or other?

As far as I can see, the list of things that wouldn’t make you look like a nail is much shorter than the list of things that would.

More cannibals on parade:

The best way to change the system, then, is to stick your fingers in your ear and scream “IM NOT VOTING”

A very mature political system blooming in your utopia, for sure.

My response, in its entirety, because I’ve been following this prolific cannibal for some years now:

It’s amazing the presumptions that can be fit into a single sentence.

When did you stop having intercourse with livestock?

See?

You’re screeching that I’m ignoring reality, when, in fact, you’re the ostrich plowing your head into the sand. What are you afraid of? I’ve been dragging you around here by your eyeballs for some time now, and all you’ve managed to do is be another data point demonstrating that a person can be shown concepts but can’t be made to think.

You’re also assuming that I want to change “the system”. All I want from “the system” is for it to remove the muzzle of its gun from my back and let me go about my life without duress. I don’t care if “the system” continues apace, slowly withers, or inevitably blossoms into an orgy of cannibalism, as long as you and your fellow votistas leave me and my life the hell out of it.

Perhaps the dumbest assumption you’re making is that I aspire to some utopia. I don’t. Humans are fallible. Anything humans do will have flaws, however, when those flaws are instituted as centralized process and “law”, there is no escape. On the other hand, when those flaws are part of decentralized associations, they victimize many fewer people.

I would never presume to make decisions about your life. That’s part of why I don’t vote. I don’t know what’s best for you. Why would you do that to me? You have no way of knowing what’s best for me. Do you have the balls to make me comply with your decisions about my life in person?

Would you dare attempt to make me comply with your preferences for my life, face to face? There is only one answer to that question, and that answer defines you as human or cannibal.

As usual, I expect he’ll go out like a light

Many thanks to Billy, for much of the ammo to use against such creatures.

Salon has an article about yesterday’s raids in Minnesota on potential protesters at the Republican National Convention. This sums things up pretty well:

Yet how is our own Government’s behavior in Minnesota any different than what the Chinese did to its protesters during the Olympics (other than the fact that we actually have a Constitution that prohibits such behavior)? And where are all the self-righteous Freedom Crusaders in our nation’s establishment organs who were so flamboyantly criticizing the actions of a Government on the other side of the globe as our own Government engages in the same tyrannical, protest-squelching conduct with exactly the same motives?

“Land of the Free”, my ass.

Richard Rahn at the Washington Times points out a despicable practice: the US government taxing its citizens who earn a living outside the US, but in the course of his article he reveals that he harbors a contradiction:

the U.S. Congress has just passed a law that places a higher tax burden (and in some cases wealth confiscation) on those who choose to permanently leave the United States,

Taxation is wealth confiscation. There is no difference. Wealth is property. Property confiscation is theft, no matter who, or what, perpetrates it.

The folks in Pillsbury, ND had an election, and no one came.

But on June 10, no one showed up. Not even those on the ballot.

Unfortunately, the zero turn-out wasn’t because they realized that voting is delegated coercion, or even for any sliver of recognition of the force underlying voting. They were all just too busy to gather round the cannibal pot that day.

My comment, which I attempted to post, only to find that I’m still banned:

“For the warrior who has such a code, certain actions remain unthinkable, even in the most dire or extreme circumstances.”

Warriors aren’t just people who participate in wars and carry weapons.

Some warriors use mechanical weapons. Some use ideas. What makes a person a warrior is relentless pursuit of truth and integrity, despite opposition.