Methods of Governme...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Methods of Government  

Page 1 / 2
  RSS

Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
09/10/2011 11:15 pm  

It's been a while since we had a solid political discussion. Hopefully we can have this one without a flame war.

We all know that, ultimately, the Law of Thelema must somehow be applied to government, both within and without. And we also know that there are few physical governing bodies in Thelema, and they are basically infants, time-wise. To date, no country, or state, as attempted any sort of "Thelemic Law", so it has yet to be experimented with on a larger scale.

Well, we all have our own viewpoints, different angles in looking at situations. Surely, all governments are not perfect, and they probably never will be. But, assuming that somehow, at some point, the Law of Thelema becomes a governing body in popular eyes, what would you like to see implemented?

For instance, I honestly think that in the U.S., one should be allowed to hold the office of President for a total of eight (8 ) years, but cannot hold the office for more than four (4) years in a row. I also think that both the Senate, and the House of Representatives, should abide by this idea.

Things it would do for the Presidency (for all intents and purposes, the current U.S. President is represented by an X):

1. It would allow X to not have to worry about campaigning and getting re-elected. This is a distraction from the job X could probably do without.
2. It would force X to have some real competition. Right now, the Republicans have their nice little "race" going on with the population. But who is going to run for Democrat in 2012? It's X. The proposed system would force another Democrat entry, Y. In the absolute worst case scenario, you get 4 years of X, 4 years of Y, 4 years of X, 4 years of Y, then Z. At this point, mandate that the current party is not eligible for the next voting session. That's 16 years of one party taking the Presidency at one time, in the worst case scenario, no matter what. In the current system, there is absolutely nothing to say that the Democrats, or the Republicans, will eventually beat each other out and one of them become the completely dominate party (dictatorship). The proposed system would have provisions against such a scenario. Also, mandate that the House of Representatives and Senate are not allowed to have a majority in the same parties, in order to ensure that one voice doesn't dominate the scene. Hell, you could let the President pick whether or not he would want a majority in the Senate, or in the House, or you could put it on the ballots, and let the voters decide (democracy).
3. It would allow current President X, to get 4 years away from the situation, take a step back, and get some perspective on things. Then, after 4 years in and 4 years out, X would be eligible to give it another go. I think this would help the overall experience level of X, thereby allowing for more proficient production.
4. Outlaw lobbying. Ramp up in the security in Congressional hearings if you have to, but keep the reporters out. Stop airing our meetings to the world. Surely, world leaders watch all of this "transparent business" and use counter-strategies designed to take advantage of any holes in the government's current plans. Lobbying simply needs to be outlawed, for obvious reasons.
5. Legalize marijuana, in an effort to redistribute some of the money this nation is circulating in the underground up to the surface, where it can be taxed, and utilized for the benefit of the people on the whole.
6. When I was in Singapore, every car had a meter on the dashboard. It was explained to me that once a year, when they renew their tags, they pay a "road tax", varying according to how much they had driven that year. It was illegal to drive without a meter. They had, the absolute best roads of any country I have ever seen.

So what do you all think? Do you like the idea? If so, what suggestions do you have to accent it? If not, why not, and more importantly, what would you suggest?

We don't have to limit this thread to just the U.S. or UK. There are many other countries in this world, and I don't see why we have to limit this thread to just talking about those two.


Quote
HG
 HG
(@hg)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 96
09/10/2011 11:55 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
We all know that, ultimately, the Law of Thelema must somehow be applied to government, both within and without.

Why?

I certainly don't think so, and I disagree with your "We all know that..."

I think Thelema is about getting your own house in order, not about telling other people how to live their lives.

OK, if it is your will to cause some political change, then do it.

But if it's not, if you simply think you have a duty to do something because somebody told you all good Thelemites should do that or think this way... In that case you're just another well-meaning idiot, probably causing more harm than good, and exactly like the politicians you're complaining about.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
10/10/2011 1:21 am  
"HG" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
We all know that, ultimately, the Law of Thelema must somehow be applied to government, both within and without.

Why?

I certainly don't think so, and I disagree with your "We all know that..."

I think Thelema is about getting your own house in order, not about telling other people how to live their lives.

OK, if it is your will to cause some political change, then do it.

But if it's not, if you simply think you have a duty to do something because somebody told you all good Thelemites should do that or think this way... In that case you're just another well-meaning idiot, probably causing more harm than good, and exactly like the politicians you're complaining about.

Actually, 1) no one was complaining. 2) If you consider yourself a Thelemite, do you not work to cultivate your understanding of Thelema both within and without? Surely you aren't just one of those well-meaning idiots that thinks it's all inside your head or your Temple, one of those imbecile fools that doesn't realize the manifestation of his efforts is as important as the Path taken to obtain them.

I'm not saying we should get together and try to decide on some sort of utopian ideal and call it "Thelema", I'm saying that practically, in order to help facilitate what the current leaders of global reality are trying to do (that's the politicians, by the way... like it or not, conjuring Belial in your parent's basement might prove useful, but I doubt he's going to buy your gas for you), there are some ideas they could implement to help further their cause, in my opinion.

And they are opinions, suggestions. Obviously, you don't have any good suggestions of your own that you'd like to share so I may assume that 1) you think everything is just perfect the way it is, and there is absolutely nothing you could do to assist, and therefore you might as well just be dead, or 2) you don't have enough actual Work behind you in order to have anything valuable to share with the world.

Don't just be a naysayer for the hell of it. On top of that, your little personal snippet was both trite, and uncalled for. I expected someone who has been around on these forums a bit to show a little more class. Is that what they are teaching you in Hogwarts these days?

Save your weak attempts at sarcasm and denigration, and provide something use to this thread, and these forums, for once.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
10/10/2011 7:15 am  
"Azidonis" wrote:
you think everything is just perfect the way it is

This is actually one of the definitions of having completed the Great Work: recognizing the perfection of the universe as it is and the unnecessity of having to undertake the Great Work at all.

Now, of course, everything is perfect in the universe including one's desire to make certain changes, if one actually desires to make those changes -- hence, HG's comment, "OK, if it is your will to cause some political change, then do it." -- but if one feels some kind of obligation to make those changes to produce a "better" world, then one is indeed acting in violation to the Law of Thelema by not attending to one's own will and instead attending to some fantasies about the world not being perfect and needing to bring it in line with some "better" ideal.

you don't have enough actual Work behind you in order to have anything valuable to share with the world.

I'm not sure what "actual Work" you're referencing here. Unless you're talking about the work of professionally studying political theory and/or taking the steps to seriously prepare a political career, any "work" undertaken, say, by the average occultist or idealist is going to be of pretty much zero value to almost the entire world's population. Slashing one's forearm with a razor and doing all kinds of funny chants in bright robes might make one feel super spiffy, but it's going to do absolutely nothing to give one any insight into politics or any ability to provide anything of political "value" to the world.

The people who are actually going to make political changes in the world are people who are politicians. It's very likely that if you were one of those people whose will it was to make those changes, you'd be a politician already -- or at least well on the path to having a political career -- thus obviating the need to talk about it on an internet forum.


ReplyQuote
HG
 HG
(@hg)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 96
10/10/2011 7:20 am  
"Azidonis" wrote:
Don't just be a naysayer for the hell of it. On top of that, your little personal snippet was both trite, and uncalled for. I expected someone who has been around on these forums a bit to show a little more class. Is that what they are teaching you in Hogwarts these days?

OK, you're upset, and it's partly my fault.

When I wrote that last paragraph that you're upset about, I used "you" to refer to a generic person - me, you, anybody - not to Mr. Azidonis personally.

Here, I have rewritten that paragraph so that it's no longer ambiguous who it refers to:

"But if it's not, if smeone simply thinks they have a duty to do something because somebody told them all good Thelemites should do that or think this way... In that case they're just another well-meaning idiot, probably causing more harm than good, and exactly like the politicians they're complaining about."

OK, now we can have the civilized discussion you wished to have, instead of the flame war you wished to avoid.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
10/10/2011 7:59 am  

Politics and government as methods of control. The self ultimately lives accordingly as an occultist or thelemite inside the tent pissing in or outside the tent pissing in.
An anarchist state is the ideal but it takes one greedy person to bring that system down, one flawed brick destables the temple.
The plato system of a government ruled by philosophy is a good premise were it not for the subject of dividing people much like the caste systems in India.
Blatant fascism and fear will give control as long as the intelligesia are bought onside or downsized.
So we have democracy, the chance to put an x on a box every 4 or 5 years.
Elected people dont necessarily stick to promises which made you vote for them, but you cant return your vote saying you are misreprested.
You cant vote for 'none of the above'.
It is possible to rise through a political party and influence policy but behind all scenes are puppet masters.

Personally, im inside, sometimes outside the tent pissing in.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
10/10/2011 7:54 pm  
"Los" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
you think everything is just perfect the way it is

This is actually one of the definitions of having completed the Great Work: recognizing the perfection of the universe as it is and the unnecessity of having to undertake the Great Work at all.

I hate to do this, Los, but: from Liber 156 "And the end thereof is known not even unto Our Lady or to the Beast whereon She rideth; nor unto the Virgin her daughter nor unto Chaos her lawful Lord; but unto the Crowned Child is it known? It is not known if it be known.".

When one "completes" a task, that's it. It done. When you build a bicycle, you've built it. It's over. The task is complete. To recognize complete perfection within complete imperfection is a beginning, not an end. There is a key in the word "Do". As gods, we are Do-ers, Go-ers. That is part of our imperfect-perfect nature. The difference between an Aspirant, an Adept, and a Master, is in the helmsman. The wheel must be turned, for we exist in a realm of cycles, and thus it is a part of our imperfect-perfect nature, to turn the wheel.

"Los" wrote:
Now, of course, everything is perfect in the universe including one's desire to make certain changes, if one actually desires to make those changes -- hence, HG's comment, "OK, if it is your will to cause some political change, then do it."

Not necessarily. Again, it depends on the helmsmen. Carnal desire, and desire without attachment, are two different things.

In an effort to be more clear on this, after a certain point, one can literally make Samadhi on anything. Essentially, without attachment, one can journey down any "rabbit hole" soever, and arrive therefrom with knowledge of a situation. This is the basis of "higher meditations", and the 10 cemetery meditations of the Buddhist come to mind. Sure, we recognize life and death, and the cycles therein, but we also recognize that death is a "changeless state", in the sense that the body in question no longer has the ability to effect its own change. It's change continues, as that is the nature of physical existence, to change, but in a different manner, and perhaps not totally associated with the karma carried by the former inhabitant of the body. And so forth. One can peer down that rabbit hole as much as one likes, and take any direction soever. Of course, it's done without attachment, and thus once Samadhi is made, one willfully "returns" from whence one came, and be non-attached.

Thus, "desire" in the sense of, "Oh hey, I don't like this" is yes, puny and belittling. It reeks of attachment, and that's when things begin to get screwy, as we spin web after web trying to force the world to mold itself around the image we have for it, instead of accepting it as it is.

The difference between the two is this: there are two clock-makers. One clock-maker looks inside of the clock (grandfather clock, not digital), sees the gears and what-not that makes it tick, and thinks, "This is fine and dandy, but this part here isn't right. So, I desire to change it, by changing these few more gears, to make it more in my own image, and maybe it'll work better." This first clock-maker since and tinkers for hours on end, trying to force his image upon the set of gears that make the clock. Alas, through much frustration, trial and error, he is able to get it to work. Then, he continues to tinker with it, and over time, you have improvements (evolution) on the clock.

The second clock-maker, looks at the clock, and sees that everything is running just fine. Sure, it's not perfect, but that is what is so great about it. It can be left alone and run just fine and no one will ever notice that there is this one little piece that doesn't seem to do anything. But, what about that little piece? Well, a little tinker here and there, and that piece becomes the foundation for a completely new design, and now this clock works much more efficient than ever, and in less time that the first guy who had to change everything around in order to get it to work.

Desire, lust of result, tends to force the situation. The ego wants to build the world in it's image. Will, for lack of a better term to denote the two types of desire here, works within the nature of the item, and from accepting what that nature is, can then see how nature itself may benefit from a tiny change. In the first case, one is the hand working for the individual. In the second case, the hand works through the individual.

"Los" wrote:
-- but if one feels some kind of obligation to make those changes to produce a "better" world, then one is indeed acting in violation to the Law of Thelema by not attending to one's own will and instead attending to some fantasies about the world not being perfect and needing to bring it in line with some "better" ideal.

Obligation is a man-made idea, as many are. The only obligations we have are those we set for ourselves, or those that are set by us, unwittingly, in the case we cannot control our own realities. But if we are "big boys", surely we see no obligation that we haven't ourselves defined. Obligation implies attachment, and that is not the idea here.

The idea is that, after looking at the political situation long enough, I've noticed that a tiny little tweak could help improve the machine on the whole. No, it's not my job to make that tweak happen. But I can say, "Hey, what about this piece," and leave it alone. People that are interested can either help it flourish or shoot it down. It's not for me to decide.

"Los" wrote:

you don't have enough actual Work behind you in order to have anything valuable to share with the world.

I'm not sure what "actual Work" you're referencing here. Unless you're talking about the work of professionally studying political theory and/or taking the steps to seriously prepare a political career, any "work" undertaken, say, by the average occultist or idealist is going to be of pretty much zero value to almost the entire world's population. Slashing one's forearm with a razor and doing all kinds of funny chants in bright robes might make one feel super spiffy, but it's going to do absolutely nothing to give one any insight into politics or any ability to provide anything of political "value" to the world.

I pretty much said that already. There is a fine line here too. Do we not accept the fact that, without any political training, past prophets have provided tremendous amounts of insight and "political value" to the world. After a time, slashing one's arm with a razor is as meaningless as writing this post is. They may be considered as "necessary" within their own spheres and such, but ultimately they mean very little.

"Los" wrote:
The people who are actually going to make political changes in the world are people who are politicians. It's very likely that if you were one of those people whose will it was to make those changes, you'd be a politician already -- or at least well on the path to having a political career -- thus obviating the need to talk about it on an internet forum.

It's very likely that I'm not a politician. That doesn't mean I cannot see what politicians do. That doesn't mean I cannot learn about the system, and it certain does not mean I cannot provide anything beneficial to said system. I, or anyone else for that matters, ultimately, am not bound by the classifications.

At the beginning of your post, you made a wonderful "perfection is imperfection" point, and then you come down here at the bottom and suggest that there is no way anyone who isn't a politician can have viable ideas for government. Everything contains its opposite, Los. Sure, one gets a varying perspective depending on one's position and attachment into any set rabbit hole, but that doesn't mean others, in other positions, cannot perceive anything in that same hole.

Look, the divisions already exist. All I did was suggest a bit of re-organizing. No, it probably won't make it to Congress. I could care less. I'm not that attached to the idea. It was an idea. It seemed like this place here, LAShTAL, would be a great place to present the idea, and let some of you "great minds" toss it around and play with it for a while, maybe shaping it into something really cool, or proving why it is unsound if it isn't sound. Sure, I could do this myself, but by having it in the world (on these forums), there are many more testers. And since it hasn't actually been played out in a "real" rabbit hole, there's really no telling and it will probably only hit mere conjecture, for the most part. I guess no one here likes brain exercise.
___________

HG... Yes. I see Los and Noc do it all the time, with the "you" deal, and after enough arguments I've learned to just accept it as part of their writing style. I'll have to remember to put yours in that category as well. Nothing's wrong with it, just a perfection/imperfection of a fallacy within the English language. I apologize for the harsh words.
___________

"Samjaza" wrote:
Politics and government as methods of control. The self ultimately lives accordingly as an occultist or thelemite inside the tent pissing in or outside the tent pissing in.

Would you mind explaining this a bit more thoroughly?

"Samjaza" wrote:
An anarchist state is the ideal but it takes one greedy person to bring that system down, one flawed brick destables the temple.

How is an anarchist state ideal?

"Samjaza" wrote:
The plato system of a government ruled by philosophy is a good premise were it not for the subject of dividing people much like the caste systems in India.

Plato was an amateur.

"Samjaza" wrote:
Blatant fascism and fear will give control as long as the intelligesia are bought onside or downsized.

It seems that less of this is happening in the present day.

"Samjaza" wrote:
So we have democracy, the chance to put an x on a box every 4 or 5 years.
Elected people dont necessarily stick to promises which made you vote for them, but you cant return your vote saying you are misreprested.

We put a lot of x's on that box. Congress is comprised of three parts, one of them just happens to be the fall guy.

"Samjaza" wrote:
You cant vote for 'none of the above'.

If one doesn't vote, that's effectively "voting for none of the above". The downside, or imperfect/perfect part about this option, is that you do absolutely nothing to cause change to occur.

"Samjaza" wrote:
It is possible to rise through a political party and influence policy but behind all scenes are puppet masters.

Things tend to get tangled when too many egos spin their webs in the same place (Congress).
___________

It's interesting to note that before discussing the concepts, we are having a debate about whether or not we should discuss the concepts.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
10/10/2011 9:17 pm  

Briefly;-

An anarchist state is ideal, idyllic, no money, no leaders no subserviants, it'll never work because of egos.

putting 'none of the above' means if that option gets the majority vote the process is void the system have to put up new candidates and policy, I believe Jello Biafra (dead kennedys) is an advocate for this and lobbys for it.

Plato an amateur? Influenced Blavatsky, who influenced Crowley.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
10/10/2011 11:09 pm  
"Samjaza" wrote:
An anarchist state is ideal [...]it'll never work because of egos.

lol?


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
10/10/2011 11:17 pm  
"Samjaza" wrote:
putting 'none of the above' means if that option gets the majority vote the process is void.

93!

If I am not misinformed there is no minimum of voters required. If only a hundred people go to vote they decide.

Or am I misinformed?

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
10/10/2011 11:27 pm  
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
"Samjaza" wrote:
putting 'none of the above' means if that option gets the majority vote the process is void.

93!

If I am not misinformed there is no minimum of voters required. If only a hundred people go to vote they decide.

Or am I misinformed?

Love=Law
Lutz

Far as I know, Lutz. Also, let us keep in mind that in the case of Presidency in the U.S., the Electoral College ultimately decides who gets the seat in Congress. There are even cases in which the Electoral College has went against the popular vote, as noted here.

So voting can lead to nothing. We can campaign until we are blue in the face, get all sorts of popular votes, and in the end... nothing. Find ourselves on Leno or something, talking about what we would have done had we gotten the chance. Voting does create the chance though, and that's what you really sign up for: the chance to help create change within the current civilization and society in which we live.

Not voting does not even give one the chance to create change. It is complete impotence, and thus you are certain to be at the mercy of whichever person gets elected.

Even in an anarchist state, those who didn't vote, or who didn't give any input into how things went, would get trampled by the herd, while those who take a chance, have a vision and a voice, will help to create change, and stand as shepherds to the herd.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
11/10/2011 6:30 am  
"Azidonis" wrote:
The idea is that, after looking at the political situation long enough, I've noticed that a tiny little tweak could help improve the machine on the whole. No, it's not my job to make that tweak happen. But I can say, "Hey, what about this piece," and leave it alone. People that are interested can either help it flourish or shoot it down. It's not for me to decide.

But you didn’t just make a post that says, “Hey what about X.” You said, and I quote,

We all know that, ultimately, the Law of Thelema must somehow be applied to government, both within and without.

This was the one point that received a challenge: your claim that the Law of Thelema must be applied to governments. In contrast to your claim, at least two other posters have presented arguments that there is no must involved here and that the idea that there is some must is in violation of the Law of Thelema. You haven’t responded sensibly to this challenge at all.

If you’re retracting that claim and now just saying, “Hey, here’s some random musings about government I feel like talking about for no better reason than I feel like talking about it” then I would have no problem with that, aside from the fact that I see absolutely no reason to talk about it at the home of The Aleister Crowley Society.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
11/10/2011 7:50 am  
"Los" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
The idea is that, after looking at the political situation long enough, I've noticed that a tiny little tweak could help improve the machine on the whole. No, it's not my job to make that tweak happen. But I can say, "Hey, what about this piece," and leave it alone. People that are interested can either help it flourish or shoot it down. It's not for me to decide.

But you didn’t just make a post that says, “Hey what about X.” You said, and I quote,

We all know that, ultimately, the Law of Thelema must somehow be applied to government, both within and without.

This was the one point that received a challenge: your claim that the Law of Thelema must be applied to governments. In contrast to your claim, at least two other posters have presented arguments that there is no must involved here and that the idea that there is some must is in violation of the Law of Thelema. You haven’t responded sensibly to this challenge at all.

If you’re retracting that claim and now just saying, “Hey, here’s some random musings about government I feel like talking about for no better reason than I feel like talking about it” then I would have no problem with that, aside from the fact that I see absolutely no reason to talk about it at the home of The Aleister Crowley Society.

I'm not retracting my statement. Eventually, each Star is to include all modes and angles of experience, is it not? If the entire world were full of Thelemites, as it is with any other major movement, does it not follow that some form of government would find ways to implement the philosophy?

I'm not saying that everyone should be involved in politics, not saying that anyone should be, not saying that anyone has to give a damn, I'm just saying that somewhere, at some point, there is a connection between Thelema and politics. That connection, I do maintain, is a necessary aspect of Thelema, in the interests of Thelema gaining common ground, a Promulgation of the Law.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
11/10/2011 8:19 am  

If the world were full of thelemites would there be any noticeable change?
Presumably the system of advancing in government would be based on grades.
There would be an inner and outer order ( house of lords/commons)
There would be protaganists and advocates like the backbenchers and the whips.
Of course there would be 'secrets' on a need to know basis.

What would happen to minority parties? Like the moderate Dion Fortune -inner light party or the Hubbards Dianetic Party?

above the new established temple of goverment would be the motto;- Do As Thou Wilt....shall be the whole of the law?

Theres no change i can see, nothing that will enhance my life or ideals?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5028
11/10/2011 3:23 pm  

Is there is a Government? then I'm agin it!
To Hell with the bloody English!

"O FRATER PERDURABO, how unworthy are these sentiments!"
"D'ye want a clip on the jaw?"

Imported from - Liber 333 Ch 80


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
11/10/2011 3:24 pm  

At the beginning of the thread, I proposed the following:

- In the U.S., one should be allowed to hold the office of President for a total of eight (8 ) years, but cannot hold the office for more than four (4) years in a row. I also think that both the Senate, and the House of Representatives, should abide by this idea.
- The proposed system would force another Democrat entry, Y. In the absolute worst case scenario, you get 4 years of X, 4 years of Y, 4 years of X, 4 years of Y, then Z. At this point, mandate that the current party is not eligible for the next voting session. That's 16 years of one party taking the Presidency at one time, in the worst case scenario, no matter what.
- Outlaw lobbying.
- Ramp up in the security in Congressional hearings if you have to, but keep the reporters out. Stop airing our meetings to the world.
- Legalize marijuana.
- When I was in Singapore, every car had a meter on the dashboard. It was explained to me that once a year, when they renew their tags, they pay a "road tax", varying according to how much they had driven that year. It was illegal to drive without a meter.

Just as a refresher...

Btw, some of you seem to be thinking these ideas are to further advance some sort of idea for a utopia. Don't put the cart before the horse. The only reason these ideas exist is that they may allow the current U.S. government system to run just a bit more smoothly, which in turn will effect pretty much the entire world.

It's not some complex plot to turn the U.S. government into my, or anyone else's version of government. It's just a couple of items that, if they decided to try, I think would make a huge impact on their lives and ours, for the better.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
11/10/2011 9:50 pm  

Los (and more recently HG), in these forums you have historically demonstrated a remarkable aversion to the topic of 'Government and Thelema,' an aversion so great that you are demonstrably unable to simply ignore it when it inevitably arises from time to time. Instead, you predictably react as if compelled by some irresistible alarm. You have tried every imaginable approach to attempt to invalidate this topic as it might pertain to the Law of Thelema, each one seemingly more irrational than the last. I find this to be very, very curious behavior, especially in light of current conditions in the world.

Yes, the Law of Thelema, "Do what Thu wilt," and the true Will implied by these terms are things which we normally hold private and personal to ourselves as free and independent individuals. However, to a certain extent, government and politics are things that shape the environments that we share in common with other Stars. These are things that people concern themselves with, in common with others, for the common good, to the extent possible - that each of us might best apply the Law of Thelema to our own lives and enjoy the fruits of doing so. Each of is not a government entirely unto ourselves. A certain amount of cooperation is required at this level of human life for the sake of successful coexistence and mutual benefit.

Your general theme seems to be that any government, any political scheme, is just as good as any other and that the current status quo in one's country is just as good as any other alternative. One should just accept it or ignore it and "Do what Thu wilt." Only an insane person would look at their world in this way if it was within their power to cause change to occur in conformity with their Will. If the house is on fire, one puts the fire out or evacuates the premises, and urges one's fellows to do the same. There comes a point when, if we Will, we brake the golden rule of "Mind your own business" because a consensus among our fellows is required to change what must be changed.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
11/10/2011 10:19 pm  
"Camlion" wrote:
any government, any political scheme, is just as good as any other and that the current status quo in one's country is just as good as any other alternative.

No, my general theme is that the kinds of governments we have in the West -- which afford the individual unprecedented levels of privacy and freedom -- put up virtually no resistance to, at a guess, well over 93% of anything that anyone could ever seriously want to do.

If one wants to modify government to make it "easier" for others to do their wills, I would suggest that 1) the effort involved in such a task is vastly out of proportion with the results one is likely to see, and 2) it's highly questionable whether the best way to enable others to do their wills is to make policy changes to government.

There comes a point when, if we Will, we brake the golden rule of "Mind your own business" because a consensus among our fellows is required to change what must be changed.

Sure, do whatever you want. The claim that HG and I were taking issue with was the statement "We all know that, ultimately, the Law of Thelema must somehow be applied to government, both within and without."

That statement is wrong in at least two ways: 1) There's no must at all here, and 2) We don't "all know" this.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
11/10/2011 10:30 pm  

Edit: Deleted. Wrong thread.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
12/10/2011 12:10 am  
"Los" wrote:
No, my general theme is that the kinds of governments we have in the West -- which afford the individual unprecedented levels of privacy and freedom -- put up virtually no resistance to, at a guess, well over 93% of anything that anyone could ever seriously want to do.

I assume that by "in the West" you mean Europe and the USA, and such...

Freedom of personal choice aside for a moment, (and I'm not conceding that point), I think that it is very important to understand the close relationship between freedom and independence as they pertain to the individual. To the degree that an individual is dependent upon something other than herself or himself, an equivalent degree of personal freedom is lost. Be it a drug, or another person, or a government, or a god, or what have you. Freedom is more than being able to do what we want, as with using that drug of choice, for example. If we become dependent upon that drug, we have lost a degree of our freedom. There is an equivalent degree of personal responsibility and independence necessary to truly having personal freedom.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
12/10/2011 1:22 am  
"Los" wrote:

There comes a point when, if we Will, we brake the golden rule of "Mind your own business" because a consensus among our fellows is required to change what must be changed.

Sure, do whatever you want. The claim that HG and I were taking issue with was the statement "We all know that, ultimately, the Law of Thelema must somehow be applied to government, both within and without."

That statement is wrong in at least two ways: 1) There's no must at all here, and 2) We don't "all know" this.

Not to speak for Az, but I read this "must" as in 'it is inevitable that the principles of the Law of Thelema will be applied to government,' (even if it is only when all else has failed,) because these principles will work when applied to government. This last part, the efficacy of those principles, is thus recognized as an irresistible force of nature. 🙂


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
12/10/2011 3:01 am  
"Camlion" wrote:
Not to speak for Az, but I read this "must" as in 'it is inevitable that the principles of the Law of Thelema will be applied to government,' (even if it is only when all else has failed,) because these principles will work when applied to government. This last part, the efficacy of those principles, is thus recognized as an irresistible force of nature. 🙂

Apparently, they thought I was trying to tell them to hurry up and write their Congressmen because Thelema says they should (boggle).


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
12/10/2011 5:21 am  
"Camlion" wrote:
Not to speak for Az, but I read this "must" as in 'it is inevitable that the principles of the Law of Thelema will be applied to government,' (even if it is only when all else has failed,)

I don't agree that it's "inevitable" at all.

because these principles will work when applied to government.

I don't agree here either, not the least because no one has ever articulated a clear idea of how to "apply" Thelema to a government. Just a lot of vague stuff about "give everyone a chance to carry out their true will" or "base the government's rules of food inspection on the idea of true will" and a lot of other incredibly vague, trite, and absolutely ridiculous wide-eyed platitudes that even a college freshman would dismiss as silly.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
12/10/2011 9:43 am  

The point regarding the failure of capitalism by wolf354 is valid.
Utility companys are owned not by the people but shareholders.
Utility prices in the uk are escalating to the extent that people have less and less disposable income. The downturn in spenditure is one huge problem of the current crisis and yet billions are thrown at the banks.
Cancel v.a.t. And cap utilities, who owns the earths resources? Shareholders?
Nationalisation of key industrys must be thelemic???


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
12/10/2011 1:12 pm  

And yet, if a couple of tweaks were made, it could keep the system from failing. Oh well, I guess failure is more important here.

Some of you don't understand that you can change one thing just a little bit, and enable thousands, millions, just that much more ability, mobility, and stability, thereby allowing those same people to live their lives more effectively and more efficiently, thereby facilitating this "quest for True Will" that you all seem to harp over so much.

Whatever. Wallow in your own piss for all I care. When the whole shithouse goes hope in flames, I'll survive. Hopefully you all can do the same. Best of luck.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
12/10/2011 2:06 pm  
"wolf354" wrote:
"Some say the end is near.
Some say we'll see armageddon soon.
I certainly hope we will.
I sure could use a vacation from this"
8)

Word.

...but...

"Death is forbidden, o man, unto thee."

Now what? No vacation time either? 😛


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
12/10/2011 9:01 pm  
"Samjaza" wrote:
The point regarding the failure of capitalism by wolf354 is valid.

Perhaps you and wolf354 could put your heads together and come up with some idea of what should replace capitalism*, Samjaza. I'd really be interesting in hearing about it, and if capitalism should fall, something will have to be ready to take its place, because it's propping everything up at present.

* Most people who use the word "capitalism" in the pejorative sense don't really know what what it means at all, but that will have to wait until we hear more about Samjaza and wolf354's proposed alternative, and it will probably save time that way 'round.

Samjaza and wolf354, you're on. Any ideas from others are welcome, of course.

(Failing that, we'll have to take Az up on ideas toward fixing the present systems, I suppose.)


ReplyQuote
amadan-De
(@amadan-de)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 686
12/10/2011 10:06 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
And yet, if a couple of tweaks were made, it could keep the system from failing.

What tweaks? Which system? The global one that seems to be sadly lacking and has never been in place?

Couldn't agree more about the general failure to understand the term 'Capitalism' Camlion, same thing goes for the pejorative use of 'Liberal', 'Socialism' and 'Anarchism' in my experience.
Couldn't agree less that Capitalism is currently the only thing propping everything up. Everything? Pretty sure a global poll of all the people that fall below the cut under the current status quo would find that hard to swallow (and they are the majority if that counts). You live in the richest State (last time I looked) in the country with the highest average living standard in the world (though resting on a multitude of dispossesed both at home and abroad) - might colour your vision a bit.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
12/10/2011 10:31 pm  
"amadan-De" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
And yet, if a couple of tweaks were made, it could keep the system from failing.

What tweaks? Which system? The global one that seems to be sadly lacking and has never been in place?

Couldn't agree more about the general failure to understand the term 'Capitalism' Camlion, same thing goes for the pejorative use of 'Liberal', 'Socialism' and 'Anarchism' in my experience.
Couldn't agree less that Capitalism is currently the only thing propping everything up. Everything? Pretty sure a global poll of all the people that fall below the cut under the current status quo would find that hard to swallow (and they are the majority if that counts). You live in the richest State (last time I looked) in the country with the highest average living standard in the world (though resting on a multitude of dispossesed both at home and abroad) - might colour your vision a bit.

This is distraction from the point, but I will indulge it. I was born to parents with next to nothing of their own. I have what I need to do my true Will. I need no more and no less. What I have, I earn. I have no debt. I live where I must to do my true Will, although I have traveled widely and known the poorest of the poor. I have seen the former Soviet Union and China both before and after they adopted capitalism to save themselves from ruin. In short, I did not just appear in LA one day sitting on pile of money and never leave or look down.

What remains if this civilization is, indeed, being propped up by capitalism.

I am waiting for an alternate suggestion. amadan-De, do you have one?

Anyone?

If there are no better alternatives, then I'm afraid that we must fix what we've got now.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4053
12/10/2011 10:53 pm  

Capitalism will adapt, as it has always done.

Here in the UK, a capitalist of say a hundred years ago would be extremely dubious about capitalism as it is here today. Trades Union rights, the National Health Service, the Minimum Wage. What, no lads up chimneys?

I doubt that Soviet Russia or China ever were anything other than state capitalism. I also doubt that Socialism is suitable at present for anything other than small societies with a strong sense of purpose, such as religious communities, or kibbutzim in the early settler days.

So you can sleep safely, Camlion.

Best,

MS.


ReplyQuote
amadan-De
(@amadan-de)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 686
12/10/2011 11:12 pm  
"Camlion" wrote:
What remains if this civilization is, indeed, being propped up by capitalism.
I am waiting for an alternate suggestion. amadan-De, do you have one?

Note "this civilisation" == "everything"

You want a short-term or long-term solution? You want a global one or a local one (what would keep the USA rolling would not necessarily help a majority of the planet)? Are we looking for holistic solutions that address some of the problems we have made in our environment or just keeping humans happy? Are we prepared to make heavy sacrifices now in order to allow the possibility of certain futures or is present comfort paramount? And so on.....the question has to be precise to be meaningful.

Short term solutions are to me no solution at all (but then by virtue of my work I tend to think in millenia anyway). The problem these days is not 'Capitalism'* per se but the short term race for fastest, largest profit and hang the consequences. Not so long ago Capitalists used to plant and manage oak trees as a cash crop - this takes at least 200 years to mature and be ready for harvesting and as a by-product generates a useful habitat with other usable resources. They understood something that has been lost in the race for "bigger faster". The only natural systems which only increase are cancers - there is a message there.

Wasn't accusing you of anything like 'silver-spoon' inheritance. I've lived in California (Altadena) and still have relatives that do (LA, San D) so I know the power of the Californian life as a cultural lens (this type of reflexive 'ethnocentricity' is something that I work consciously to avoid as it can only have a negative impact when looking at past societies with its tacit assumptions - I've met very few humans who do the same or are even aware of the problem, especially among the comfortable ones).

You probably wouldn't like my 'solutions' - they tend to the Draconian. But then 'Any means necessary" right? (See the Danger of Dogma thread).

*It amuses me that the second sentence of the Wikipedia entry for poor misunderstood 'Capitalism' reads; "There is no consensus on the precise definition of capitalism, nor on how the term should be used as a historical category."


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
12/10/2011 11:17 pm  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
So you can sleep safely, Camlion.

Agreed as to the rest, Michael, and yes, I can sleep, thank you. I am free and independent, and able to do my true Will, as anyone can if they know themselves well enough and plan their lives accordingly.

But enough about me, I am hoping for alternatives to capitalism (and democracy, if need be), so that we don't have to fix them.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
12/10/2011 11:26 pm  

All this over six little ideas. I'm amazed.

I'm also amazed how someone can say they are an anarchist, and probably still pay taxes.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
13/10/2011 7:47 am  

The answers will come not from a body of intellectuals or theorists but the will of the majority and particularly the energy of the young, the 16-25 year olds of the world have been left a shit legacy and in the words of the newscaster from the film 'Network' will rally to the cry of ' I'm as mad as hell and I aint gonna take it any more'. ( apologies for my cockney translation )
We will see the illumianism of order from chaos, that will happen and the chaos hasnt started.

The british, remembering British is a term coined by Queen Elizabeth meaning, ' covenant of Israel' created a political system based on, red on the left, blue on the right and yellow in the middle? Sound familiar? 
The new aeon will be based on green on the right, pure ecological ethics, orange on the left, active and driven policy to evolve wisdom and skills in accordance with the new perspective of limitations on Earth and the centre influence will moderate between them.( a violet or silver depending on the balance)

I work in one of the largest investment banks in the world. If people knew what really went on you'd all be down wall street with garden implements and guns.

But first! What has to happen is a release of information, everything from the vaults of the vatican to the corridors of the pentagon. The truth of all religions and power. 
This is happening much like the slow leaks of the dutch boys finger in the dyke ( wikileaks) but will flood soon.

Its not conspiracy, the blanket the organizers have thrown over the weak and desperate for too long will not hinder them, aye indeed they are the naked kings clothed only by their warped imagination.

We, as archetects must see the archetypes, and bring them from the 'astral' to fruition.

As Samjaza inthe fall declared, 'i shall not prostrate myself before any man.'
Indeed fallen to the lowest does the rebel angel bow to God the highest?

As thelemites it is duty to reveal!
The light cannot be hidden behind the veil for kether must shine in malkuth, but prey, for the realm of chaos must first be wandered.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
13/10/2011 5:57 pm  
"amadan-De" wrote:
"Camlion" wrote:
What remains if this civilization is, indeed, being propped up by capitalism.
I am waiting for an alternate suggestion. amadan-De, do you have one?

Note "this civilisation" == "everything"

You just have to down-shift gears from the latter to the former to address this little problem with the 'grand illusion,' that's all. 😉

"amadan-De" wrote:
You want a short-term or long-term solution? You want a global one or a local one (what would keep the USA rolling would not necessarily help a majority of the planet)?

If the USA falls, well... It's all quite connected economically.

Short-term, long-term, whatever you've got in the way of alternative forms of government. We're not trying to fix the old ways yet, hoping we don't have to. The sentiment here seems to favor chucking the old ways in the bin.


ReplyQuote
amadan-De
(@amadan-de)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 686
13/10/2011 6:44 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
I'm also amazed how someone can say they are an anarchist, and probably still pay taxes.

LOL I'm amused that you are amazed, think we have differing definitions of 'anarchist'. You call yourself a 'Thelemite' (apologies if I'm mistaken..) do you pay taxes? Both terms indicate subscription to an as yet unrealised ideal neither denies the possibility of working within the existing system on its own terms if the alternative is less useful to long-term goals. Whether the ideal appears acheivable or not is no excuse to not strive for it. "There are better ways of protesting than head-butting truncheons."
I'm amazed that high earning capitalists frequently move mountains to avoid paying taxes in systems that they help create. I have a cousin who works in 'off-shore banking' - oh boy 🙄

"Camlion" wrote:
If the USA falls, well... It's all quite connected economically.
...
The sentiment here seems to favor chucking the old ways in the bin.

If the USA falls it'll have a sizable impact certainly - foolish to deny it - but with it's voracious market removed quite a few places that currently service its need for say cheap Chocolate and Coffee will find themselves in the position of being able to focus on local requirements and return to a more diverse portfolio of local production. Many of them are far better placed to do this than the USA which has gone too far down the road of monoculture and chemical agri-tech solutions. Short-term = masses of shit for everyone, long-term - the USA may just find itself looking to the 'less-civilised' for supplies it can't provide its belligerent and 'entitled' population. In your terms the USA depends on far too many external sources for so much to actually be considered 'Free'.

I'd never advocate throwing anything in the bin without absolute certainty that none of it is of possible present or future use.

"Margaret Killjoy" has written some interesting pieces regarding what is getting called post-civilisation and the importance of self-sufficiency. Worth a read even if you disagree with the political shade its coming from. The principles are apolitical anyway.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
13/10/2011 7:36 pm  
"amadan-De" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
I'm also amazed how someone can say they are an anarchist, and probably still pay taxes.

LOL I'm amused that you are amazed, think we have differing definitions of 'anarchist'. You call yourself a 'Thelemite' (apologies if I'm mistaken..) do you pay taxes?

Of course I do. I actually support the idea of limited government, and limited capitalism. It's not very limited at the moment, but I work with what I've got. Hence, this thread of ideas, which has has turned up more "we can't cause change" and "we should just wait for change" and "just collapse the whole system" than I anticipated, but whatever.

Anarchists, on the other hand, support the absence of government. I guess it's okay to be a bit hypocritical when you don't have a choice?

"amadan-De" wrote:
Both terms indicate subscription to an as yet unrealised ideal neither denies the possibility of working within the existing system on its own terms if the alternative is less useful to long-term goals.

Ah, okay. So you are saying that it's okay for anarchists to be hypocritical until anarchy actually takes hold.

"amadan-De" wrote:
Whether the ideal appears acheivable or not is no excuse to not strive for it.

Strive for anarchy by obeying the current laws, paying taxes, etc. That makes sense...

"amadan-De" wrote:
"There are better ways of protesting than head-butting truncheons."

What "better ways" have anarchists come up with? Going along with the system and hoping they live long enough to see it cave in on itself?

"amadan-De" wrote:
I'm amazed that high earning capitalists frequently move mountains to avoid paying taxes in systems that they help create.

Also hypocritical. Design a system that will "benefit everyone" at a cost, then wiggle one's way out of paying the cost. Sounds like Wall Street.

"amadan-De" wrote:
If the USA falls it'll have a sizable impact certainly - foolish to deny it - but with it's voracious market removed quite a few places that currently service its need for say cheap Chocolate and Coffee will find themselves in the position of being able to focus on local requirements and return to a more diverse portfolio of local production.

You are saying that if capitalism fails, China will be able to focus on exporting to... China, right?

"amadan-De" wrote:
Many of them are far better placed to do this than the USA which has gone too far down the road of monoculture and chemical agri-tech solutions.

It looks like in 2010, the U.S. Exported $91,886.0 million (what's that, 91 billion? I suck at math and conversions) to China, whereas China Imported $364,943.9 million (364 billion?) in trade goods to the U.S. The balance comes out at -$273,063.2 million (273 billion?) if you are the U.S.. That's a pretty big loss for the U.S., and a fairly large gain for China. This balance has not been below $200,000 million since 2004. Source.

Tell me, how are they prepared to lose almost 300 billion dollars in revnue if the U.S. system crashes completely?

"amadan-De" wrote:
Short-term = masses of shit for everyone, long-term - the USA may just find itself looking to the 'less-civilised' for supplies it can't provide its belligerent and 'entitled' population.

It may. Or it may not be able to accomplish that, and the result is a nation-wide famine. Perhaps the latter is more necessary.

"amadan-De" wrote:
In your terms the USA depends on far too many external sources for so much to actually be considered 'Free'.

Oh, I see where you went. You are saying the U.S.A. isn't Free as it depends on other countries in order for its economy to work, therefore it must not be "Thelemic"?

I don't guess the freedom to fuck everything up is a part of freedom.

"amadan-De" wrote:
I'd never advocate throwing anything in the bin without absolute certainty that none of it is of possible present or future use.

Who's throwing anything into the bin? Did I throw precious anarchy into the bin? With the current world population, anarchy would give us quite a rinse over. Maybe it would create enough bloodshed to actually have a lasting effect on the psyches of this planet's inhabitants. I'm all for indiscriminately trimming the population down by about 4 billion or so. Would be quite a wake-up call. After that, it would be a Mad Max movie, but I refuse to grow a mullet!


ReplyQuote
amadan-De
(@amadan-de)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 686
13/10/2011 9:32 pm  

😯 Whoa there!

You seem to be taking responses made to Camlion as directed at you and your core-beliefs far more agressively than ever intended..

Oh well, can't help trouble I guess.

How is it hypocritical for an 'anarchist' (no rulers _not_ no rules) to pay taxes in order to benefit themselves and the wider community? Some cognitive disconnect there for me (or maybe in the UK we see more of an actual result of our taxes than you do in the US).

I personally (and many others) have in the past held back a specified proportion of taxes to protest how tax monies are spent (ie, if totally against defence spending for a simple example, withold the same proprtion of your tax bill as would go to that - witheld monies are invested as a pool to generate interest and amounts released back to the individual tax defaulters to allow final payment just before court action - makes a highly visible point and costs the governing body time and money to pursue.). I was told many years ago by a Dutch medical doctor (surgeon) who was a volunteer on an excavation that at that time in Holland once an individuals income reached certain levels (as his did) they were taxed at a very high rate but were given the right to determine how this upper level taxation was spent - X% on Education, Y% on Health, Z% on Defense etc. Sounds like a very good model to me though there will always be those of the "He who has the most toys wins" mentality that would try and avoid paying anything..

Other ways of protesting and monkey-wrenching? Imagination is your friend... How about the 'poinding parties' that were a feature of Scottish protest against the *spit* Poll Tax? Refuse to pay the tax. Get sent a notice that the bailiff's are coming to 'poind' your goods (forced sale to recover debt). Invite everyone you know and then some to be present for the poinding - fill house and street with so many bodies it is not physically possible to enter property or remove items. Rinse and repeat. If not planning to go to jail or make a court protest (many did - little old-ladies in court make an interesting headline for a gov to spin) pay enough at the last minute to restart the process. In some areas there were so many defaulters that the legal infrastructure simply couldn't cope. Course they then moved the experiment out of the Scottish Test Dept. and applied it to the UK as a whole and suddenly...the English rioted. LOL

As far as China and USA economic relations go...I was writing in terms of 'post-USA collapse', in such an event China will indeed have to stop focussing on production of cheap and cheerful 'tat' for the vanishing US market and look at becoming self-sufficient or continue their forging of connections with sub-Saharan Africa (some very smart moves there - build infrastructure first, gets you popular, though definitely not going all their way) and the Pacific. Worst case scenario - it would be a far shorter journey for China to return to a subsistence economy than the US because there are still living 'peasants' in China with skills that will be highly 'marketable' (if using current economic jargon) locally - the US's equivalent are frequently illegal workers with no reason to be at all loyal to their paymasters if there is no pay in the offing. They'll take their practical skills straight back home to feed their families. Consider the Amish as a valuable cultural resource.

There is also the point that with their present increasing monopoly of 'rare earth element' raw materials the Chinese are going to be a necessary supplier for anyone wanting to use a whole range of high-tech electronic items - like the bankers...

It's worth bearing in mind that national political systems are not really the drivers in the state of the global economy, it's mutli-national companies/banks and if they can see a profit in a collapse (and they do) do you think it will make any difference who or what is in the White House, Senate, Parliament etc.? Our problem is not so much government as supra-governmental greed.

If wanting interesting ideas that aren't tarnished by 'Anarchism' - try looking at ZERI and The Blue Economy.
God - more than enough from me. I retire.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
13/10/2011 10:00 pm  

So I just got my voter packet for the next general election in the county. Here is an example of what they want us to vote for:

"Initiative Measure No. 1125 concerns the state expenditures on transportation. This measure would prohibit the use of motor vehicle fund revenue and vehicle toll revenue for non-transportation purposes, and require that road and bridge tolls be set by the legislature and be project-specific. Should this measure be enacted into law?"

The idea of a "road tax" presented earlier in this thread, would make this a non-issue across the country. Installing little meters into vehicles, and making people pay a tax for the wear and tear they specifically put onto the road each year, then using that money to maintain the same roads. It works just fine in Singapore, and like I said, they have the best roads of any country I've been to.

"Incentive Measure No. 1163 concerns long-term care workers and services for elderly and disabled people/ This measure would reinstate background checks, training, and other requirements for long-term care workers and providers, if amended in 2011; and address financial accountability and administrative expenses of the long-term in-home care program. Should this measure be enacted into law?"

So in other words, should people willing to provide care for elderly and disabled persons undergo background checks, special training, and take on financial responsibility for the same (I'm assuming the finances are handled by the state)?

It has been proven that Medical cannabis can successfully treat over 250 human diseases, including AIDS and cancer. Simply legalizing marijuana can provide further health benefits to both the elderly and disabled, not to mention it can be used as a viable renewable fuel source.

"Initiative Measure No. 1183 concerns liquor: beer, wine, and spirits (hard liquor). This measure would close state liquor stores and sell their assets; license private parties to sell and distribute spirits; set license fees based on sales; regulate licenses; and change regulation of wine distribution. Should this measure be enacted in law?"

Really? First, we have prohibition of alcohol. Now we have state liquor stores. This is nothing new. Tobacco use is the world's number one killer, and there are an estimates 2.5 million deaths related to alcohol per year world-wide. For a sense of perspective, The Iran-Iraq War that lasted from 1980-1988 claimed an estimated 500,000 - 2,000,000 lives in 8 years! The current war is estimated somewhere around 2 million deaths, since 2003. That's another 8 years!

So the government prohibits alcohol, then turns around and opens liquor stores. They hike up the cost and tax on tobacco products in order to make as money money as is feasible off of it, and these are two of the worst murders in the world.

Marijuana has never claimed one life.
___________

So ya, you can say this is all arbitrary, and that people are stupid, and whatever you want. I say that there are ways to improve the current system without any major overhauls, and very little risk.

I don't expect anyone to agree with me. I don't expect anyone to care. I'm just saying when I envision a world in which people are free to do their Wills, when I envision a world in which greed and money is not king of the hill, when I envision a world in which people actually regulate themselves instead of looking for a government to do so, I do not envision the current state of affairs int he world.

No, I'm not just talking about the U.S. In the U.K. alone, alcohol related deaths reach over 9,000 in some years. For a bit more perspective on this, "In 2009, there were 8,664 alcohol-related deaths in the United Kingdom. The number decreased from 9,031 in 2008. The number of alcohol-related deaths has doubled since the early 1990s, rising from 4,023 (6.7 per 100,000 population) in 1992 to a point of 9,031 (13.6 per 100,000) in 2008." The total population in the U.K. is over 60 million.

Comparatively, the U.K. is roughly the size of California. California hosts about 37 million people. In 2009, the same year mentioned above, "Excessive alcohol use resulted in over 10,000 deaths and 72,000 nonfatal hospitalizations in California. The majority of consequences (51%) were due to chronic illnesses associated with long-term excessive use of alcohol."

Granted, in almost double the population, the UK had about 1,000 less alcohol-related deaths, but you get the idea. This was only intended to show a somewhat comparative picture in other countries, before people start thinking it's only the U.S. that has a problem. What about the bankruptcy threat in Greece, the constant war between Israel and Palestine, population control laws in China, etc. ad nauseum.

The whole world is fucked up. We are abusing natural resources with little to no accountability, foresight, or use of the Precautionary Principle. The current growth rate of the human population is about 1.4. At the current rate, within 50 years, the human population in this world will be doubled... doubled. That's about 16 million people world-wide. Economy runs on the idea of scarcity, but rarely do they hold anything back, unless they are in the oil industry. Deforestation and other human projects are causing global climate change that is pushing out astronomical numbers. The amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is nearly doubled to what the lowest number of GHGs is on record, and by 2050 they are projected to be more than doubled. The human animal, civilization, is destroying itself and anything it can get its hands on.

But some of you think we should just sit back and wait for it to all go completely to shit before we do anything at all about it. I'm puzzled at this. Do you just think that people will end up in another World War, and you will somehow survive, and pick up the pieces of your life, only to struggle on like a beetle that got stepped on but didn't die? Do you even plan on fighting in that war, or do you plan to run away? Do you plan on doing anything to prevent such war if you can, or do you plan on stocking up on popcorn and making sure your cable connection is good enough that you can watch as much of it as you can on CNN before you have to evacuate your home and are forced into it?

I'm not trying to be a doomsday-sayer or any of that shit. I'm just saying that there are real issues in this world that the Law of Thelema can somehow be applied to in order to either a) offer it a swift, less painful death, or b) help set things on a more balanced track at the least. If the Law of Thelema could not be applied to government, if it could not be applied to well, everything, then it wouldn't be a Law. It would be a hypothesis, a theory, a past-time.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
13/10/2011 10:24 pm  
"amadan-De" wrote:
😯 Whoa there!

You seem to be taking responses made to Camlion as directed at you and your core-beliefs far more agressively than ever intended..

Don't be shocked. You quoted me in that response too. I'm not being aggressive, but assertive. You know me a little better than that, Brother! 🙂

"amadan-De" wrote:
Oh well, can't help trouble I guess.

It's a vicious cycle. I wanted to put this thread down after the first few initial replies, but alas...

"amadan-De" wrote:
How is it hypocritical for an 'anarchist' (no rulers _not_ no rules) to pay taxes in order to benefit themselves and the wider community? Some cognitive disconnect there for me (or maybe in the UK we see more of an actual result of our taxes than you do in the US).

"Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, has been variously defined by sources. Most often, the term "anarchy" describes the simple absence of publicly recognized government or enforced political authority."

So you are saying that you can still pool your money together, and allow someone to handle it for everyone at their discretion, but you cannot have a government?

"The word government is derived from the Latin verb gubernare, an infinitive meaning "to govern" or "to manage"."

"amadan-De" wrote:
I personally (and many others) have in the past held back a specified proportion of taxes to protest how tax monies are spent (ie, if totally against defence spending for a simple example, withold the same proprtion of your tax bill as would go to that - witheld monies are invested as a pool to generate interest and amounts released back to the individual tax defaulters to allow final payment just before court action - makes a highly visible point and costs the governing body time and money to pursue.).

I don't know if there is anything like that in the U.S., where taxpayers are allowed to withhold portions of their taxes and, oh ya... it's tax evasion, a felony, unless it is a "donation" of some sort, but there is no guarantee your money will go where you want it to.

"amadan-De" wrote:
I was told many years ago by a Dutch medical doctor (surgeon) who was a volunteer on an excavation that at that time in Holland once an individuals income reached certain levels (as his did) they were taxed at a very high rate but were given the right to determine how this upper level taxation was spent - X% on Education, Y% on Health, Z% on Defense etc. Sounds like a very good model to me though there will always be those of the "He who has the most toys wins" mentality that would try and avoid paying anything..

Sounds like lobbying to me.

"amadan-De" wrote:
Other ways of protesting and monkey-wrenching? Imagination is your friend... How about the 'poinding parties' that were a feature of Scottish protest against the *spit* Poll Tax? Refuse to pay the tax. Get sent a notice that the bailiff's are coming to 'poind' your goods (forced sale to recover debt). Invite everyone you know and then some to be present for the poinding - fill house and street with so many bodies it is not physically possible to enter property or remove items. Rinse and repeat. If not planning to go to jail or make a court protest (many did - little old-ladies in court make an interesting headline for a gov to spin) pay enough at the last minute to restart the process. In some areas there were so many defaulters that the legal infrastructure simply couldn't cope. Course they then moved the experiment out of the Scottish Test Dept. and applied it to the UK as a whole and suddenly...the English rioted. LOL

Sometimes I think the U.S. needs to riot, instead of this "peaceful protest" shit they do. There were more people outside the White House when we killed Obama than there were to bitch about the government defaulting on their bills.

"amadan-De" wrote:
As far as China and USA economic relations go...I was writing in terms of 'post-USA collapse', in such an event China will indeed have to stop focussing on production of cheap and cheerful 'tat' for the vanishing US market and look at becoming self-sufficient or continue their forging of connections with sub-Saharan Africa (some very smart moves there - build infrastructure first, gets you popular, though definitely not going all their way) and the Pacific. Worst case scenario - it would be a far shorter journey for China to return to a subsistence economy than the US because there are still living 'peasants' in China with skills that will be highly 'marketable' (if using current economic jargon) locally - the US's equivalent are frequently illegal workers with no reason to be at all loyal to their paymasters if there is no pay in the offing. They'll take their practical skills straight back home to feed their families. Consider the Amish as a valuable cultural resource.

China would have quite a surplus, that's for sure...

We can address the illegal immigrant problem in the U.S., if you want.

"amadan-De" wrote:
There is also the point that with their present increasing monopoly of 'rare earth element' raw materials the Chinese are going to be a necessary supplier for anyone wanting to use a whole range of high-tech electronic items - like the bankers...

"China now produces over 97% of the world's rare earth supply, mostly in Inner Mongolia, even though it has only 37% of proven reserves."

Sounds like a cash crop. I wonder how many countries it would take to make up for the U.S. consumption of the same?

"amadan-De" wrote:
It's worth bearing in mind that national political systems are not really the drivers in the state of the global economy, it's mutli-national companies/banks and if they can see a profit in a collapse (and they do) do you think it will make any difference who or what is in the White House, Senate, Parliament etc.? Our problem is not so much government as supra-governmental greed.

Agreed. Case in point: Stanley O'Neal.

"amadan-De" wrote:
If wanting interesting ideas that aren't tarnished by 'Anarchism' - try looking at ZERI and The Blue Economy.
God - more than enough from me. I retire.

Thanks for this. They have a good little video that deserves a link, but this site won't allow embedded movies. If any of you want to watch it, go here, then scroll down to the "simple show" which you can pull up on YouTube and re-size to full screen resolution.


ReplyQuote
amadan-De
(@amadan-de)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 686
13/10/2011 10:32 pm  

FWIW
I agree with you far more than I disagree.

I do not think that anyone with a working brain should simply wait for it all to go to hell. Do things now and get ready - if you are ready for the worst then the less-than-worst is an easier hill to climb. I've heard most of these ideas before (30 years before for some) they are still good ideas, spread them.

If it does go all End-Times not only the Amish but the Hells Angels may be necessary cultural resources (once they learn to ride horses). 😉

Ah, the Joy of X-post...more after the break


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964

ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
13/10/2011 10:37 pm  

Some thoughts toward Az's plan for reform of government, particularly as it applies to the USA:

"Azidonis" wrote:
Well, we all have our own viewpoints, different angles in looking at situations. Surely, all governments are not perfect, and they probably never will be. But, assuming that somehow, at some point, the Law of Thelema becomes a governing body in popular eyes, what would you like to see implemented?

Why don't we say that the Law of Thelema becomes the governing principle, instead of "governing body," and even if it's called something else besides "the Law of Thelema," it wouldn't matter (to me) so long as it worked. I think the following answers Crowley's objections to democracy, which makes it just as relevant, so no one need ask "What does this have to do with Thelema?"

"Azidonis" wrote:
For instance, I honestly think that in the U.S., one should be allowed to hold the office of President for a total of eight (8 ) years, but cannot hold the office for more than four (4) years in a row. I also think that both the Senate, and the House of Representatives, should abide by this idea.

Things it would do for the Presidency (for all intents and purposes, the current U.S. President is represented by an X):

1. It would allow X to not have to worry about campaigning and getting re-elected. This is a distraction from the job X could probably do without.
2. It would force X to have some real competition. Right now, the Republicans have their nice little "race" going on with the population. But who is going to run for Democrat in 2012? It's X. The proposed system would force another Democrat entry, Y. In the absolute worst case scenario, you get 4 years of X, 4 years of Y, 4 years of X, 4 years of Y, then Z. At this point, mandate that the current party is not eligible for the next voting session. That's 16 years of one party taking the Presidency at one time, in the worst case scenario, no matter what. In the current system, there is absolutely nothing to say that the Democrats, or the Republicans, will eventually beat each other out and one of them become the completely dominate party (dictatorship). The proposed system would have provisions against such a scenario. Also, mandate that the House of Representatives and Senate are not allowed to have a majority in the same parties, in order to ensure that one voice doesn't dominate the scene. Hell, you could let the President pick whether or not he would want a majority in the Senate, or in the House, or you could put it on the ballots, and let the voters decide (democracy).
3. It would allow current President X, to get 4 years away from the situation, take a step back, and get some perspective on things. Then, after 4 years in and 4 years out, X would be eligible to give it another go. I think this would help the overall experience level of X, thereby allowing for more proficient production.

Some scheme of lifetime term limits for all elected office is absolutely necessary to curb corruption, eliminate the career politician and replace him/her with qualified people interested in temporary public service. This would put a whole new, different and better class of people into politics. It would also answer the average person's disgust with politics, as would the following.

"Azidonis" wrote:
4. Outlaw lobbying. Ramp up in the security in Congressional hearings if you have to, but keep the reporters out. Stop airing our meetings to the world. Surely, world leaders watch all of this "transparent business" and use counter-strategies designed to take advantage of any holes in the government's current plans. Lobbying simply needs to be outlawed, for obvious reasons.

Agreed. Lobbying is bribery, and should be punished with prison terms. Also, outlaw private political contributions completely. Each qualified candidate, and there should always be a minimum of three per high office, should receive an equal allowance from the government for campaign expenses, and not one penny more should be spent. This would eliminate elections being bought and sold by "interest groups," as they always are at present.

I would add here: insure an informed electorate. A voter should study the 'rules of the road' of the politics of her/his land and pass a simple test on them, like a driver must do to get a driver's license. An informed electorate is essential to the success of democracy, and is consistently absent at present. With this current lack of education, voters are easily fooled, flattered or freighted into voting one way or another. Those citizens not interested in voting need not apply and should be exempt.

I think you're off to to good start, Az.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
13/10/2011 11:00 pm  
"Camlion" wrote:
Why don't we say that the Law of Thelema becomes the governing principle, instead of "governing body," and even if it's called something else besides "the Law of Thelema," it wouldn't matter (to me) so long as it worked. I think the following answers Crowley's objections to democracy, which makes it just as relevant, so no one need ask "What does this have to do with Thelema?"

Works for me. The ideas just came up when I was thinking of ways to help balance some of the situations we currently have. However they are implemented, or whatever is implemented, or whatever it is called, is fine with me. I just see a very large unbalance in the current systems and uses thereof, and without some semblance of balance, there will only be more suffering on a global scale.

"Camlion" wrote:
Agreed. Lobbying is bribery, and should be punished with prison terms. Also, outlaw private political contributions completely. Each qualified candidate, and there should always be a minimum of three per high office, should receive an equal allowance from the government for campaign expenses, and not one penny more should be spent. This would eliminate elections being bought and sold by "interest groups," as they always are at present.

I would add here: insure an informed electorate. A voter should study the 'rules of the road' of the politics of her/his land and pass a simple test on them, like a driver must do to get a driver's license. An informed electorate is essential to the success of democracy, and is consistently absent at present. With this current lack of education, voters are easily fooled, flattered or freighted into voting one way or another. Those citizens not interested in voting need not apply and should be exempt.

I agree with this. I think that part of the problem is filtered money. It's as dirty as any drug money can ever be, and it's completely legal.

"Camlion" wrote:

That's cool. Thanks for at least entertaining the notions.

"Camlion" wrote:
I think you're off to to good start, Az.

Thanks. It's a state of Bombardment, at the moment, if you know what I mean...


ReplyQuote
amadan-De
(@amadan-de)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 686
13/10/2011 11:40 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
😯 Whoa there!

You seem to be taking responses made to Camlion as directed at you and your core-beliefs far more agressively than ever intended..

Don't be shocked. You quoted me in that response too. I'm not being aggressive, but assertive. You know me a little better than that, Brother! 🙂

Well I think I do but I also reserve the right to be surprised by people that I only interact with in this electric gulag. 😛

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
Oh well, can't help trouble I guess.

It's a vicious cycle. I wanted to put this thread down after the first few initial replies, but alas...

It has some value as a document - as I said I'd never advocate throwing anything away unless absolutely sure it has no worth. 😉

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
How is it hypocritical for an 'anarchist' (no rulers _not_ no rules) to pay taxes in order to benefit themselves and the wider community? Some cognitive disconnect there for me (or maybe in the UK we see more of an actual result of our taxes than you do in the US).

"Anarchy (from Greek: ἀναρχίᾱ anarchíā, has been variously defined by sources. Most often, the term "anarchy" describes the simple absence of publicly recognized government or enforced political authority."

So you are saying that you can still pool your money together, and allow someone to handle it for everyone at their discretion, but you cannot have a government?

"The word government is derived from the Latin verb gubernare, an infinitive meaning "to govern" or "to manage"."

Right. I tend to go by a variation of Proudhon (who was allegedly the first man to call himself an 'anarchist' though in some ways he might be called a federalist..complicated things labels) and while I wish no one ill he who lays his hand on me to govern me I declare my enemy. Important qualifier in bold. Consensus agreement on a communal endeavour or action or even the acknowledgement that an individual might have specilaised knowledge and so give their opinion more weight is not the same thing. Incidentally with regard to the pooling of resource (specifically witheld taxes in this example) there was never any question of a single individual managing the money 'at their discretion'.

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
I personally (and many others) have in the past held back a specified proportion of taxes to protest how tax monies are spent (ie, if totally against defence spending for a simple example, withold the same proprtion of your tax bill as would go to that - witheld monies are invested as a pool to generate interest and amounts released back to the individual tax defaulters to allow final payment just before court action - makes a highly visible point and costs the governing body time and money to pursue.).

I don't know if there is anything like that in the U.S., where taxpayers are allowed to withhold portions of their taxes and, oh ya... it's tax evasion, a felony, unless it is a "donation" of some sort, but there is no guarantee your money will go where you want it to.

Oh we weren't 'allowed' to do this - it is technically tax avoidance and illegal 🙂 but in this case when paying the remainder of the tax a letter would be sent stating clearly how much proportionally was being witheld and why. Money was pooled and invested to make income for the particular protest/pressure group and released back to the 'tax-defaulters' at the last minute to be paid to the tax authorities just before legal steps were taken.

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
I was told many years ago by a Dutch medical doctor (surgeon) who was a volunteer on an excavation that at that time in Holland once an individuals income reached certain levels (as his did) they were taxed at a very high rate but were given the right to determine how this upper level taxation was spent - X% on Education, Y% on Health, Z% on Defense etc. Sounds like a very good model to me though there will always be those of the "He who has the most toys wins" mentality that would try and avoid paying anything..

Sounds like lobbying to me.

Again slight misunderstanding. This system was put in place by the government and they guaranteed that if a highest rate tax payer wanted 100% of the tax paid on their income over the threshold (this only applied to the tax at highest rate) spent on Education it would be. As the Dutch surgeon put it "I already have more income than I can spend usefully so if I can tell the government exactly how I want some of the excess used to improve my country why not?". Sort of state managed old-school capitalist philanthropy I guess.

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
Other ways of protesting and monkey-wrenching? Imagination is your friend... How about the 'poinding parties' that were a feature of Scottish protest against the *spit* Poll Tax? Refuse to pay the tax. Get sent a notice that the bailiff's are coming to 'poind' your goods (forced sale to recover debt). Invite everyone you know and then some to be present for the poinding - fill house and street with so many bodies it is not physically possible to enter property or remove items. Rinse and repeat. If not planning to go to jail or make a court protest (many did - little old-ladies in court make an interesting headline for a gov to spin) pay enough at the last minute to restart the process. In some areas there were so many defaulters that the legal infrastructure simply couldn't cope. Course they then moved the experiment out of the Scottish Test Dept. and applied it to the UK as a whole and suddenly...the English rioted. LOL

Sometimes I think the U.S. needs to riot, instead of this "peaceful protest" shit they do. There were more people outside the White House when we killed Obama than there were to bitch about the government defaulting on their bills.

Funny that in a country which started its independance (or Indy-pain-dance) by rioting...maybe too many are too comfortable (read - sedated by bread and circuses) to get past the apathy hurdle. Mind you riots in a country with such a large number of legal and illegal guns would be a very different beast to what we get up to...

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
As far as China and USA economic relations go...I was writing in terms of 'post-USA collapse', in such an event China will indeed have to stop focussing on production of cheap and cheerful 'tat' for the vanishing US market and look at becoming self-sufficient or continue their forging of connections with sub-Saharan Africa (some very smart moves there - build infrastructure first, gets you popular, though definitely not going all their way) and the Pacific. Worst case scenario - it would be a far shorter journey for China to return to a subsistence economy than the US because there are still living 'peasants' in China with skills that will be highly 'marketable' (if using current economic jargon) locally - the US's equivalent are frequently illegal workers with no reason to be at all loyal to their paymasters if there is no pay in the offing. They'll take their practical skills straight back home to feed their families. Consider the Amish as a valuable cultural resource.

China would have quite a surplus, that's for sure...

We can address the illegal immigrant problem in the U.S., if you want.

No thanks 🙂 I know a little about it anyway - my maternal grandfather after retiring grew avocados and citrus and used almost exclusively 'illegal immagrant' labour - he trusted them more and developed close friendships with his regular seasonal workers, even visiting them 'at home' and helping with education costs etc. 😉 Mildly feudal but entirely benevolent.

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
There is also the point that with their present increasing monopoly of 'rare earth element' raw materials the Chinese are going to be a necessary supplier for anyone wanting to use a whole range of high-tech electronic items - like the bankers...

"China now produces over 97% of the world's rare earth supply, mostly in Inner Mongolia, even though it has only 37% of proven reserves."

Sounds like a cash crop. I wonder how many countries it would take to make up for the U.S. consumption of the same?

This is the stuff that allows us to communicate like this - no one is going to want to do without it.

"Azidonis" wrote:
"amadan-De" wrote:
It's worth bearing in mind that national political systems are not really the drivers in the state of the global economy, it's mutli-national companies/banks and if they can see a profit in a collapse (and they do) do you think it will make any difference who or what is in the White House, Senate, Parliament etc.? Our problem is not so much government as supra-governmental greed.

Agreed. Case in point: Stanley O'Neal.

"amadan-De" wrote:
If wanting interesting ideas that aren't tarnished by 'Anarchism' - try looking at ZERI and The Blue Economy.
God - more than enough from me. I retire.

Thanks for this. They have a good little video that deserves a link, but this site won't allow embedded movies. If any of you want to watch it, go here, then scroll down to the "simple show" which you can pull up on YouTube and re-size to full screen resolution.

The ZERI stuff is a great paradigm shift - check The Blue Economy website and just read the 66 cases for some great ideas many of which are actually operating now. No such thing as waste indeed.
Also I do recommend reading some of the Post-Civilisation material - it is not advocating "Hurrah it's all going to hell, strap in for Mad-Max style frolics", rather that the current system doesn't work and it's probably a good idea to get a head start on what follows rather than reacting to catastrophy. They spell it out better than I at the link, I'd then go to 'Articles' and read the first two (at the bottom). I don't agree with it all but enough is worthwhile I think.

What I really advocate is 75% extinction of the human race but that makes people twitchy....shhhhhh.

Brief P.S. - I also agree fundamentally with all Camlion's comments above. Incidentally the idea of life-time limits on holding political office was put into practice (IIRC) by the German Greens in the 80s at least within their own party.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
14/10/2011 8:22 am  

Recently, in the states, aired a documentary on PBS (public broadcasting) called Prohibition, it was a Ken Burns joint, well done and entertaining. It did shine a light on a crucial point in American history where federal power touched everyone and the damage done is still being felt today. If you have a chance watch it, it is quite good.
I do not entertain notions that I am self actualized and following my true will, I am but adrift, a sailor on the seas of fate. A road tax, well its a nice idea but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. 18 cents a gallon is enough for me, they don't need anymore money. In a dream land I told my government where to spend my money, but I'm not delusional enough to believe them when they said yes we can. Nor do I feel good about my benevolent tree growing family and all the diploma mills they paid for...
I recommend a healthy dose of Slavoj Zizek and Ayn Rand, and a little Mises and Marx for balance. I accept a mixed economy start the revolution without me.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
14/10/2011 3:48 pm  
"jcyn" wrote:
Recently, in the states, aired a documentary on PBS (public broadcasting) called Prohibition, it was a Ken Burns joint, well done and entertaining. It did shine a light on a crucial point in American history where federal power touched everyone and the damage done is still being felt today. If you have a chance watch it, it is quite good.

I just might do that, thanks. Since we are on links, try this one The Union: The Business Behind Getting High. You can stream it on Netflix.

"jcyn" wrote:
I do not entertain notions that I am self actualized and following my true will, I am but adrift, a sailor on the seas of fate.

So you aren't steering the ship (adrift)? In the analogy, the difference between one who knows/does their Will and one who doesn't is the ship's helmsmen.

"jcyn" wrote:
A road tax, well its a nice idea but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. 18 cents a gallon is enough for me, they don't need anymore money.

Some more links...

Road Pricing
Electronic Road Pricing
Timely Renewal of Road Tax and Vehicle Insurance

On the 18 cents a gallon gas tax... Gas prices rise and fall for a variety of reasons. One of those reasons is that the oil companies control them by adjusting the rates at which they refine oil. Current oil companies run their refineries at about 50% capacity, 70% at most. They don't run their refineries at full capacity on purpose, as they adjust the refinery capabilities to help them control the market. (Again, economy is based on the idea of scarcity.) Another determining factor is the prices paid for obtaining oil from overseas. Oil is a huge trade commodity, and was much as some Muslims want Western civilization out of their life spheres, there are plenty of people in the Persian Gulf area that quite frankly are rich as hell due to it. (Take a look at Dubai.)

That's where legalization of marijuana comes in. Hemp Fuel & Energy. Currently, we know there are many ways to make renewable fuel sources, corn being a major crop for this. Hemp is another one. Hemp has a wide variety of uses, including as a renewable fuel source. It also makes a sturdier and longer lasting paper than what we use today. In short, hemp products could make a lot of farmers switch their crops, and put a lot of companies out of business. Currently, it is legal to own hemp products in America (shirts, paper, and the like), but it is illegal to grow hemp. Here is yet another link, Hemp & Marijuana: Myths and Realities.

Long story short, legalization of marijuana would have major health and economic benefits. It would help to reduce the dependency on foreign oil, and work to drive those prices down (the more of a surplus you have, the lower your prices get). It would also help the corn industry, as the more corn products we depend on, the more troubles we run into. For instance, farmers cannot plant corn "on top of corn". That is, they have to alternate between corn and another product that replenishes the minerals in the earth, like soy. Otherwise, the land would become infertile for corn.

Marijuana, on the other hand, probably has some similar rules to it. But, we also know that the shit can be grown practically anywhere. An estimated 45% of the marijuana in the U.S. today is grown right here in the U.S., quite illegally. It's already a cash crop, just the the wrong people are cashing in (like drug pushers and the U.S. government).


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
14/10/2011 7:12 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
Marijuana, on the other hand, probably has some similar rules to it. But, we also know that the shit can be grown practically anywhere. An estimated 45% of the marijuana in the U.S. today is grown right here in the U.S., quite illegally. It's already a cash crop, just the the wrong people are cashing in (like drug pushers and the U.S. government).

It's a very interesting prohibition in this country now, a huge industry in enforcement and prisons that is also keeping the Mexican cartels in business, and the President of Mexico is on record as opposing decriminalization in the US. Very interesting.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
14/10/2011 7:27 pm  

Azi, thanks for the links..you can tell my road tax research consisted of the first paragraph from wiki !! Oh well it was the scotch talking. I will check them out.

The only growth industry in my town is a federal detention facility and they are building a 30 million dollar jail, I am serious !! Yes the prison industry and the black market both fear decriminalization.
Lots of thought provoking stuff here, thanks to all for posting.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
14/10/2011 9:33 pm  

Cam, you are absolutely right. It's pretty disgusting, imo.

As for the jails... if you have Netflix, or some way to watch that Union movie, jcyn, definitely give it the time of day. You're sure to be amazed.

For instance, one of the things they cover, is that most of the government funds allocated to "fighting the war on drugs" goes to pot busts, while a small portion is actually used for the more dangerous drugs.

They actually have private prisons now, and a very high percentage of the people in prison for drugs are just there for marijuana.

Our tax dollars at work, while the government defaults on its bills. 🙁

As much as I could sit and talk about weed all day, let's try to keep on topic though, and definitely not turn this into another drug thread.


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2
Share: