Because The State Loves You

Originally posted by LeeOben

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by SWCCFAN

 

I really don't think violence would solve any systemic problems better than non-violent disobedience would.

While I think people have a right to defend themselves against unwarranted aggression by the State, ultimately this just gives the State political propaganda to further entrench itself.

Consider the institutional damage the video of those charity workers being arrested for feeding homeless people causes the State, then consider the damage that a rebellious militia could do.

While the militia would generate front page news across the nation, most people would not feel any sympathy for men who initiate violence against government agents.

However, when people can see peaceful activists being beaten and arrested for feeding homeless people, they feel a great deal of outrage at the State over its actions.

This is a propaganda war - a war for hearts and minds. Violence undermines that objective.

edit on 10-8-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

Your point of view does not work in the real world my friend. If you think violence doesn't solve anything tell that to your great grand parents who fought, bled and died in the creation for your country's freedom from tyrants.

When you see your ancestors on other side after you've been executed on your knees because you did not believe violence would solve anything try and explain that.

I'm guessing your the type of person that would let your whole family get wiped out at the hands of these monsters. You know they're planning on killing ALOT of Americans. You all know thats in their game plan. Are you just going to sit there and take it like alittle bitch? Or are you gonna be prepared to throw down the gloves and get bloody??

Violence is a last resort. It is like any other weapon. Must be used effectively, and only used to protect yourself and your family. On a larger scale to destroy REAL enemies that threaten your very existence.

Well the question you have to ask yourself is whether the colonists could have overthrown British rule by simply not complying with them.

What would the Red Coats have done?

Locked up all the colonists without a trial?

Would they have spent a mighty fortune on building prisons to hold them all?

The fact of the matter is that the colonists could have ended British rule without firing a shot had they chosen to go that route.

reply to post by mnemeth1


Did they not try non-compliance? Wasn't that basicly the reason for starting the revolution? They stopped paying tax, at which point the ole king sent over troops, stationed them through out citys and started pointing guns/cannons at the people telling them tax was a "nessesary evil"(obviously paraphrasing).

The same happens today, if you want to keep your land/property they will extract tax out of you, even if you have no reason to leave ones property(self sustaining). No tax, and they will point guns at you. They(government) are always willing to escalate any situation as they believe they are always right.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by LeeOben

 

Violence is what the terrorist State engages in.

Stooping to their level is unnecessary.

All that is necessary is for people to not obey.

It All Depends how you look at it

Curious Ever Heard of the OKA Crisis ?

Oka Crisis
en.wikipedia.org...

The crisis developed from a local dispute between the town of Oka and the Mohawk community of Kanesatake. The town of Oka was developing plans to expand a golf course and residential development onto land which had traditionally been used by the Mohawk. It included pineland and a burial ground, marked by standing tombstones of their ancestors. The Mohawks had filed a land claim for the sacred grove and burial ground near Kanesatake, but their claim had been rejected in 1986.




The Oka Crisis lasted 78 days, and gunfire early in the crisis killed SQ Corporal Marcel Lemay. The golf course expansion which had originally triggered the crisis was cancelled by the mayor of Oka. The Oka Crisis galvanized, throughout Canada, a subsequent process of developing an First Nations Policing Policy to try to prevent future such events.

The Planned Golf Course Was to be Put on Burial Mohawk Ground ! that was Caused the OKA Crisis
The Mohawk Community's Around the Area did everything Legal within Canadian Laws Until They were Starting to Construct a Golf Course On Claimed Mohawk Sacred Burial Ground that is when they drew The Line!

it lasted 2 1/2 months the golf course was Cancelled and a First Nations Policing Policy was Established

Google Video Link

reply to post by mnemeth1


Awesome thread I have already been violated by the State of California for "LEGALLY" growing Cannabis for medicinal purposes In a court battle right now facing 5 years for being part of a legal collective. Why am I talking publically about my leagal problems? Well, because what was done to me by the LA County Sheriff's Department was against Prop 215 and SB420 by the so called IMET(Illicit Marijuana Enforcement Team). Yeah right I had all my ducks in a row, but when they kicked my freakin door in, they refused to even look at my paper work! I got a few bones to pick with the LA County Sheriff's Dept., as soon as this is all over

Especially, since after breaking into my house they demanded to know where I was hiding the cash (which I only had 1100 bucks and after they stole $300, I was left with $800)! I had just caught two of who turned out to be a detective and an officer snooping outside my house two weeks prior to them violating my 4th Amendment. Once I confronted them outside my house and climbing off the wall that surrounds my house, all they said was "is that your Trans Am"? I said yes, then they said "are you selling it", and I said "NO, but what are you doing on my wall and why are you in my yard"? They continued to ask about my car which is a 79 4 speed T/A. They soon just turned and walked away up the street. I decided to go around the corner to see where these guys went as there had been a series of break-ins in my neighborhood. I found them on the street behind me in a park parking lot at 10 o'clock at night with 4 other guys talking in the parking lot. I pulled behind them, wrote down their license plates number and proceeded back home. Please, don't ask me why didn't I call the police? Two weeks later they were back with a search warrant stealing my meds pointing a gun to my head saying "yeah, you know me"!

Next step in court is having the search warrant thrown out based on the biased judge (amongst many other things) who issued it, who said on record "I do not recognize the laws SB420 or Prop 215 as being legitimate" . Pretty sure I'll win that one. After my attorney, who just happened to be the attorney the judge made that statement on record in his own court to told me that, I just about feel outta my chair! This judge has no right to take the bench and needs to be removed if he can't uphold the laws of the State of California voted into law by the People of the State of California. As for the IMET....

However, the states are making laws which they refuse to uphold. And making laws that are just stupid, but make them an endless amount of money. Had I been doing something unlawful, I would suck it up and say "Oh well, you really got yourself into a real hum-dinger", but that's not my case. I followed every rule, every law the State of California set forth, and still got robbed. I had just been jacked!

I could comment more but I digress.

S~N~F

This argument could go on forever folks. In fact this is exactly the way the powers that be intend it to be. This increasing division between us is planned and orchestrated. The one thing no power on earth can stop is a united people.

Anarchists are divisive and extremely so. Their goal is division which plays directly into their hands.

The Right / Left argument is an orchestrated one also. We see that almost daily now as we face the most divisive Administration in the US in recent history. We see them lie to us every day. They call those who cry for a return to what we once were Terrorists for a reason. To drive a wedge between us.

We the People are as stupid as they think we are and they know that. As long as we continue to bicker amongst ourselves the bad guys win. They know most who enter into these arguments have not a clue what they are talking about. They have programed everyone to have a knee jerk reaction to triggers.

Some of the current ploys being used:
-If you don't vote for me you are a "Racist".
-If you are for the Constitution and returning to what worked, you are a "Terrorist".
-If you are a Social Liberal, you are a "Communist".

We are carefully nurtured by replacing one hate with another. Racism is now replaced with hatred of the Obese, Smokers or those who are more successful than you. The point is not who or what you hate, it is simply that your hate and anger is misdirected; often at innocent victims.

Democrats are not Communists any more than Tea Partiers are Terrorists. Foxnews being Right leaning is no worse than all other TV News being Left Leaning. They even go so far as calling for Censorship to ignite the fire.

Will people wake up to this ploy? No and that is why it works so well.

As to the Anarchists or self-proclaimed Anarchists they are with us all the time. It is no different now than when I was young. We had the phonies from the Weather Underground who were and are common thugs. No different than the thugs in the UK right now destroying innocent peoples property and looting while claiming to have a cause.

Anarchists have no cause other than seeking attention, engaging in violence including bombings and murders, looting and plain old stealing under cover of fake protests. Nobody with a functional brain is now or have they ever been fooled. There is a reason nearly all Anarchists are children, students or adults who prey on children and young adults they can fool into following them. Nothing changes under the Sun.

There will always be a tiny percentage of us who fight against the laws and systems that keep us civilized. There will always be those for whom everything is about Me, Me, Me and to hell with everyone else. There will always be those who have zero respect for the Rights of anyone else. There will always be those who think the world owes them a living.

reply to post by mnemeth1

Without the State, I might walk down the street texting my friend about pot while carrying a shingling hammer, distributing free pamphlets about where to buy raw milk, all while video taping myself in action.

So without the state, you would grow two extra arms in order to perform those tasks?

This thread is great dude, thanks for putting it together. I always see individual threads of certain things, but seeing them all compiled in one mega-thread really makes you realize just how powerful the government has become.

reply to post by Blaine91555


You def have an eagles eye if I do say so myself.

Good breakdown of the play/ploy/plot

reply to post by mnemeth1


Really? You think they just wanted to try out their guns on people instead of raccoons and deer? How would you know they could have done it without firing a shot? We do not seem to be able to coerce the fed govt today to stop the IRS collection of huge taxes way beyond that which our Founding Fathers fought a bloody war over. Want to be non-compliant? You get a jackboot in your teeth. Or a summons from the Court. No, I dont think non compliance is doing a lot. It's just a gnat in their eyes.

reply to post by Blaine91555


Bill Ayers is more than a common thug. He got away with his anarchist behavior, and also raised the orphaned son of one of the Weather Underground couples incarcerated for same actions. After he got off on a technicality, he decided he could have a bigger impact on spreading communism by infiltrating colleges. During that time, he gave a party for Obama in his own home. He has dealings with Obama before his Presidency. He is anything but a common thug. He has made inroads into the very institution he hated so much, the American govt. And by the way, Ayers and Dohrn were DSA(Democratic Socialists of America) and used that group to spark anarchy and anti-war protests over Viet Nam. That was done to give the Soviets and Chinese an edge and destroy US efforts to fight communism over there. Code Pink is the same today as DSA was yesterday. Dohrn herself was involved in talking to students at Kent State.

reply to post by mnemeth1


Very well put. Ok then now lets us look at the other side of things. Let us look at what good the state has done. I bet i can find an exact opposite link to every one that the OP has presented. I just dont have any idea how to post it. You have to look at both sides of all of these issues. The state does good things I challenge anyone to prove that it doesnt. Humans work for the state and in every one of theses situations you have to account for human emotion and action. Yes they represent the state. But you do have the option of going to court and fighting it. Theres that at the very least. I feel this is more america bashing going on. By the way before you say it im not trolling just giving my opinion)

reply to post by semperkill


Semper, the American Constitution and form of govt has been the best form of governing in thousands of years. However, the CFR moved in with their Shadow Govt to destroy the vey things our Founding Fathers espoused. Even in the best form of government, when selfish people are in power, there is corruption of every kind.

reply to post by Lightrule


Thank you for explaining all this about law and contracts and property tax. It is very valuable information. Lawyers write the legislation Congress votes on, and they write the stuff in local govts too. Remember what Shakespeare wrote about lawyers in Hamlet?

reply to post by Donkey_Dean


This gives us the ability to repel invaders. Who in their right mind would attemp to invade a country that spends more than half of its money on defense/offense And half of that is spent in space (yes outer space). No one. This spending gives us a chance to fix our issues. Which i believe we are doing right here on ats. We know the problems and if we keep spending all of our time focusing on our problems and not looking for solutions and demanding solutions then we all lose. Im a big believer in making your thoughts reality. I dont remember the thread but it is here on ATS somewhere. I believe that if we focused our minds together we can make the change we have been hearing about. Lets get these good thoughts going. Lets develop our national conciousnes and focus it towards solving these issues. Lets use our positive energy.

reply to post by semperkill

Let us look at what good the state has done. I bet i can find an exact opposite link to every one that the OP has presented. I just dont have any idea how to post it.

I'm sorry, but what does that even mean? You bet, for example, that you can find a link showing that the state saved someone from hurting themselves from texting while walking? And so even if you could, that somehow justifies threatening everyone with violence who believes they are intelligent enough to walk while texting? Come off it.

The state does good things I challenge anyone to prove that it doesnt.

I challenge you to prove that it does. Even if there are a few things which are more "good" than what the free market would provide (I can't think of any at all off the top of my head), they wouldn't come close to justifying the many evils of the state.

Humans work for the state and in every one of theses situations you have to account for human emotion and action.

That doesn't help your argument that a coercively funded state is the most moral form of governance.

I feel this is more america bashing going on.

Whilst the American government has become one of the most controlling of its citizens and has created countless unjust laws, nearly every country in the world has a coercively funded government with silly laws and this thread is applicable to all of them.

reply to post by semperkill

This gives us the ability to repel invaders. Who in their right mind would attemp to invade a country that spends more than half of its money on defense/offense

Who in their right mind would spend that much money on killing people when there are tens of thousands of children starving to death every single day?

Under a culture of non-compliance with violent authorities there is no need for a defense force, and certainly no need for an offense force. What would invaders do? Destroy infrastructure only to rebuild it once they have taken over? Attempt to go around taxing (robbing) everyone?

And half of that is spent in space (yes outer space).

Incorrect.

This spending gives us a chance to fix our issues.

Really? What issues are being resolved by buying more killing machines?

reply to post by Blaine91555

Anarchists have no cause other than seeking attention, engaging in violence including bombings and murders, looting and plain old stealing under cover of fake protests. Nobody with a functional brain is now or have they ever been fooled.

You really need to update your mass media anarchist definition. The London rioters are also not anarchists.
www.zpub.com...
It is unthinking people who blindly accept the coercively funded state (who have engaged in much more violence including bombings and murders, looting and plain old stealing under cover of patriotism than any other organization or group of people).

Originally posted by DrinkYourDrug
reply to post by semperkill

 

Under a culture of non-compliance with violent authorities there is no need for a defense force, and certainly no need for an offense force. What would invaders do? Destroy infrastructure only to rebuild it once they have taken over? Attempt to go around taxing (robbing) everyone?

You forget a third, yet very real alternative: make examples out of a few of the non-compliant demonstrators until the rest give in. I'm sorry, but peaceful resistance doesn't work in an environment where the other side has no qualms about slaughtering you.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Without the State, I might walk down the street texting my friend about pot while carrying a shingling hammer, distributing free pamphlets about where to buy raw milk, all while video taping myself in action. If anyone tried to do that in real life the entire world would implode in an apocalyptic disaster. Only the State can keep us safe from ourselves.


It must do the following to you:

• Arrest you for shingling your own home.
  
  
• Arrest you for selling raw milk.
  
  
• Arres t you for distributing free pamphlets.
  
  
• A rrest you for legally carrying a concealed weapon.
  
  
• Fine you for selling lemonade.
  
  
• Arrest you for swearing.
  
  
• Arrest you for asking a judge questions on his way to court.
  
  
• Arrest you for asking questions at a city council meeting.
  
  
• Arrest you for video taping police while they are performing their duties in public.
  
  
• Arrest you for video taping a public policy meeting in a public venue.
  
  
• Arrest you for feeding homeless people.
  
  
• Arrest you for locking your pets in a parked car for a brief period of time.
  
  
• Arrest you for standing around on a public sidewalk.
  
  
• Arrest you for dancing in public.
  
  
• Arrest you for reading the Bible aloud in public.
  
  
• Arrest you for not giving your child medication that they have a reaction to.
  
  
• Arrest you for merely linking to sites that contain copyrighted material.
  
  
• Arrest you for walking down a sidewalk while texting.
  
  
• Arrest you for giving out hugs.
  
  
• Arrest you for farting.
  
  
• Arrest you for carrying a Bic lighter and multi-tool.
  
  
• Fine you for eating doughnuts in public playground.
  

And that’s just in the past 6 months.

Note, that I didn’t even touch on the evil horrors of adults voluntarily trading money for recreational drugs like tobacco, alcohol, pot, ecstasy or coc aine between themselves.

But these acts of benevolence pale in comparison to the outpouring of love that occurs when:

• The State beats you for being handcuffed in a patrol car.
  
  
• The State beats you for not signing a confession.
  
  
• The State beats you because your kid committed suicide.
  
  
• The State kills you because you are homeless.
  
  
• The State beats you because you didn’t zip up your sweater.
  
  
• The State destroys your property because you are homeless.
  
  
• The State beats you for clapping your hands.
  
  
• The State beats you for video taping police.
  
  
• The State kills you for getting into an argument with your mother.
  
  
• The State kills you for defending your home from armed invaders.
  

It is difficult for me to express my level of gratitude to the State in its efforts to keep me safe from myself.

Without the State, I might walk down the street texting my friend about pot while carrying a shingling hammer, distributing free pamphlets about where to buy raw milk, all while video taping myself in action. If anyone tried to do that in real life the entire world would implode in an apocalyptic disaster. Only the State can keep us safe from ourselves.

edit on 9-8-2011 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-8-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)

The State must do these things to keep the members of the human herd it is cultivating for their wealth and production, living in fear of the State.This fear dictates that the human herd continues to be slaves to the Ruling caste.
The ironic thing is we citizens pay these rulers (some even want to pay them more) to make these laws to enslave us!

reply to post by TupacShakur




It is nice to see all the articles in one place. That is, until you realize most the sources are the authors own, and extremely biased.

For example, the one titled "Fine you for eating doughnuts at a public park". Once you read the article, you see the adults were fined for loitering at a kids playground, with no children. The title makes it sound as if they were ridiculously fined for eating a doughnut, when frankly doughnuts are completely beside the point. But I guess "Adults fined for loitering around children's playground" didn't fit with the picture the OP was trying to paint, so he had to sensationalize it a bit.

The sad part is I generally agree with much of what the OP was trying to get across, but anytime you start playing fast and loose with the facts you lose any hope you had of convincing rational people.

ETA: As another example of the obvious anti-state slant, look at the link titled "Arrest you for handing out free pamphlets.". I guess the more accurate "Man arrested for handing out pamphlets attempting to influence juror members as they left the courthouse" doesn't play towards his agenda the same way. It had nothing to do with handing out pamphlets, and everything to do with trying to influence the jury during the course of a trial (aka jury tampering)

reply to post by Akasirus

It is nice to see all the articles in one place. That is, until you realize most the sources are the authors own, and extremely biased.

For example, the one titled "Fine you for eating doughnuts at a public park". Once you read the article, you see the adults were fined for loitering at a kids playground, with no children. The title makes it sound as if they were ridiculously fined for eating a doughnut, when frankly doughnuts are completely beside the point. But I guess "Adults fined for loitering around children's playground" didn't fit with the picture the OP was trying to paint, so he had to sensationalize it a bit.

The sad part is I generally agree with much of what the OP was trying to get across, but anytime you start playing fast and loose with the facts you lose any hope you had of convincing rational people.

ETA: As another example of the obvious anti-state slant, look at the link titled "Arrest you for handing out free pamphlets.". I guess the more accurate "Man arrested for handing out pamphlets attempting to influence juror members as they left the courthouse" doesn't play towards his agenda the same way. It had nothing to do with handing out pamphlets, and everything to do with trying to influence the jury during the course of a trial (aka jury tampering)

I agree, the pamphlet arrest where the dude handed them out to jurors seemed justifiable.

But with the donut one, there was probably a bench there and maybe they just wanted to chow down, I think a fine was out of line. Was it making other parents nervous, seeing two women eating donuts near their children? I don't see the threat that it poses to anybody, the cops probably just wanted to confiscate the donuts and stuff their faces.

I think the vast majority of those arrests are completely ridiculous, and the idea that people actually go to jail for things like videotaping cops, swearing, or farting is insane and shows that our legal system needs some serious refurbishment.

Originally posted by Akasirus

Originally posted by DrinkYourDrug
reply to post by semperkill

 

Under a culture of non-compliance with violent authorities there is no need for a defense force, and certainly no need for an offense force. What would invaders do? Destroy infrastructure only to rebuild it once they have taken over? Attempt to go around taxing (robbing) everyone?

You forget a third, yet very real alternative: make examples out of a few of the non-compliant demonstrators until the rest give in. I'm sorry, but peaceful resistance doesn't work in an environment where the other side has no qualms about slaughtering you.

I agree that at the present level of human evolution/culture/thinking completely non-violent non-compliance may not be the best solution, however a government is not required to protect people from rival governments.

There would be no demonstrators, just people going about their lives. IMO some level of violence is sometimes necessary in self defense and in defense of others. Private security would continue to continue to protect their clients from violence and kidnappings with appropriate levels of force. Private investigators would investigate these violent crimes. If the thugs doing the murdering and kidnapping are wearing state or gang issued uniforms, this only makes it easier for the private security and investigators. Many people also own firearms for self defense.

If people were still not convinced, and believed they needed a large scale defense force to protect them from invading governments, the free market would provide this. People worried about commie invaders would donate to this force. People not worried would not be forced at gun point to contribute to the funding. Much more civilized.

reply to post by Akasirus

That's because conditioning has made word's like "loitering"," taxation" and "arrest" invoke different thoughts and emotions than some of their more accurate synonyms, such as "hanging-out", "theft" and "kidnapping." Must alternative media use the same buzzwords as the mass media? As long as the message is correct I do not see the problem. The headline was correct and far less sensationalized than what is typical of the mass media.