RE: Rights and violent aggression.
December 14, 2016 at 4:19 am
(This post was last modified: December 14, 2016 at 4:22 am by paulpablo.)
(December 13, 2016 at 11:28 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Talk about a blunt treatment. Our goverment -rarely- threatens violence for -any- reason. If you deny a right, even then, lilly livered peices of shit will try to settle with you. Violence is threatened in the abrogation of rights, but not by the government, by the people...for whom the government speaks, ostensibly.
"Fuck up, and we'll fuck you up"
Aren't you American? America is one of the most aggressive, violent, threatening governments in the world.
Didn't Obama even say something along the lines of the nation state is the monopoly of violence.
Ontop of the military bases America has all over the world, the police brutality, so on and so on.
(December 13, 2016 at 11:49 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: The social contract legitimizes the threatened punishments for dodging taxes. Even anarchists benefit from government expenditures; Kazcinski wouldn't have been able to pursue his anarchist aims without using the roads built with taxes.
I think people who believe in capitalism and anarchy believe in the privatisation of road building.
Not that I'm an anarchist myself. I'm all for good old fashioned government built roads.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
Impersonation is treason.
