No one Believes in Government

[CleanShavenJesus]

Despite what statists say, they don't believe in -any- of it, because it's forced upon them, they don't believe in it by definition. If people actually believed in it, they would participate and do what the state does voluntarily, without force.

How do you know the victim of rape really doesn't want to have sex with the rapist? because there's a knife to her throat.

How do you know the man didn't want to give his wallet to the guy in the alley? because there's a gun pointed at him.

How do you know the child doesn't believe in Islam? because if he doesn't he would be verbally and physically attacked.

How do you know people don't want to support the government? Because they will be thrown in a cage if they don't support it.

The only reason why people pretend to support the state is to avoid processing the trauma of being aggressed against and/or immediate physical danger in extreme police states. Every person that pretends to support government is simply projecting their Stockholm syndrome. People do not believe in the government, at all. Otherwise it would not be backed up by violence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

[Koolay]

Why? I'm not the one pointing guns at people.

Unless I am mistaken, the point of your first post is that if you are not actively working against the government, you are giving it your tacit approval to point guns at people.

I treat the government like any gang of violent criminals, I just pay them off so I don't get put in a cage. I don't give them a second more of my time or energy than I need to.

Eventually society will come to logical conclusions, I am just another spokesperson putting in the good word of truth, although I may never see the fruits of my labour. Like those who opposed slavery, never saw their country slave free. Government will become obsolete, it is inevitable.

[LastPoet]

---

Stupidity is not an actionable offense.

But spamming is.

The interpretation is up to the mods, but a cursory reading of the rules tells me:

No Spamming
This not only refers to blatant attempts to advertise but to any post that is not an attempt at discussion. Depending on the severity of the spam, a warning or a ban will be administered. We consider spam to be any of the following:

-Multiple postings of the same topic.
-Threads which are posted to advertise products / links unrelated to this forum.
-Responses to existing topics which are completely unrelated to the subject.
-Hit and run postings of a trollish or otherwise inappropriate nature.

Koolay's threads are all on the same topic (government evil, anarchy good), they use the same arguments and given that he keeps ignoring any and all replies and repeating the same thing elsewhere, discussion doesn't seem to be the goal. But, atleast the wording of the thread is different every time - even though the message remains the same. So, at what point does it go from not-spam to spam?

---

I'm glad that you know the rules, if only all knew about them. But yes, it is to the staff collective interpretation and at this time there is no reason to act. There is the ignore function provided to our members to avoid the problem of reading his posts. The rule you mention is not one that can be evaluated immediately. His posts are indeed slight variances, but he does engage others on his threads (as well as others engage him) and keeps within such threads for the most part.

We are aware of koolay. Chillax.

[Faith No More]

*ducks*
Peace, brother. Me shouldn'a mentioned mods-- my bad yo.

Anyway, I don't have a problem with you. I have a problem with a guy who makes 6 threads about exactly the same thing over just a couple of months, with no new slant on it and no fresh material.

Haha, no worries. It's just that the staff here works quite hard to keep this place clean, so I get a little defensive when I feel we are being attacked.

The spam rule does get fuzzy and is open to interpretation when we reach the point of someone continuing the same argument over and over. Koolay's threads have all had the common theme of "government bad," but they are all slightly different variations. While he may not actually engage in thoughtful debate, he does follow up on each topic and responds accordingly. He hasn't violated any rules.

As of now, all we can do is hope he tires himself out.

[ITChick]

Ok, I don't really understand what the op is saying. I think he said "governments are bad". Since my government is in the process of banning porn right now (I'm still sticking with: they can't just do that!) (uk), I'll have to agree with him.

Faith, you guys are doing an amazing job! (Except when Peter was banned, but that is a conversation for another post )

[bennyboy]

Eventually society will come to logical conclusions, I am just another spokesperson putting in the good word of truth, although I may never see the fruits of my labour. Like those who opposed slavery, never saw their country slave free. Government will become obsolete, it is inevitable.

Sounds like you're preaching the gospel, but without all the cool bedtime stories.

Koolay: "Hallelujah, brother, deliverance is almost upon us! The Lord shall set us free; thou shalt walketh among the lions and the beasts of the field unafraid, for the lions shall not eat of the meat, and the strong of arm shall not use their strength any more for selfish gain, and the governments taxeth thee no more, for the roads buildeth themselves, and the cities administer themselves, and the students of the land teacheth themselves, each to his own. No longer will one group of people subdueth any other, for ever and ever, Amen, because evolution never happened, says He who understandeth not Evolution. Chicks shall not any longer diggeth powerful men, nor men struggle to gaineth promininence to lay the chicks down upon their bedding; for the chicks shall glory in bedding fat jobless morons, for they shall be eternally barren, and lacking in all forms of shallowness. Glory to God, who makes the fucking senseless and impossible a reality, Amen."