DONATOR ONLY PREMIUM CONTENT - For more information on donator levels click here

 

 

If your donator status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with the relevant information.

 

Freedomain Radio Amazon Affiliate Links: United States - Canada - United Kingdom

Welcome to Freedomain Radio Message Board

If you're interested in joining the philosophical discussion, click "sign in" or "create account" on the right of the page. If you're creating a new account, please be sure to include an explanation as to why you're interested in joining the message board community. This verification requirement is included to cut down on possible spam accounts.

 

If you have supported Freedomain Radio financially and would like immediate access to the message board - or - your donation status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with your Paypal email/Bitcoin address/etc as well as your board account name and the situation will be addressed ASAP.

 

We just upgraded the board software, and now your email address is used to log in. If you're having trouble, please Contact Us.

You can't fix a problem that you don't understand. Would you agree? It seems to me that talking about dissolving the State demonstrates a lack of understanding of what the problem is. Government doesn't exist. A belief in it does, that allows those who operate in its name to go largely unopposed. The moment you turn to the State for anything, it grows, because you are now behaving as if it exists. Even if your intent is to "dissolve" it.

 

When people make voluntary trades that aren't taxed, this dissolves the State. When people have conversations about the fact that government isn't real, they dissolve the State. When people use Bitcoin (as an example), they are dissolving the State. Nobody set out to dissolve the horse and carriage. They made something better and people stopped using horse and carriage organically.

This has been my single greatest issue with Mr. Kokesh all along. He's so busy figuring out how to use an imaginary weapon in order to dismantle itself, that he's doing so little to actually contribute to doing so.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll pass your thoughts onto Adam & see if he has a reply. I do see dissolving the State requires more freemarket solutions, than it does top-down. There are certainly concerns about legitimizing the process of Government by trying to dismantle it top-down. However, i think have many freedom lovers pursing multiple approaches (such as Adam's) certainly helps move freedom in the right direction. What is the best solution? Well that's the one that works of course :). We wont know for sure what the best solution is- until it proves it'self. My solution is to build FreeMarket Systems which systematically remove revenue from the hands of violent (irrational) actors in Government into the Freemarket.

 

You can see my solution approach in depth in this video:  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, i think have many freedom lovers pursing multiple approaches (such as Adam's) certainly helps move freedom in the right direction.

I agree that it takes all types to make the world go 'round. How do you know that they are moving freedom in the right direction? It seems to me that every behavior we engage in either adds to our freedom or detracts from it. Operating from within the system--when within the system precludes dissolving it; when in fact within the system grows that system--is detracting from freedom. It's not only not a solution, but it is an anti-solution. It achieves the opposite of one's stated goals and prevents them from seeking out actual solutions. Mires them down. Takes them out of the game, which is what the whole "of the people" narrative is meant to accomplish.

 

Then, instead of choosing to be mired down himself, he's putting a lot of effort into misleading others into thinking his approach is tenable. Miring that many more people down.

 

I will try and check out the video you just shared as I am interested. However, I think it's tangential at best to the discussion. Full disclosure: I find the title to be problematic. Not knowing for sure what is meant by "system," man made systems are built on ideas.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I will try and check out the video you just shared as I am interested. However, I think it's tangential at best to the discussion. Full disclosure: I find the title to be problematic. Not knowing for sure what is meant by "system," man made systems are built on ideas.

Well the video is actually a direct reply to your comments to me: "When people make voluntary trades that aren't taxed, this dissolves the State. When people have conversations about the fact that government isn't real, they dissolve the State. When people use Bitcoin (as an example), they are dissolving the State. Nobody set out to dissolve the horse and carriage. They made something better and people stopped using horse and carriage organically."

 

The video itself encapsulates my response to that comment in depth. 

 

 

As for your argument to Adam, & this is my opinion of course- operating within the System doesn't eliminate his goal to completely close it down. Example; if i shut down my mafia, thus it stops using violence- it's violence has ended- regardless of being in the System or not. I would agree, political action other than dissolving, or removing laws, or the state itself, would indeed be likely to expand the State. 

 

You also have not provided any evidence or logic as to why using the state for the sole purpose to "close it's doors," would expand it's violence... You keep making comments without backing up your claims....

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You also have not provided any evidence or logic as to why using the state for the sole purpose to "close it's doors," would expand it's violence... You keep making comments without backing up your claims....

If you find my argument to be flawed, by all means refute it. I don't think saying it hasn't been provided accomplishes anything.

 

Government doesn't exist. A belief in it does, that allows those who operate in its name to go largely unopposed. The moment you turn to the State for anything, it grows, because you are now behaving as if it exists. Even if your intent is to "dissolve" it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the video is actually a direct reply to your comments to me: "When people make voluntary trades that aren't taxed, this dissolves the State. When people have conversations about the fact that government isn't real, they dissolve the State. When people use Bitcoin (as an example), they are dissolving the State. Nobody set out to dissolve the horse and carriage. They made something better and people stopped using horse and carriage organically."

 

The video itself encapsulates my response to that comment in depth. 

 

 

As for your argument to Adam, & this is my opinion of course- operating within the System doesn't eliminate his goal to completely close it down. Example; if i shut down my mafia, thus it stops using violence- it's violence has ended- regardless of being in the System or not. I would agree, political action other than dissolving, or removing laws, or the state itself, would indeed be likely to expand the State. 

 

You also have not provided any evidence or logic as to why using the state for the sole purpose to "close it's doors," would expand it's violence... You keep making comments without backing up your claims....

I'm open to possibilities but somehow the idea of one man shutting down a mammoth organization using only signatures on documents sounds like something from Marvel comics. That's an enormous amount of time and energy spent to get to the top of the beast only to have it flick you off. He might be able to get a wider audience a la Ron Paul but then his message will have changed. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't fix a problem that you don't understand. Would you agree? It seems to me that talking about dissolving the State demonstrates a lack of understanding of what the problem is. Government doesn't exist. A belief in it does, that allows those who operate in its name to go largely unopposed. The moment you turn to the State for anything, it grows, because you are now behaving as if it exists. Even if your intent is to "dissolve" it.

 

When people make voluntary trades that aren't taxed, this dissolves the State. When people have conversations about the fact that government isn't real, they dissolve the State. When people use Bitcoin (as an example), they are dissolving the State. Nobody set out to dissolve the horse and carriage. They made something better and people stopped using horse and carriage organically.

 

This has been my single greatest issue with Mr. Kokesh all along. He's so busy figuring out how to use an imaginary weapon in order to dismantle itself, that he's doing so little to actually contribute to doing so.

Interesting thoughts. Adam Kokesh was the one that pushed me towards an Agorist perspective where you do everything you can to work around the state to diminish it's effect.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now