🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ua6dnTFXhIzytc7RnZ2dnUVZ_tydnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 mrmcafee <"(mrmcafee)nospam"@cox.net> wrote:

> Billy wrote:
> > In article <xMqdnW-KIvZEiM7RnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >  mrmcafee <"(mrmcafee)nospam"@cox.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> Billy wrote:
> >>> In article <4v-dnUacM7Ywbc_RnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>  mrmcafee <"(mrmcafee)nospam"@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Strongman "B" is just exercising his sovereign rights (as defined by 
> >>>> himself and the Libertarian Party) as is Weakling "A". Good thing for 
> >>>> Strongman "B" is he is strong and "A" is weak. The conflict is why 
> >>>> libertarian (anarchist) philosphy can not work. In human nature 
> >>>> conflicts will inevitably develop. There has to be some way to resolve 
> >>>> them, even if not everybody agrees with the resolution.
> >>> You said that libertarians "hold that all individuals have the right to 
> >>> exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live 
> >>> in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly 
> >>> interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they 
> >>> choose." 
> >>>
> >>> Ergo, "B" isn't an anarchist.
> >> "B" is too. "B" is practicing "sole dominion" over his own life, as is 
> >> "A". "B" recognizes no authority above his own, as does "A". The 
> >> difference is that "B" has the power to have his way and "A" does not.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Anarchy worked fine for hunter gatherers, but those were small units.
> >> Prehistoric people were organized into the most non-anarchistic 
> >> organization there is: the family / clan (tribe). Power flowed from the 
> >> Chief down to the smallest girl child. Anarchy has never worked for long 
> >> anywhere in any large group setting.
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm beginning to worry about what you were doing when you should have 
> >> been in school.
> > 
> > You where the one who gave a definition, and when it made you look like 
> > the idiot that you are, you disavowed it.
> 
> It's not my definition, Billy, it is the LP's definition and no, it is 
> not I that appears like an idiot here.
> 
> 
> > 
> > In hunter/gatherer cultures, the best hunter was the leader of the 
> > group, because the best hunter gave the group it's best chance of 
> > success. Aristocracy didn't enter into the picture until agriculture. 
> > Don't you know anything?
> 
> Who is talking about aristocracy?
> 
> Prehistoric clans were normally lead by the smartest elder, not the best 
> hunter. It is why elders were allowed to exist. It is why agriculture 
> was developed, a boon to mankind despite that silly link you provided. 
> Authoritative family / clans are NOT libertarian or anarchist in nature 
> despite your delusions. You don't really believe in what you promote, do 
> you?
> 
> 
> > 
> > Hunter/gatherers were squeezed out by the greater numbers of 
> > malnourished agriculturalists.
> 
> 
> Let's see, that would make them a failed approach, right?
> 
> 
> > 
> > <http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/claessen/agriculture/mistake_jared
> > _diamond.pdf>
First you give me a definition of libertarian as those that "hold that 
all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own 
lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so 
long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to 
live in whatever manner they choose." 

Then you say that a tyrant is the same as a libertarian, because s/he 
does what s/he wants. Besides being hypocritical, it doesn't fulfill the 
definition that YOU gave.

Most of human existence has been as hunter/gatherers, except for the 
last 10,000 years, so you may want to look up the term prehistoric, as 
writing began as a way to inventory the crops of the agriculturalists.

Social and economic structure
Hunter-gatherer societies also tend to have relatively non-hierarchical, 
egalitarian social structures. This might have been more pronounced in 
the more mobile societies, which generally are not able to store surplus 
food. **Thus, full-time leaders, bureaucrats, or artisans are rarely 
supported by these societies.**
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer#Social_and_economic_structu
re>

Hunter/gatherers were small cooperative groups in which no permanent 
leadership was invested in any member, and any member had an equal say 
regardless of age or gender, because their cooperation was needed in the 
hunt.

That hunter/gatherers were replaced by agriculturalists is a great 
calamity to our species. The hunter/gatherers were healthier than the 
reputed winners of exploiting the environment.

Agriculture led to the exploitation of topsoil, which may as well be a 
fossil resource, when you reckon the amount of time that it takes to 
replace it. And the clearing of the land chased away the animals that 
had previously lived there as free food, with their complete protein and 
high energy fat. Then we had industrialists who harnessed fossilized 
energy, to pump water for irrigation (and the inevitable salting that 
occurs with it), as well as machines that expanded acreage, and allowed 
for a larger population. And lastly, we have the fossil energy being 
transformed into chemical fertilizer, which speeds the loss of top soil, 
allows pasture land that was once used for animals to be converted to 
food production, for larger crops, and greater populations. Britain for 
example produces less than half the amount of food that it needs, and 
2/3 of the Japanese would be starving without trade. They are dependent 
on other countries for their food. 

And now the train comes barreling down the tracks. By 2050, (12 billion 
in 2067, if we get that far) there will be 9 billion of us. Topsoil will 
only be a memory in the third of the planet where it could be used to 
grow crops. The oceans will will be fished out. Fossil water from 
aquifers will be out of reach. A "World Bank study says that the (water) 
demand is going to exceed supply by 40 percent in twenty years." Not 40 
years, but 20 years. Add to the mix starving, "failed nation" states 
with nuclear weapons (Pakistan/North Korea). Hooray, for agriculture. It 
destroyed the hunter/gatherers first, and now it is about to destroy the 
rest of us.

What we need to do is stop the stupid farm subsidies that support 
Cargill, Archer Daniel Midlands, and Monsanto, while destroying "Third 
World" farmers by the US exporting subsidized grain below the cost of 
production. This would allow "Third World" farmers to grow their own 
food. We need farm supports for farmers to grow healthy food and to stop 
using chemical fertilizers, and start re-growing topsoil (it's called 
organic agriculture, like it was done before 1947). We all need to start 
growing food, organically. Additionally, we need to offer men $1,000 or 
more to have a vasectomy, and/or change the tax structure to favor 
couples that have no children, and penalized those that have many 
children, or our "grands" ain't gonna make it.

The above is just food and population. Global warming and ocean 
pollution are 2 another things that really ought to involve you.
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1298596/Massive-40-declin
e-oceans-phytoplankton-puts-entire-food-chain-threat.html>

Are our oceans dying? Phytoplankton has declined 40% in 60 years as 
figures reveal Earth has been getting hotter since the Eighties
----
The oceans only contribute half of the oxygen that we breath. A good 
deal of the rest lies in the forests that are being burned off to be 
used as more cropland.

Do the Kleptocrats (Dems and Reps) want you to think about this, and the 
sacking and pillaging of the national wealth? No! They want you to worry 
about nickel and dime immigrants, and racism. If we are too busy, 
watching each other, the "White Guys in Suits" will pick our pockets 
clean (cleaner).

I can just imagine the braying that you will respond with "fee". If you 
want to do the same dumb parrot routine as "Speedy", you can go into my 
KF as well. I don't have time for your brain farts.
-- 
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the 
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/middleeast/2010/07/201072816515308172.html