Alt. Right "Blood & Soil" Types Are Opposed To Western Civilization

[dannno]

When you are dependent on the whims of the King for what you can and cannot do, you are a serf or a slave.

And you cannot create a free market by signing an executive order. When the market is dependent on the king's edict it isn't free, it is subject to the whim of those in power, for blessing or cursing. That is slavery and the very definition of regulation.

If you were free, if the market were free, it wouldn't matter what the current tyrant decides he wants to decree a she would have no power to force or compel in any manner.

Politics are a fantastic way to divert you from these truths though. The false "Left v. Right" illusion is a great way to keep people dumb, divided, and content with their serfdom. When your master gives you a little piece of bread from the table you think yourself "better" when you are still totally dependent on the master himself. You become a happy little serf.

Politics also makes you a hypocrite. How many times have you derided Obama for circumventing the Constitution's limitations that all law come from Congress and ordering something by fiat through an Executive Order? How many times did you complain about this as an attack on liberty? And now King Trump does it and you're defending him? Better lick the master's hands. Maybe he'll throw you a few more scrapes, maybe even a whole bone to chew on. Just don't delude yourself into thinking you are free, that you are anything more than a well kept pet.

Um, ya... You remind me of my progressive friend who claims that people who want freedom are tyrants because they want to force freedom on other people. Lol..

 

[PierzStyx]

I am a blood , soil and liberty kind of guy .

You can be one or the other, but not both.

The real pathetic issue is that these barbarians that want to drag us back to their barbarian tribalism aren't even honest enough to admit that their ideas are what they are and try and steal the language of freedom. "Western ideals" have been humanism, universal rights, and individualism. "Blood and soil" is just another form of Leftist identity politics in direct opposition to "Western Civilization." "Blood" focuses on a false idea of ethnicity, creating an arbitrary definition of a group and then demanding conformity to that group. It rejects individualism and humanism for racial collectivism. "Soil" is a collectivization of the land. It violates property rights because it asserts communal control over private property, arguing that the group, or its representatives in whatever State they organize, have greater claim to control your private property than you do. "Blood and soil" therefore asserts the power of the "many" to absolutely control the person and property of others through collectivist ideas that reject individual person hood and individual rights, existing only as a total rejection of individualism and universal human rights and therefore a total rejection of "Western Civilization."

 

[PierzStyx]

There are areas where executive action is legal, and breaking the law to obey the "supreme law of the land" (the constitution) is different than breaking both.

So, violating the Constitution's limitations on presidential power is obeying the Constitution? That is the stupidest think I've ever heard. Are you Abraham Lincoln, somehow using the internet from beyond the grave?

 

[PierzStyx]

Um, ya... You remind me of my progressive friend who claims that people who want freedom are tyrants because they want to force freedom on other people. Lol..

Is that "progressive friend" really just your reflection? Because defending a President using unconstitutional executive power to circumvent Congress in order to create laws to make things the way you think they should be -you know, what you're defending now- is the very essence of Progressivism. Meaning you are a Progressive.

Oh, and in case you missed it, you aren't free. When you depend on teh whim of those in power you're a slave, not a man.

 

[Lamp]

You can be one or the other, but not both.

The real pathetic issue is that these barbarians that want to drag us back to their barbarian tribalism aren't even honest enough to admit that their ideas are what they are and try and steal the language of freedom. "Western ideals" have been humanism, universal rights, and individualism. "Blood and soil" is just another form of Leftist identity politics in direct opposition to "Western Civilization." "Blood" focuses on a false idea of ethnicity, creating an arbitrary definition of a group and then demanding conformity to that group. It rejects individualism and humanism for racial collectivism. "Soil" is a collectivization of the land. It violates property rights because it asserts communal control over private property, arguing that the group, or its representatives in whatever State they organize, have greater claim to control your private property than you do. "Blood and soil" therefore asserts the power of the "many" to absolutely control the person and property of others through collectivist ideas that reject individual person hood and individual rights, existing only as a total rejection of individualism and universal human rights and therefore a total rejection of "Western Civilization."

Well actually Bastiat himself identified as a leftist and the entire 18th century classical liberal tradition identified itself as part of the left until socialism came along soooooooooo....yeah.

 

[dannno]

Is that "progressive friend" really just your reflection? Because defending a President using unconstitutional executive power to circumvent Congress in order to create laws to make things the way you think they should be -you know, what you're defending now- is the very essence of Progressivism. Meaning you are a Progressive.

Oh, and in case you missed it, you aren't free. When you depend on teh whim of those in power you're a slave, not a man.

Oh ok, but if I exercise my "freedom" that we all have deep down inside, and end up in federal prison, then I'm "really" free right?

 

[Swordsmyth]

So, violating the Constitution's limitations on presidential power is obeying the Constitution? That is the stupidest think I've ever heard. Are you Abraham Lincoln, somehow using the internet from beyond the grave?

Instructing the executive branch to not obey unconstitutional laws is following the constitution.

 

[PierzStyx]

Mostly because it is constantly overwhelmed by the hordes of humanity that reject it, a freedom culture is like a garden, if you don't pull the weeds and fence out the critters it doesn't last.

I suppose you would know a lot about barbarians rejecting freedom as that is what you champion.

But no, it isn't because it has been overwhelmed by the "hordes of humanity." Rather it is because liberty is a new idea every time. And people are uneducated in it and afraid. They would rather grasp onto their ancient tribalism ("blood") and territorial isolation ("soil") than embrace the dangers and blessings of being free. The great march of history though is towards greater and greater liberty, and you can see its progress etched across the whole of human history even as it has floundered in some areas. As civilization grows the tribal barbarisms of the past become obsolete.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I suppose you would know a lot about barbarians rejecting freedom as that is what you champion.

But no, it isn't because it has been overwhelmed by the "hordes of humanity." Rather it is because liberty is a new idea every time. And people are uneducated in it and afraid. They would rather grasp onto their ancient tribalism ("blood") and territorial isolation ("soil") than embrace the dangers and blessings of being free. The great march of history though is towards greater and greater liberty, and you can see its progress etched across the whole of human history even as it has floundered in some areas. As civilization grows the tribal barbarisms of the past become obsolete.

And why does freedom need to be reborn? Because people keep killing it, the vast majority of mankind don't want freedom and they kill it with depressing regularity.
Even your definition of freedom would need an area to call it's own while it tried to expand it's territory to reach the entire globe through education.

And LOL at the idea that the world is getting freer than it used to be, the world has had it's ups and downs but we are reaching unplumbed depths in modern times and it just keeps getting worse.

 

[PierzStyx]

Instructing the executive branch to not obey unconstitutional laws is following the constitution.

The President doesn't even have the power to issue such orders in the Constitution.

Further, using executive authority to circumvent and nullify the law is a violation of the Constitution. In regards to the law the President has three powers: to veto a proposed law, to pardon convicted violators of the law, and to enforce the current law.

Only Congress has the power to create or alter the law. When the President engages in such activity it is unconstitutional as he is assuming the powers held by Congress.

This order allows for insurance companies to form and operate that are currently illegal under the ACA. This means Trump is essentially creating a new law by fiat order, nullifying previous law by fiat order, and then using his position to force that law into action. In this he usurps Congressional power to create and alter law along with the Judicial power to abolish law.

Whatever you think of the ACA, and I despise it, this is nothing but another blatant violation of the US Constitution and further expansion of the centralized power of the Presidency. No constitutionalist could applaud this, but like all other Progressives you are a constitutionalist only when it is convenient. When it isn't you violate it and ignore it.

 

[PierzStyx]

And why does freedom need to be reborn? Because people keep killing it, the vast majority of mankind don't want freedom and they kill it with depressing regularity.

Even your definition of freedom would need an area to call it's own while it tried to expand it's territory to reach the entire globe through education.

And LOL at the idea that the world is getting freer than it used to be, the world has had it's ups and downs but we are reaching unplumbed depths in modern times and it just keeps getting worse.

Freedom doesn't need a territory. As an idea, or set of ideas, it transcends such petty ideas as territory. Indeed, if you think freedom has any culture then you don't understand freedom or culture.

The Internet has made it possible to use a currency completely unregulated by the State, Bitcoin, engage in free market capitalism across the world with the touch of a button without government tax interference, has given unparalleled power to the practice of the freedoms of speech, expression, religion, etc. The ideas of liberty are spreading wider than they ever have at one time in all of history. It is a great moment in the history of freedom. Certainly we still live with many of the hallmarks of the State that have always existed -taxation, imprisonment, etc.- but more than ever we are able to circumvent those if we truly wish.

 

[Swordsmyth]

The President doesn't even have the power to issue such orders in the Constitution.

Further, using executive authority to circumvent and nullify the law is a violation of the Constitution. In regards to the law the President has three powers: to veto a proposed law, to pardon convicted violators of the law, and to enforce the current law.

Only Congress has the power to create or alter the law. When the President engages in such activity it is unconstitutional as he is assuming the powers held by Congress.

This order allows for insurance companies to form and operate that are currently illegal under the ACA. This means Trump is essentially creating a new law by fiat order, nullifying previous law by fiat order, and then using his position to force that law into action. In this he usurps Congressional power to create and alter law along with the Judicial power to abolish law.

Whatever you think of the ACA, and I despise it, this is nothing but another blatant violation of the US Constitution and further expansion of the centralized power of the Presidency. No constitutionalist could applaud this, but like all other Progressives you are a constitutionalist only when it is convenient. When it isn't you violate it and ignore it.

The Constitution is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, it is enforcing it to instruct the executive branch to follow it and not illegitimate unconstitutional laws made by congress in violation of the constitution.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

How could they be if, like I said, they don't really even exist anymore?

On what are you basing this assertion?

 

[Swordsmyth]

Freedom doesn't need a territory. As an idea, or set of ideas, it transcends such petty ideas as territory. Indeed, if you think freedom has any culture then you don't understand freedom or culture.

The Internet has made it possible to use a currency completely unregulated by the State, Bitcoin, engage in free market capitalism across the world with the touch of a button without government tax interference, has given unparalleled power to the practice of the freedoms of speech, expression, religion, etc. The ideas of liberty are spreading wider than they ever have at one time in all of history. It is a great moment in the history of freedom. Certainly we still live with many of the hallmarks of the State that have always existed -taxation, imprisonment, etc.- but more than ever we are able to circumvent those if we truly wish.

If you don't have a place to be free you are not free, if those around you will kill or imprison you for acting free you are not free.

If freedom is the absence of tyranny then like the vacuum in the walls of a thermos it needs it's own space protected by walls.

 

[dannno]

On what are you basing this assertion?

The term used to have a very broad meaning encompassing a large group of people in the US, now it has a very narrow meaning and encompasses a few nutcases.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

Liberty is a culture, if too many outsiders are let in too fast they will swamp that culture rather than learn it, then liberty dies.

Didn't really mean to neg you, but I'm on a phone and can't use it well with my fat fingers. But seriously, you're starting to sound like FeS2H2O.

 

[AuH20]

Freedom derives from culture as opposed to the other way around. Some cultures are more hostile to freedom than others. The rush to erase christian based precepts in American society is not being done by accident.

 

[dannno]

Didn't really mean to neg you, but I'm on a phone and can't use it well with my fat fingers. But seriously, you're starting to sound like FeS2H2O.

lol.. you just -rep'd me for a post that was totally 100% factually correct, even though your rep comment was also factually correct it didn't contradict anything I said.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Didn't really mean to neg you, but I'm on a phone and can't use it well with my fat fingers. But seriously, you're starting to sound like FeS2H2O.

I have always been in favor of controlled immigration, I have a long post history on the subject.
The rest of the world is even less freedom oriented than we are, if we let them all in we will become no different than them, I do believe in reasonable immigration as charity to those who are seeking a better life and for our own benefit though.

P.S. glad to hear the neg was an error but I have a thick skin anyway

 

[H. E. Panqui]

...good thread..lots of food for thought...

...i've never heard any two people define 'liberty/freedom' the same way...it seems any possibility for 'liberty/freedom' is PRECISELY inversely proportional [ceteris paribus] to population...i.e. pop. 1 = maximum possible liberty/freedom, pop. 7,000,000,000 = much much less liberty/freedom possible...

...'justice' is my favorite 'ideal'...and imo, BY FAR, the biggest obstacle to 'justice' is this HIDEOUS monetary order under which most of us are [unknowingly] enslaved...'it' is THE one topic of discussion 'they' most fastidiously squelch and avoid...forever and always...now why do you suppose that is?...

“We have stricken the shackles from 4,000,000 human beings and brought all labourers to a common level, but not so much by the elevation of former slaves as by reducing the whole working population, white and black, to a condition of serfdom. While boasting of our noble deeds, we are careful to conceal the ugly fact that by our iniquitous money system we have manipulated a system of oppression which, though more refined, is no less cruel than the old system of chattel slavery.”- Horace Greeley (1811-1872), editor of the New York Tribune