Is the Revolution a Myth in the Republican Party?

[RobHino]

This is my understanding too...

If the r3volution is only civil disobedience, then the State that agents of the revolution ignore will just pound them into dungeons. There needs to be a street component, mobilizing the forces of the people AND a corresponding civic wing mobilizing the political classes to defend their rights to do this.

And the opposite is true too, if the revolution is only about civics and politics, then the reps will never know how the people on the streets feel. Hence, my original comment:

There are 3 ways to make the change we all want. All 3 ways are completely necessary, but one has proved most effective over time. The first way is to run for political office and become a politician. The second is to work through the party process to lobby your representatives to bring about the change you desire. The third, and most effective way to bring change, is through civil disobedience....think of Rosa Parks, Ghandi, the Civil Rights Movement, Anti-Slavery Riots, etc.

From a friend, "Working within electoral politics influences politicians. Civil disobedience educates the people. The primary problem is the people."

Inside the convention center in Tampa, there were several thousand people. Outside the center, there are 300 million people.

So, if some people feel they can be more effective running for office, or working through the party process, or by civil disobedience, we should all do everything we can to advance Liberty, and as Qadoshyah says, not rail on those who choose to work through the party process to build on what was already gained.

 

[RobHino]

Really? So if I fire my gun into a crowd, and I don't hit anyone, it's a victimless crime and I can just go on about my business and keep doing it until I inevitably do hit someone?

Getting shot at seems like an act of aggression to me...no?

...unlike some of you I am not into this whole extreme anti-govt philosophy. There is alot of govt I'd love to take an axe to but saying you should waste my tax dollars "defending yourself from the state" when you are in the wrong is beyond baffling.

Who gets to define "wrong" as going 72 mph...the 51%? Who benefits (cui bono?) from ticketing someone several hundred dollars for going 2 miles over the suggested speed limit? Does society benefit from misallocating several hundred dollars out of the private sector and into the city coffers? Victimless crimes are something you should do more research on apparently. I'm not an anarchist, and while I admit government will virtually always fail, I do believe there is a legitimate role for SOME local government...although given it's track record, I'd be more inclined in this stage of humanity, with all the technology and communication structures, to trust people acting in their own interest and getting in voluntary contracts rather than the aggressive force of government. I'm still learning in this area, and I don't claim to have all the answers, or be all knowing.

 

[Butchie]

Attempted murder is the straw man you bring up when talking about speeding? Your scenario has real victims and an attempt at their lives. My scenario is every day where I go over the speed limit and victimize nobody. Nice straw man.

Are you such a statist that you don't know how to drive safely without the hired goons telling you how to do it?

You accusse me of a strawman? Who says when I fire my gun I'm trying to hit anyone? Maybe I'm trying NOT to hit anyone, that's not the point, the point is it's dangerous and puts people's lives at risk, just as speeding does, so therefore, whether I'm trying to hit people, or trying to avoid them is irrelevant, you know damn well you'd call the cops on me if I did it.

If you speed everyday all I can do is pray you get caught, and I hope they take your license as you obviously don't deserve one. I know perfectly well how to drive safely, it's because of people like you that we need traffic laws and "hired goons" to enforce them.

Getting shot at seems like an act of aggression to me...no?



Who gets to define "wrong" as going 72 mph...the 51%? Who benefits (cui bono?) from ticketing someone several hundred dollars for going 2 miles over the suggested speed limit? Does society benefit from misallocating several hundred dollars out of the private sector and into the city coffers? Victimless crimes are something you should do more research on apparently. I'm not an anarchist, and while I admit government will virtually always fail, I do believe there is a legitimate role for SOME local government...although given it's track record, I'd be more inclined in this stage of humanity, with all the technology and communication structures, to trust people acting in their own interest and getting in voluntary contracts rather than the aggressive force of government. I'm still learning in this area, and I don't claim to have all the answers, or be all knowing.

I've yet to see a cop pull someone over for going 2miles an hour over the limit, yes, I know, everyone loves to tell that story, but every cop I know says they won't even bother unless you're doing atleast 10 over. As for who gets to determine the speed limit, well who gets to determine any law? Are you saying we live in a society with no laws? Do you also think traffic lights and stop signs are wrong? How about school zones? Being "forced" to drive in the right lane instead of the left?

I still chuckle everytime I hear one of you use this phrase "vicitmless crime", everything is 'victimless' till something goes wrong. Would you want a doctor operating on you who was drunk, he may not mean to screw you up, therefore there would be no "act of aggression" but that makes little difference. I will say again, I DO think there are some functions for which we need govt, those of you who think roads should be your own personal drag stips: Well, go buy your own island then you can do whatever you want, but as long as you live in a society you are going to have to follow some rules, your rights end where mine begin.

 

[torchbearer]

If you're speeding, you ARE doing something wrong, so yes, you have something to worry about.

the act of going any certain speed is not immoral.
killing or injuring someone while driving recklessly is immoral and wrong.