Secession Is Not A Bad Idea

[StoneByStone]

Disagreed. Listen to Robert Frost and take the road less traveled. Not the same bullshit two choices every election.

In this context, the road less traveled is doing nothing. It's sitting out an election so the worse side has a better chance of winning. Maybe that's ok when it's Obama vs Romney, but this past election was a choice between an imperfect Democracy and Fascism.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

That's the problem. 2012 was the last time I voted for a Republican President. Before that, I'd voted heavily Libertarian. After that, a straight Libertarian ticket. Where no Libertarian was running, I voted for the challenger, regardless of party.

You? What's been your voting strategy?

I voted for Perot, since then it's always been Libertarian. ALWAYS. When there is no Libertarian running, I write myself in.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Serious question, do you know how the Overton Window works?

yes, I do know how it works.............I consider it every bit as evil as the lesser of two evils.........

 

[MAGA MAN]

once enough Americans realize the Parasite Class is so deeply entrenched in the halls of power there is not a chance of repealing the XVI Amendment:

Rush Limbaugh: Conservative States Are 'Trending Toward Secession'
By Jeffrey Rodack
Thursday, 10 December 2020 09:35 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/ru...conservatives-new-york/2020/12/10/id/1000877/
​

Only nine states are governed by, and elected by, the Parasite Class; nevertheless, secession will create sovereign nations. Maybe only two:

1. The United States of Big Government.

2. The United States of Limited Government.

I'd love to see this. Would be fun to have BIG energy tariffs on the Big FedCo states.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

In this context, the road less traveled is doing nothing. It's sitting out an election so the worse side has a better chance of winning. Maybe that's ok when it's Obama vs Romney, but this past election was a choice between an imperfect Democracy and Fascism.

40%, on average, do nothing. In this election, a record turnout, a third of American voters did nothing. Ergo, not the road less traveled. Just a third fork too well traveled.

There's a reason why 70% of American voters are not Democrats, a reason why 70% of American voters are not Republicans and why, on average, 40% of Americans eligible to vote , don't vote.

What are your solutions to these problems?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I voted for Perot, since then it's always been Libertarian. ALWAYS. When there is no Libertarian running, I write myself in.

I also voted for Perot, but when Clinton won, I went back to voting Republican. It was only after 2012, after the "Republican Autopsy" that I realized, to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, that the Republican party had left me to become some quasi-religious group of nutjob extremists.

 

[StoneByStone]

40%, on average, do nothing. In this election, a record turnout, a third of American voters did nothing. Ergo, not the road less traveled. Just a third fork too well traveled.

There's a reason why 70% of American voters are not Democrats, a reason why 70% of American voters are not Republicans and why, on average, 40% of Americans eligible to vote , don't vote.

What are your solutions to these problems?

TBH, I'm starting to think people who don't vote for the lesser evil are too selfish or stupid to reason with. So I guess one solution would be to explain why both sidesing is cringe. Maybe we can have everyone take a course on the subject in high school. But that probably won't change many minds.

 

[StoneByStone]

yes, I do know how it works.............I consider it every bit as evil as the lesser of two evils.........

Well, if we didn't have people trying to move the Overton Window towards workers' rights, then we'd still have a six day work week, no child labor laws, and no hazard regulations.

If you don't believe in harm reduction, then you believe political engagement is pointless.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Well, if we didn't have people trying to move the Overton Window towards workers' rights, then we'd still have a six day work week, no child labor laws, and no hazard regulations.

If you don't believe in harm reduction, then you believe political engagement is pointless.

reducing the population to government dependency is not harm reduction, it's enabling a more dangerous environment for people to be stupid. your overton window crap is nothing more than an attempt to paint any non mainstream idea or policy as extreme and radical.....

 

[StoneByStone]

reducing the population to government dependency is not harm reduction, it's enabling a more dangerous environment for people to be stupid. your overton window crap is nothing more than an attempt to paint any non mainstream idea or policy as extreme and radical.....

Literally everyone is dependent on the government and each other. It's part of living in a society.

Non-mainstream ideas aren't always bad. There are plenty of non-mainstream policies I agree with. But if you're unwilling to reduce harm any way you can, then you're useless in the political sphere. You'll never find a perfect candidate.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Literally everyone is dependent on the government and each other. It's part of living in a society.

exactly the way the authoritarians/totalitarians/statists want it..........individual freedom and liberty has to be squashed because the majority of you are terrified by the freedom of others.

Non-mainstream ideas aren't always bad. There are plenty of non-mainstream policies I agree with. But if you're unwilling to reduce harm any way you can, then you're useless in the political sphere. You'll never find a perfect candidate.

reduction of harm by reduction of freedom is more harmful

 

[NiftyNiblick]

This is an invalid debate because debate requires stipulation.

Two parties have to agree on certain facts in order to extrapolate logic to determine what else is or isn't factual.

The American left and right agree on nothing so debate is impossible.
Divorce is the answer.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

TBH, I'm starting to think people who don't vote for the lesser evil are too selfish or stupid to reason with. So I guess one solution would be to explain why both sidesing is cringe. Maybe we can have everyone take a course on the subject in high school. But that probably won't change many minds.

Too stupid or two cowardly. Probably both in many instances.

My plan would be to require every voting citizen to pass both a citizenship test, just like naturalized citizens, and something like the military ASVAB. If they are too fucking stupid to pass both, they shouldn't be voting.

That said, they are free to take the tests once every six months after completing the free courses on the subject offered every six months. The questions would be randomly chosen from a 1000-question bank, freely available to all online, to avoid cheating, hacking or "studying for the test".

 

[StoneByStone]

exactly the way the authoritarians/totalitarians/statists want it..........individual freedom and liberty has to be squashed because the majority of you are terrified by the freedom of others.

Well sometimes we're more free when other people's freedom is limited. We took away the freedom to rape and murder, but we're more free overall now because we don't have to constantly worry about rapists and murderers.

I'm sure you've heard the phrase, you have the freedom to swing your fist but not punch people. In order to have the most freedom possible, we have to restrict certain liberties.
And this is all part of harm reduction. I think that by making rape illegal, we're now more free.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Well sometimes we're more free when other people's freedom is limited. We took away the freedom to rape and murder, but we're more free overall now because we don't have to constantly worry about rapists and murderers.

no such right existed and making it illegal didn't stop the crimes anyway........all your harm reductions laws did was make it easier to do so because most women are now left unarmed and defenseless.

I think that by making rape illegal, we're now more free.

so there isn't any more rape in the country, right?

 

[StoneByStone]

no such right existed and making it illegal didn't stop the crimes anyway........all your harm reductions laws did was make it easier to do so because most women are now left unarmed and defenseless.


so there isn't any more rape in the country, right?

Laws don't eliminate crime, they reduce the amount of crime. Again, harm reduction.
If you don't believe in harm reduction, then you're basically saying there's no point in making murder illegal. After all, there will still be murders.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Laws don't eliminate crime, they reduce the amount of crime. Again, harm reduction.
If you don't believe in harm reduction, then you're basically saying there's no point in making murder illegal. After all, there will still be murders.

again, are you reducing harm by forcing people to be unarmed and defenseless?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Well sometimes we're more free when other people's freedom is limited. We took away the freedom to rape and murder, but we're more free overall now because we don't have to constantly worry about rapists and murderers.

I'm sure you've heard the phrase, you have the freedom to swing your fist but not punch people. In order to have the most freedom possible, we have to restrict certain liberties.
And this is all part of harm reduction. I think that by making rape illegal, we're now more free.

No one has a right to harm another person. Where some people get silly is by declaring my breathing is taking their air or some other equally nonsensical bullshit.

It's one thing for a town to have an ordinance stating no loud music after 10PM and another thing to pass a Federal law saying no Boom Boxes over 10 watts. One is by majority vote of a town's citizens, the other is authoritarian bullshit.

 

[Peace n Safety]

No one has a right to harm another person. Where some people get silly is by declaring my breathing is taking their air or some other equally nonsensical bullshit.

It's one thing for a town to have an ordinance stating no loud music after 10PM and another thing to pass a Federal law saying no Boom Boxes over 10 watts. One is by majority vote of a town's citizens, the other is authoritarian bullshit.

Delineation of the Samoan v Dutch. Nice. I happened be half both thanks to uncle broken rubber. Don’t listen to this beta male nonsense. We fight that’s life.


Blessings

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Laws don't eliminate crime, they reduce the amount of crime. Again, harm reduction.
If you don't believe in harm reduction, then you're basically saying there's no point in making murder illegal. After all, there will still be murders.

Where do you draw the limit? Ban cars? About 40,000 Americans dead every year. Ban suicide? Closer to 50,000 Americans dead every year. McDonald's?

Where do you draw the line on dictating to people how to live, what to think and how to believe?