The Current Totalitarian State

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

Easy. How many people have that as an option?

In 2010 it's not likely to come in the foem of border controls and gulags, but is happening in thought control and incapacity. The best jails are the ones where you can't see the bars.

Or perhaps you'd like to express personally held opinions which run counter to the mainstream "permitted thinking"; such as whether you'd like to draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammed, or maybe you'd just like to open your house to paying guests who'd like a smoke?

but you are clearly not an apparatchik, so i dont understand how it can be totalitarian and yet you could still succeed and be able to hurt the state by removing your wealth accrued under the state permanently

Edited May 1, 2010 by Tamara De Lempicka

[oracle]

hmmmm.

jack straw condemning england for "brutal" treatment of irish and scots!!!ha!!!!

good one!

he needs to go back to school and learn some history.

a couple of centuries before that,the irish and scots celts were giving the romans and normans a hiding!

the english meekly caved in and took it up the @rse from the invaders.

much as he'd like to soften the country up by stealth,he ought to keep those opinions in mind.

there is a steel within this country(and ireland) that will dig it's heels in.That "propensity for violence"" as he refers to it,may end up coming back to haunt him and his KGB lackies.

feigned diplomacy or not...britain and ireland are BOTH getting pissed off.

a,la lisbon treaty.

what part of the word NO,do you not fecking understand?

Edited May 1, 2010 by oracle

[TGP]

Easy. How many people have that as an option?

Emigration ? Everyone. This is a liberal democracy. Anyone who can afford the (capitalist) transport costs to the border may leave.

If you REALLY lived in a totalitarian state ? almost no-one. A few party apparatchniks. Olympic Athletes. . Scientists. They'd have an opportunity to leave, and could use it to not return. The bulk of the population ? No. The border guards would stop them, then imprison or execute them for the attempt.

In 2010 it's not likely to come in the foem of border controls and gulags, but is happening in thought control and incapacity. The best jails are the ones where you can't see the bars.

But jails without bars are also "free" jails. If the jail is only you own thoughts.... then where is the jail ? You are as free to change your thoughts as the next man. You are as free to teach others your changed thoughts as the next man. All you need to do is decide to leave the jail. Thats not an option in a "real" jail.

What do you think would happen to people like you, Bogbrush, in a genuinely totalitarian state ? Stalins russia, say ? People who spend their free time rubbishing the government, and organising with like minded people to create a new system, who copy and disseminate ideas and literature promoting that fact ? That essentially gather in a puclic place and publicly dissent and argue against the government ?

You'd be in a REAL Gulag.... One with REAL bars... and REAL deaths... and REAL privation... and REAL pain.

It's all very well saying "Totalitarianism is making people think certain ways, and doesn't involve real bars"... that this is equivalent to "real totalitarianism with real bars".... I don't notice you emigrating to North Korea in order to put this theory into action. You know it's not the same. If it WERE the same.... you wouldn;t be on here talking about anarchism.... because you'd be fearing the jackboots and the death and the pain.

Or perhaps you'd like to express personally held opinions which run counter to the mainstream "permitted thinking"; such as whether you'd like to draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammed, or maybe you'd just like to open your house to paying guests who'd like a smoke?

I see, so not being able to let guests smoke in a private enterprise is fully equivalent to taking people like you and executing them for speaking their minds ?

It is not. You are free to advocate your POV. You are free to organise to get that implemented. If you were actually successful in persuading people..... you could win an election and actually implement your ideas. You could smoke in guesthouses to your hearts content OR create an anarchist state IF you persuaded enough people, and you are free to try and persuade as many as you wish. In fact the government will work to PROTECT you while you do so against anyone using force to stop you disseminating this idea.

Your problem is NOT a totalitarian state oppressing you and dealing death to people who disagree with them.... it is that your arguments are so weak you can't convince anything other than a tiny percentage of people that they are good ideas (on anarchism)... and less weak, but still not noticably successful, in the case of smoking in bars.

There IS a difference between being allowed to try, and failing....... and being executed for even trying.

It's the difference between "Liberal Democracies" and "Totalitarian States".

Yours,

TGP

[bogbrush]

Emigration ? Everyone. This is a liberal democracy. Anyone who can afford the (capitalist) transport costs to the border may leave.

If you REALLY lived in a totalitarian state ? almost no-one. A few party apparatchniks. Olympic Athletes. . Scientists. They'd have an opportunity to leave, and could use it to not return. The bulk of the population ? No. The border guards would stop them, then imprison or execute them for the attempt.

"Anyone who can afford the (capitalist) transport costs to the border may leave", Exactly.

Er.. athletes and scientists were always leaving the USSR> Wasn't that totalitarian then?

But jails without bars are also "free" jails. If the jail is only you own thoughts.... then where is the jail ? You are as free to change your thoughts as the next man. You are as free to teach others your changed thoughts as the next man. All you need to do is decide to leave the jail. Thats not an option in a "real" jail.

What do you think would happen to people like you, Bogbrush, in a genuinely totalitarian state ? Stalins russia, say ? People who spend their free time rubbishing the government, and organising with like minded people to create a new system, who copy and disseminate ideas and literature promoting that fact ? That essentially gather in a puclic place and publicly dissent and argue against the government ?

You'd be in a REAL Gulag.... One with REAL bars... and REAL deaths... and REAL privation... and REAL pain.

It's all very well saying "Totalitarianism is making people think certain ways, and doesn't involve real bars"... that this is equivalent to "real totalitarianism with real bars".... I don't notice you emigrating to North Korea in order to put this theory into action. You know it's not the same. If it WERE the same.... you wouldn;t be on here talking about anarchism.... because you'd be fearing the jackboots and the death and the pain.

Ok, do some free things that the state profoundly disagrees with. Try it for size.

I see, so not being able to let guests smoke in a private enterprise is fully equivalent to taking people like you and executing them for speaking their minds ?

It is not. You are free to advocate your POV. You are free to organise to get that implemented. If you were actually successful in persuading people..... you could win an election and actually implement your ideas. You could smoke in guesthouses to your hearts content OR create an anarchist state IF you persuaded enough people, and you are free to try and persuade as many as you wish. In fact the government will work to PROTECT you while you do so against anyone using force to stop you disseminating this idea.

Your problem is NOT a totalitarian state oppressing you and dealing death to people who disagree with them.... it is that your arguments are so weak you can't convince anything other than a tiny percentage of people that they are good ideas (on anarchism)... and less weak, but still not noticably successful, in the case of smoking in bars.

There IS a difference between being allowed to try, and failing....... and being executed for even trying.

It's the difference between "Liberal Democracies" and "Totalitarian States".

Yours,

TGP

You think that the oprion to win the election (for F*cks sake!) means I'm free to organise my smoking club?

Are you really with us here?

By the way, PLEASE can you learn the joy of brevity in prose?

Edited May 1, 2010 by bogbrush

[erranta]

hmmmm.

jack straw condemning england for "brutal" treatment of irish and scots!!!ha!!!!

good one!

he needs to go back to school and learn some history.

a couple of centuries before that,the irish and scots celts were giving the romans and normans a hiding!

the english meekly caved in and took it up the @rse from the invaders.

much as he'd like to soften the country up by stealth,he ought to keep those opinions in mind.

there is a steel within this country(and ireland) that will dig it's heels in.That "propensity for violence"" as he refers to it,may end up coming back to haunt him and his KGB lackies.

feigned diplomacy or not...britain and ireland are BOTH getting pissed off.

a,la lisbon treaty.

what part of the word NO,do you not fecking understand?

The Normans were our cousins!

They were all settled VIKING extraction in North Coastal France (why they were so brutal)

The ODD ones out are SCOTS who are of SCYTHIAN (SIDHE) (VLAD THE IMPALER COUNTRY) extraction apparently.

Their distant cousins are POLES, Central Europeans, KAZAKSTANIS

The Romans fought with Celts who had curved swords!

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_tuathadedanaan01.htm

"As Professor Margaret Murray discovered herself, vampirism was not the prerogative of the merchant or peasant classes, but was a cultic observance confined to the environs of the nobility, often as an adjunct to rites of the Noble and Royal Witch Covens of Scotland"

Hence all the posted 'VEILED' references to Giant "VAMPIRE" Squids proxy-symbolistic dragon praise!

[erranta]

That's the Stockholm bit.

Stock - holm(an OAK tree Norse Mythology etc)

Commonly known as "HOLLY-OAKS"

MAY ring a bell with some of you! Proxy-Praise!

[Guest Noodle]

Stock - holm(an OAK tree Norse Mythology etc)

Commonly known as "HOLLY-OAKS"

MAY ring a bell with some of you! Proxy-Praise!

Sorry Pattie, I've no idea what you're on about.

[TGP]

"Anyone who can afford the (capitalist) transport costs to the border may leave", Exactly.

Yes. You were saying "very few people can afford to leave".... as the fares are currently under £100, how can you say "Exactly" ? Almost everyone can afford that fare. Sh*t, with the current govt's "£250 trust fund for each child" policy they GUARANTEE you have that fare, gratis courtesy of the rest of us, at age 18 !!!!

Er.. athletes and scientists were always leaving the USSR> Wasn't that totalitarian then?

Yes.... thats what I was saying. In a true totalitarian country the only ones who could get out were the party apparatchniks, the olympic athletes and the scientists. NO ONE ELSE. (Well, some spies and soldiers had the opportunity too). These were the examples I was using of who COULD get out under totalitarianism... and so, yes, the USSR was totalitarian.

Ok, do some free things that the state profoundly disagrees with. Try it for size.

Ah, but there is a difference between the liberal democratic state and the totalitarian state.

In a liberal democracy what the state "profoundly disagrees with" is largely limited to a) Acts that affect other citizens in a negative manner and that those citizens generally more or less agree they want the state to enforce on their behalf.

In a totalitarian state there are those categories.... but there are NEW categories of things you may not do... like ANYTHING to harm/change that state or which shows it in a bad light..... or ANY attempt to share unapproved thoughts and ideas with others.

I am aware that the government will put you in jail for murder. In both liberal democracies and totalitarian states.... but that doesn't make liberal democracies totalitarian. It's when the state will put you in jail.... for disagreeing, peacefully attempting to change things or simply exercising your right to leave the state that they become totalitarian. It's when changing the system (or leaving it) becomes illegal that you have a totalitarian state.

You think that the oprion to win the election (for F*cks sake!) means I'm free to organise my smoking club?

Freeer than you are in a totalitarian state, yes.

I am not saying you have unlimited freedom in a liberal democracy.... But you DO have the freedom to organise to change the system..... and so while you may not be free to start your smoking club, you ARE free to try and get the rules changed so you can have a smoking club. Do you doubt that SHOULD you form a "lets all smoke" party... and SHOULD that party win the election.... the "state" would not let you change the law ?

This is not an option any totalitarian state offers. Even attempting to do so will quickly find you freezing to death in a gulag.

It may not be easy to get the rules changed...... persuading millions of people your ideas are good ones rarely is..... but you have a chance, you are welcome to try, no one will stop you. That is not the same as a totalitarian state where people WILL stop you, often by simply killing you and leaving your corpse as a warning to others who might think of attempting the same thing.

Are you really with us here?

By the way, PLEASE can you learn the joy of brevity in prose?

Only if you learn the joy of recognising the difference between "Being within a system that allows you to change it if you dislike it OR leave it if you can;t changeit and find it to onerous to stand" and "Being within a system that would kill or injure you for merely talking with others about what you beleive is right and attempting to change the system OR kill/injure/jail you for any attempt to leave/escape the system you find onerous".

Yours,

TGP

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

Sorry Pattie, I've no idea what you're on about.

im sure its the helsinki syndrome , i saw it on a film

yippeekiyaa

[erranta]

im sure its the helsinki syndrome , i saw it on a film

yippeekiyaa

Compart-Mentalised Drone!

[Guest Noodle]

im sure its the helsinki syndrome , i saw it on a film

yippeekiyaa

Dunno. I just get this stuff off re-runs of Magnum Force.

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

Dunno. I just get this stuff off re-runs of Magnum Force.

blonde bikers, thats a wrongun

[InternationalRockSuperstar]

see sig.

[pyracantha]

Sorry Pattie, I've no idea what you're on about.

I think it's a lizard people thing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke

[Guest Noodle]

I think it's a lizard people thing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke

Oh I loved Wogan.

[TGP]

see sig.

[sIG]

if you do not pay your taxes, your extortion, you will get a letter - and then another letter - and then a court date - and then another extortion notice for back taxes, interests and penalties. if you do not pay off this extortion, armed thugs in costume will come to your house and drag you to jail. if you resist, you will be brutally subdued. if you raise a gun to defend yourself against this home invasion, you will be slaughtered like livestock in a hail of bullets. in jail, you will be brutalised, tortured, raped for months and years. you may be released, eventually, like Winston Smith, a broken and shattered soul.

Sigh.

And wheres the bit in the sig which says "If you don't like the taxes/services taxes pay for you can go and live somewhere that doesn't tax you, taking all your wealth, and not a souil will stop you" ?

Or the bit in between receiving the "notice" and "being dragged off" where 12 people chsen at random from the population review your case...... and if you can convince them this is extortion and unfair/unjust you can go home entirely free and unmolested without paying a bean ?

Or the bit where if you feel such taxes are extortion you are entirely free to end them entirely IF you can convince enough of your fellow human beings that this is a good idea ?

Or, finally, the bit where you do so..... end all taxation...... and then you all die as no-one has been paying for sensible public health measures and you all contracted cholera because sh*t now runs in the streets ?

What that sig omits are any and all references to the parts of taxation that make it reasonably fair, just and useful.

Yours,

TGP

[InternationalRockSuperstar]

And wheres the bit in the sig which says "If you don't like the taxes/services taxes pay for you can go and live somewhere that doesn't tax you, taking all your wealth, and not a souil will stop you" ?

geographic location in no way justifies the horrific actions in my sig.

[TGP]

geographic location in no way justifies the horrific actions in my sig.

Well,

In so far as your sig is not a true reflection of taxation.... then no. Geographic location does not justify extortion then murder, if this was extortion and murder it couldn;t be justified like that.

On the other hand, geographic location DOES justify taxation as it is actually practised in Liberal Democracies.

If you don't like the social contract in that area when it includes taxation.... then you have to go elsewhere, where there is a contract with no taxation or no contract at all.

Just as if someone doesn't like the rent you levy on your property... they must go elsewhere where they like the rent the owner levies, or where there is no rent at all.....when they stay and refuse to pay, a similar litany of horrific actions ensued involving men who drag you to jail and so on.

It's the same "horrific" actions. You can even describe them in exactly the same way, if you want to be an ass about it.

if you do not pay your rent, your property owners extortion, you will get a letter - and then another letter - and then a court date - and then another extortion notice for back rent, interests and penalties. if you do not pay off this extortion, armed thugs in costume will come to your house and drag you to jail. if you resist, you will be brutally subdued. if you raise a gun to defend yourself against this home invasion, you will be slaughtered like livestock in a hail of bullets. in jail, you will be brutalised, tortured, raped for months and years. you may be released, eventually, like Winston Smith, a broken and shattered soul.

Doesn't alter the fact that you have a right to charge fees for the use of your property. Does me describing it that way suddenly mean you consider charging for the use of your property horrific extortion ?

Geographic location excuses that.... that geographic location is your property, and he doesn't have a right to be there soaking up services (like walls and a roof) you paid for. He's got a choice of paying or leaving. If he wasn't in that geographic location that would be a horrific thing to do to him.... if you prevented him from leaving that would be a horrific thing to do to him........ only that location, your relationship to it and his ability to leave whenever he wishes justify those actions.

It's the same with nations and taxes, for largely the same reason.

Yours,

TGP

[InternationalRockSuperstar]

Geographic location does not justify extortion

,,,

geographic location DOES justify taxation

same thing.

weird how you think extracting money from people by threatening them with kidnapping and locking up in institutionalised rape rooms is somehow not extortion.

If you don't like the social contract in that area when it includes taxation.... then you have to go elsewhere, where there is a contract with no taxation or no contract at all.

blatant contradiction of terns.

contracts require agreement, whereas taxation requires coercion.

Just as if someone doesn't like the rent you levy on your property... they must go elsewhere where they like the rent the owner levies, or where there is no rent at all.....when they stay and refuse to pay, a similar litany of horrific actions ensued involving men who drag you to jail and so on.

...

and why would I pay rents to a landlord class when I could just build my own home somewhere on the >90% of this island that is undeveloped?

[TGP]

Geographic location does not justify extortion

,,,

geographic location DOES justify taxation

same thing.

No it isn't.

weird how you think extracting money from people by threatening them with kidnapping and locking up in institutionalised rape rooms is somehow not extortion.

weird how you think extracting money from people by threatening them with kidnapping and locking up in institutionalised rape rooms is somehow not extortion.

Afterall, that is what you'd do to someone squatting in your house and refusing to pay rent, right ? You'd point out it was your house.... and they're free to leave.... or they're free to stay and pay rent.... but if they stay and don't pay rent, it'll be jail for them eventually. How weird is that ? You extorting them and threatening them with rape rooms if they don;t comply ? You're freaking weird dude.

No ?

If you don't like the social contract in that area when it includes taxation.... then you have to go elsewhere, where there is a contract with no taxation or no contract at all.

blatant contradiction of terns.

No it isn't. In this geographic area there is a contract which all people within that area are expected to fulfil. In return they get the benefits of that contract. The responsibilities include taxation the benefits include, say, roads or public health.

Just as anyone in your house would be expected to pay rent (the responsibility) and in return receive the benefits (roof, walls etc). They can reject BOTH by leaving. Or accept BOTH by staying. You wouldn't allow them to stay and reap the benefit of the roof without paying for it. If they try to do so, and after you have taken all reasonable steps to settle this in a less extreme manner it'd be what you call the institutionalized rape rooms for them, although I'd prefer to call that jail.

contracts require agreement, whereas taxation requires coercion.

But the person squatting in your house signed no contract with you to pay rent. He just walked in the door one day, sat there, and demanded to live rent free. When you point out to him it's rent or leave or jail. He refuses to pay rent or leave. BUT he made no agreement with you to do so. There is no written contract you can point to. Does he, therefore, have a right to live their rent free ?

Are you saying that because there was no agreement between you..... then he is entitled to sit there enjoying the walls, roof and other amenities you paid for rent free ?

No. He isn't. Despite the fact that there was no agreement for him to pay rent.... if he stays he has to pay.... and if he stays and refuses you are entitled to have goons come and take him to court (where if he is found guilty he'll go to jail/institutionalized rape rooms for trespass).

Taxation/States work off the same contract Property Rights/Your house do. In neither case must everyone in the country sign an agreement. You own your house and have the right to levy rents there even IF some people refuse to accept that as valid. The people of the UK "own" this geographic area and have the right to levy taxes there even IF some people refuse to accept that as valid.

You no more have a right to stay in that area and refuse....... then I have a right to climb in your window and live in your house without paying rent. In BOTH cases if the person refuses to leave we are entitled to start justice proceedings that may (if he's found guilty by 12 randomly chosen peers) end in men dragging him away to jail.

and why would I pay rents to a landlord class when I could just build my own home somewhere on the >90% of this island that is undeveloped?

Because the land IS developed, even those bits of it you think are not.

British people chopped down the woods that were once over this entire island. They defend it with their blood from attack today and have done so for thousands of years. Any building materials you made your houses from would be protected by their laws and arrive through the transportation networks they built. When you needed goods not grown on your subsistence farm, they would also be protected by the same laws and arrive via the same infrastructure. Whatsmore, you are protected on that land by the police and the "institutionalized rape rooms" that are holding murderers and rapists who would otherwise be free to access that land and murder/rape you. Other humans you meet and interact with would have been educated by that country, so they could read and count well enough to do business with you. You wouldn't catch cholera from them because of the public health measures, like sewers, and you wouldn't catch other nasty diseases because they were immunized..... .and so on..... that land IS developed.

You are entirely free to go to some land that is genuinely undeveloped (and whose social contract reflects that) and build your tax free house there.... perhaps an ice floe in the arctic.... or somalia.... or places like the pakistan/afghanistani tribal areas.... even some tax havens have social contracts you might find more agreeable. If you want to live tax free, go there.

Build it HERE .... on the island the british people own in commonwealth, and have developed and protected, and who continue to do so.... and you have to pay the "rent" that our social contract specifies for that. Thats known as "taxes".

Yours,

TGP

[bogbrush]

TGP, you're a waffler and a windbag.

I can't be arsed reading your posts any more until you learn how to express yourself succinctly.

[OnlyMe]

What a load of tosh. I hope you didn't pay for that "analysis". Another internet nutball pissing into the wind.

And I like the way his postulated (on a load of tosh) future totalitarian state became an existing and current totalitarian state in your thread title.

Just how is the current US state, which is democratic and includes guarantees of it's citizens freedoms, totalitarian ? If you think it is, you've badly misunderstood what totalitarian means.

Yours,

TGP

Have you got a time machine and posting from the web in the 60's?

[TGP]

TGP, you're a waffler and a windbag.

I can't be arsed reading your posts any more until you learn how to express yourself succinctly.

Lol.

Fine, you can't handle arguments expressed in just a few sentences..... I can't force you.

I would have thought anyone wishing to argue politics/economics would have been prepared to read half a page of A4 though. Thats one LOW intellectual threshold you've got there. How do you cope basing your politics/economics only on things that can be summarized in less words than that ?

Come to think of it... maybe that explains why your iPeas about politics are so simplistic as to be unworkable.

Yours,

TGP

[TGP]

Have you got a time machine and posting from the web in the 60's?

Someone getting tasered does not a totalitarian state make.

If you lot had your anarchist utopia.... and some home owner tasered someone on his property... would that prove that your anarchist utopia was a totalitarian dictatorship ?

For the record, I deeply disagree with the use of tasers. IMO they should only be used in circumstances where an officer would normally use a gun. In any other circumstances they should not be used. Nevertheless, despite my disagreement with how they are used ..... they do not make a totalitarian state. No more than the old police truncheons did. Or the fact that homeowners (or guards they hire to protect their property) may have tasers or truncheons do.

In your anarchist utopia.... when you have a guard to look over your gold stash.... what will he be armed with ? Or are you going to trust every other member of your utopia NOT to walk off with your krugerrands ?

Yours,

TGP

[bogbrush]

Lol.

Fine, you can't handle arguments expressed in just a few sentences..... I can't force you.

I would have thought anyone wishing to argue politics/economics would have been prepared to read half a page of A4 though. Thats one LOW intellectual threshold you've got there. How do you cope basing your politics/economics only on things that can be summarized in less words than that ?

Come to think of it... maybe that explains why your iPeas about politics are so simplistic as to be unworkable.

Yours,

TGP

Was it Oscar Wilde who wrote to a friend regretting that he would have written a short letter but he didn't have the time? Another intellectual lightweight I guess.

You must think intelligence and power of argument is directly proportionate to the volume of words. Sadly, it's generally the opposite.

PS I'd be happy to read half a page, it's just that you fit so little into it.