A New Agreement, Just Between Us Friends
View this post on Hive: A New Agreement, Just Between Us Friends
7 years ago in #steemit by valued-customer (67)
$3.54
- Past Payouts $3.54, 0.00 TRX
- - Author $2.90, 0.00 TRX
- - Curators $0.63, 0.00 TRX
Government is something we all do
nope.
Government is a mental disease. It's the functional equivalent of cancer. It's progress is directly parallell. Once the tumor get's too large (beyond Dunbars Number) it spreads (metastisize)...grows, causes great pain and disruption, and is eventually fatal.
I suspect you confine the term to politics, as we have been taught. When you move your foot from one side of the bed to the other, you are governing your foot. Being alive is governing.
You are a government, no matter what you call it. What I want is to bring us back to the actuality that we are governing, despite your insistence that you wouldn't touch governing with a ten foot pole.
Call it by any word you like. Managing your own affairs, agreeing with others to mutually respect one another. I don't care much, really.
I just want to get together with my friends and agree on those things we do and then act to take responsibility for our agreement, rather than let the imposition of rulers that I have no truck with, nor influence over, be supposed to be something I consent to.
I reckon we have plenty we agree on, despite semantics over specific words, but also things we don't, and when we set them out, we can respect both, on purpose - without letting gummint get in the way of our agreements.
exactly right.
English (and even Texan)
is chock full of hijacked words.
words can be twisted to mean
ANYTHING
you want them to.
but once again
I
AGREE
with what you said.
I learned a bit of Texian when I was down that way, Austin mostly, but a few Hellish days in Houston, and some nice visits to Franklin. Austin was fun. Franklin was good folks. Houston is a swamp full of people I can live without.
Sadly, I never made it to Bastrop. I knew a fella named Steele Nixon, from Beaumont. He said he met a girl once (he did that a lot. Me too. Texas if full of 'em) who asked where he was from, and when he told her Beaumont, she replied "Oh! What kind of truck do you drive?"
I laughed. He drove a Ford pickup.
we call Austin 'berkley east' and houston is 'nyc south'.
not real texas..
NOTHING like the rest of the state.
I spose Austin is choked with SJW's now, but it was a lot of fun for a guy from Alaska at 27. 6th St. was incredible. Shit kicking goat ropers in Maggie Mae's and punk rocker zipper faces right across the street in the metal clubs. Halloween they barricaded off the middle of 6th St. and the cops stayed inside the barricades, trying to swipe bottles of booze from the obviously drunk that came in range.
I recall estimates in excess of 60k people went to the party. That was an event.
yup..that was then.
this is now.
toooooo many people waz having toooooo much (un-regulated) fun.
that's Got to end.
So, in order to better understand, your first reply was 'government.. nope...'
But after my response you state you agree with what I said, so I'm wondering, was my post unclear? Did I kick myself in the nucken futz by using too many words I don't unnerstand, or were you merely commenting as to our mutual dislike of the present form government undertakes?
I do get carried away with words. I oughta join one of those 12 step programs for people that talk too much. I reckon Onan'onAnon is the one for me.
I agree with your conclusions
I just don't agree with your reasoning
I agree with the WHAT.
not the WHY
I would like to know where I erred. I thought the why was clearly that it is we ourselves who are sovereign, the bearer of our rights, and responsible for our use of them. The present fallacy of government is in the way of our exercise of our duty, at best, and inflicted on us maliciously, in practice.
Izzat not the tl;dr version of my post?
in my not so humble opinion
your error is the concept of 'maliciously'.
that implies prior intent.
government doesn't have that.
not guilty by reason of insanity.
government is a mental illness.
nuckin futz.
Well, I'll ponder on how to better (and more concisely) word it, so as to communicate that the malice is on the part of those using bureaucracies and the like for their personal ends. An entity 'government' isn't capable of doing a damn thing. It's the people occupying the jobs, and the people corrupting them, that effect what we call government nowadays.
Depends on context. I govern my children, or I could hire a governess.
I'm sure the word was chosen specifically by the state to engender confusion between legitimate governance and their special brand of terrorism.
the state is insane.
you give it MUCH too much credit.
I certainly hope so.
there is absolutely no doubt in my mind. A brief look at history (which is a lie, which further confirms my contention) or a life long in-depth study validates my claim. The Iron Law of the Crazy Donkies
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":
First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.
Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.
The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
George Washington knew that.
John Wayne knew that.
the only antidote is to THINK
we know this.
the entire purpose of the US Constitution was to be a restraining order of Government Power.
How's that working out for us?
I agree. I sometimes think there are two voluntaryist/ancap camps;
Those who think the government is a malicious, scheming entity, and those who think it's just a collection of malicious, scheming entities.
Looks like you and I each subscribe to the latter, which is great if true.
It means those few scheming entities who comprehend crypto will use that knowledge to feather their own nests, rather than burn political capital on trying to educate and mobilise their fellow schemers against the existential threat to the state.
My Philosophy of Life
(see my last post)
is that
the whole world is crazy
except for me and you
and I'm not too sure
about you
there is no
"State"
there are only a whole lot of people infected with various types of mind virus.
they are all nukin' futz.
Libertarians are funny. No matter how much we all agree, we all have those differences too! I like what you're doing. I think it's a good idea and I don't know how I can or will help but I am willing haha!
@valued-customer, I don't know why, but I didn't see any ping/notification that you had mentioned me in this post. I, literally, happened upon it 'cause I came to your blog page to follow you (thought I had done that awhile ago!), and to see your posts.
And you know WHY I came over here hunting? Because of the incredible comment you left on my post about SativaYoga and being in your body. I was so blown away by the lushness you described. I craved more of your writing...
So came over here to get some... scrolled down past Re-steems, and was immediately drawn to this title's post! Obviously, I self-identify as "friend" :-)
And to then be met with a mention!! I honestly had no idea... was just the most pleasant surprise, so THANK YOU FOR THAT.
Now, as far as what I can happily, voluntarily pledge as your friend on this platform:
(1) First of all, thank you for being so principled as to ask!
(2) No one has ever done that with me before, nor have I done so with anyone, though I have considered what, exactly, terms of friendship might look like with/among those open to voluntaryist ideals, so it's cool to be able to put some conscious thought into this. That said, I'm sure I'd want to revisit this in time, but for now...
(3) I believe the best relationships have the least need of rules. I am a bio-philiac, so I align with whatever AFFIRMS LIFE. Generally, that means to me positivity that is brave and honest. I will always endeavor to be those things with you. Offering support and upliftment, whenever inspired and able to. That's my default intention. And also, to reflect back the high-quality attention you have gifted me.
Thanks for the richness of your thoughts, heart and writing. Upvoted. Resteemed. Deeply admired.
Wow. I am humbled by your regard.
It may actually have been your work and posts that triggered my upheaval, as I'm kinda focused on intellectual endeavors, consciously, but you reveal more subtle and less measurable realities about us. So, I was met with a kind of cognitive dissonance that dislodged me from my focus on less meaningful, but more easily measurable things.
You have probably influenced me more than I can relate. I write from the hip, and your influence was integral to my epiphany.
Also, thanks for substantively contributing to the actual purpose of the post. I seem to have failed in my intention to collect bits and pieces of text I could conjoin to form a document - a government - we could intentionally set our hands to, that might replace the insinuations and coercions we are currently subject to.
While more may yet come, you (alone, so far as I know presently) did produce exactly what I seek. Thanks for that.
I'm not necessarily entirely discouraged, as I don't have a great deal of expectation of my being some kind of catalyst for the change I want to see happen (I actually felt pretty presumptuous at my temerity in making the attempt), but I am interested in any thoughts you may have on how to proceed from here to do that.
What do you think I can do to proceed from here?
Edit: LOL I forgot to mention that I wholeheartedly agree with your pledge! I love the word 'biophiliac' too =D
"An agreement between friends that can grow". An ambitious undertaking, considering that we are individualists, first and foremost. Are we building a foundation with structure that will allow each person to maintain autonomy and yet somehow provide a platform for supporting all others in their sovereignty? Are we attempting to build a society somewhat like an existing 12 step program, such as AA, which employs the 12 traditions? This existing society works remarkably well and the study of it could provide some ideas that we might incorporate into our agreements.
My intention is ambitious to the point that I experienced some cognitive dissonance. I have practically no expectation that I could actually start something as significant as a foundation for maintaining individual autonomy while potentiating mutual support and assistance, yet I realized that I know of no other attempt to do this, and I reckon it needs doing, so I just did it.
I aim to commence the process of people agreeing with one another how they are willing to interact; agreements they actually set their hands to voluntarily, rather than being assumed to consent to.
I am seeking contributions to such agreements from folks that I, and anyone else wanting to, can sign on to.
Got any thoughts on how best to proceed? I wanna hear them.
We socialists would call that a commune
You interested in building a community on the blockchain? Membership, rules, organisation and discussions but everything based on the blockchain, no discord, no steemit.chat
I am all about community, however, I am a rabid autarchist. I'll certainly be willing to avoid other media lol
The idea was that each participant could create the laws they agree to abide by, and others could say "Hmm. I can do business with that guy, if we each agree to these particular rules, but also agree not to try to impose any others on each other." , while others might think "That guys nuts. I'm never gonna be able to work things out with him."
This would allow those that have compatible laws to cooperate, while not forcing those with incompatible laws to be forced to comply. All interactions and commerce could be completely voluntary.
Given that each person is completely free to change their mind at any time, those who discover they are essentially shunned can decide to compromise, and accept rules they might prefer not to, except that they prefer to undertake commerce (or need to) and therefore can accept a given set of laws compatible with those able to provide such business as they require.
However, changing your mind after being contractually obligated wouldn't sever the contract already undertaken, unless you decide that's what you want to do, in which case there would be a cause of action the injured party could bring, to recover damages for breach of contract, if there were any.
These things would need to be considered up front, so that going in, you'd know what the recourse was in the event of default.
It is a complex scheme, and apparently I'd have to be God-Emperor to get people to do it =P I ain't signing on for that!
Every vote should be given manually after you read a post in the tag we use and like it. No auto-vote or "we must unite behind idea x" bullshit. A bond of free individuals.
I would like to focus the tag on philosophy and politics. Philophers of Steem or short POS. We would be the posers then... maybe the name needs some work...
LOLOL
I couldn't type there for a minit XD
So far what you state is reasonable, although I can see that communities that want to allow bots might also arise. That might not be me though!
You do know PoS is also an abbreviation for piece of shit? Scheisse is not how I'd prefer to be remembered. Neither as a POSer lol
Maybe it looks better in German =p
In German we would be the PDS which has been for some time the far left party in Germany. And from what you say about the left I am not sure if you wouldn't prefer that.
I remembered that PoS stood for something but google didnt tell me so i stepped right into it.
Very Clichee but : Steemosophy ?
Philosteemy? I like the 'philo' part, the meaning is lover of mankind, or summat. More important in my mind than the 'osophy' part, which means 'to study, or practice' IIRC.
sophia is the goddess of wisdom my friend ;). Definitely better than sharing a word with pedophils. I would guess you know how Platon came up with the platonic love? Hint: He did not discover it with an adult woman, but with a young boy.
I am struck by the evolution of the word, as it clearly did not mean then what it does now.
As Plato is reported to have said, "I know one thing, that I know nothing.", there are many things, such as his love life, about which I find it preferable to know nothing.
Fortunately, I am blessed by the good fortune of an incapacity to know too much, yet much I know I wish I did not, still. Even so, there is much yet I have to learn, and ignorance remains my nemesis - as it is all of ours.
I shall prefer philanthropy to platonopy for all my days. I find Sophia to be the muse I must heed in my geas to reveal that course that charts the journey that shall end when all people are free.
I only hope I am able to resist the siren call of sophistry which lures men astray, and yet attain such substance requisite to the task, all too elusive for mere men.
meep
meep
For some reason I only read your first sentence last night, lack of brain function I suppose.
Trying to play out problematic scenarios and making sure that our initial plan gives at least a good guideline and has not to be completely rewritten within one week of existence, is exactly why I pitched the idea several times already and not yet posted about it.
@berniesanders said he does not believe it would work to keep it all on the chain, but it would be awesome if it did.
Oh and God games like Populous and Black&White is one of my favorite genre. If you really want to make me a God-Emperor I humbly accept :)
Failing to plan is planning to fail, and only nominal consideration might enable sound plans to result.
As an autarch, I shall resist installing any tyranny, however willing applicants might be. Good company, however, must be the essence of every endeavor towards the common liberation of all of us. Striving together, to reach that happy future we might deliver to our posterity, I reckon sufficient.