Coronavirus Pandemic

[WMUG]

Force is any transaction, physical or threatened, that removes consent and equity from any party engaged in that transaction. Unprompted violence and coercion are both examples. The equity also has to materialise, it cannot be a lie, a product of fraud or any other subterfuge. The exception is charity which, by it's nature, can often lack tangible equity but this is fully understood by the donor and so no violence can possibly occur.

Ok, got it. Are there any justifiable uses of force, in your opinion be it by individuals or organisations? I'm guessing self-defence is one, any others?

An authoritarian is anyone who assumes or is granted superior privileges (masquerading as rights) and then enacts violence on anyone who did not consent to the assignment of such privileges or the use of those privileges. Basically anyone who believes they have a right to instruct you how to behave (or these days, think) without your consent is an authoritarian. Somebody who justifies inequality of human rights. There is soft authoritarianism and hard. Government spends most time engaged in soft authoritarianism but, remembering the countless millions who have been slaughtered by governments, it is never shy to remove the mask and reveal its true nature.

Everyone has a right to self defence and would be perfectly justified in calling for others to assist in that form of defence.

That assistance would have to be freely/consensually granted in order to be justifiable, I take it?

Again, picking out examples of what violent individuals might do does not discount liberty as an option for coexistence and collaboration. Are you saying a minority of evil people might seize control by using violence? Well if that happened, how does liberty leave you any worse off than you are now? Do you not already see the very worst of mankind, in control, violent and bent on self preservation and self enrichment?

Not the very worst, no. At least not in this country. There's always, you know, Hitler, Stalin et al. I don't think the people in charge of this country, whoever they may be, are as bad as people who round people up and shove them in labour/death camps simply for existing or opposing them. There are countries like that, but this isn't one of them.

We have some people in control now who shaft others in various ways; landlords who are also MPs and so make laws that benefit landlords, over in the US congresspeople taking bribes from corporations in the form of campaign contributions to make laws that enrich them and shaft working people, but nobody's booting the door down and dragging people off to be gassed/worked to death.

Could it be better? Sure. Is it as bad as it could be? Obviously not.

If it follows that liberty cannot work because violent individuals would prosper (though there is no proof to suggest this is certain) does it not also follow government cannot work given the violent individuals who prosper? A system of individual responsibility might result in more individuals standing up against the abuses of those who seek and exercise authority, as opposed to the trend of hoping violent abuse can be avoided by delegating authority to the very individuals who are violent and abusive.

Fair point.

As always stated, change is not expected to come overnight. Libertarianism does not demand an instant shift. As things stand, libertarians mainly concern themselves with trying to resist violent psychopaths gathering even more authority to themselves. It's not a progressive battle, it's a rearguard action.

Ok, interesting. That's something I hadn't properly appreciated before now. It's not about reshaping society, it's about stopping it sliding backwards.

Examples of victories won by genuine libertarians (those who believe in consent and equity) go all the way back to the times when kings and queens seemed unassailable. If you compare those times to the present, ignoring the deeper and relatively short lived dives into stark authoritarianism for the sake of argument, we have fewer abuses of human rights. Overt slavery has been alleviated. Women's rights have been established. Religious persecution is on the decline. Workers cannot be so blatantly abused.

Ok, we're on on the same page there, then. Good to know.

These focus on the ownership of your own labour, a fundamental of survival

So you'd be in favour of more worker owned co ops, then? Workers exercising democratic control of their workplace (assuming that that democracy weren't subverted, of course)?

Also, given that we're on a football forum, how familiar are you with AFC Wimbledon? I've been getting more and more interested in them over the last few years (which makes the latest League Cup draw a little irritating ). It sounds like they represent a lot of the values you're espousing here.

existential equity of the human being (separate to behaviour or environment)

Can you explain what you mean by that?

and the right to control of your own mind and beliefs and the freedom to express such beliefs.

Fair.

Of course all of these gains are being rolled back in the west at this point in time. But liberty goes in peaks and troughs as each new enemy rises, is confronted and then falls.

Are they? They were last year, but they seem to be coming back now.

I would think Covid is a perfect example of what Camus concluded. Being just the most recent example from a tireless list stretching all the way back. What about September 11th, seeing as we are approaching another anniversary? The examples are rather obvious.

They might be obvious, I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page regarding what we were talking about.

Covid is an interesting one. I don't share your belief about it all being a scam to increase power, I broadly agree with Letters on its deadliness and, in general, it being a Bad Thing™. I also agree that the vaccines we have are effective and needed if we're to get cases and hospitalisation down to a manageable level.

But let's say for argument's sake, there's a pandemic for a disease that is demonstrably and visibly incredibly deadly. We're talking black death levels, bodies piling high in the streets, ambulances calling "bring out your dead", all the rest of it.

What is your position on what should happen in that circumstance?

It is not an assumption to state you can either have liberty or authority. They are mutually exclusive. You cannot be a little bit free, you are either free or somebody else has final say, to at least some degree, over how you live your life.

Regarding tax, it is by its application theft and therefore violence. The revenue service does not propose a worthy idea whereby people can contribute to a pot and benefit collectively (there would be nothing wrong with that, provided the equity promised actually materialised). But that's not how the revenue operates. It operates by applying threats and violence against those who will not or cannot comply. Given that rights exist equally for all, it cannot be possible for one individual to steal from another and still maintain they are not an authoritarian criminal. Also, if you work for an hour but get paid for working half an hour because the state has stolen your earnings, you may not be a slave in the commonly understood sense, but half your labour has been conducted for the benefit of another. If you consent to this or view it as an act of charity then no problem, although the threats are violence of the state are still criminal behaviour. But if you do not consent to this then what would you call the portion of your labour that has been taken against your will? Enforced charity? It is slavery by any measure and I'm unsure why you would think it ridiculous to say so.

There is, obviously, a huge difference how I live my life and how a person who was stolen from Africa and brought to the Americas in chains to be held in complete and utter bondage lived their life, though.

I am freer than that person, as you said before.

I'm not utterly free to live exactly as I may choose (although personally there's not that much I'm wanting for), but I am not oppressed to anywhere near the same level as a slave.

Similarly, women are freer than they were 200 years ago, as you say. Different religions can coexist more peacefully these days than in the middle ages. I can work without fearing my hand will get ripped off by a machine. If I'm sick, I can take the day off without my livelihood being threatened, etc etc.

And you said it yourself, liberty ebbs and flows. How can an absolute ebb and flow? It's either present or it isn't.

Don't confuse leaders with authority (of course the best leaders never need to exert authority). Leaders can be appointed by consent, there's no ideological issue with that (although practically it hardly ever works out well). But if a person does not consent to be led then it will take an authoritarian, bringing the implied threat of violence, to abuse that choice and that right. Obviously the person being coerced is no longer free.

Again, AFC Wimbledon is sounding more and more like your thing

[Mac76]

Ok, got it. Are there any justifiable uses of force, in your opinion be it by individuals or organisations? I'm guessing self-defence is one, any others?

he seems to think disagreeing with someone on a message board gives someone the right to shove their fist down the other person's throat, if what he's said to me, Letters and others is anything to go by

[Niall_Quinn]

Sure. Defence of private property. Defence of those who have had force initiated upon them. Consensual use of force (a boxing match). Defence of the nation too, as in defending the actual nation and not going off and attacking somebody else and calling it defence. Point is, if you don't initiate conflict then force is never necessary.

I would think assisting others is often implied rather than specifically requested. Somebody being mugged will probably not give their consent for you to help them out. We use our judgement. I would never consider stepping between two lads having a punch up on a Friday night. That's their business and they probably wouldn't consent to me sticking my nose in. Common sense comes into it. Libertarianism is not a religion, it's a set of principles.

I disagree regarding politicians being the worst of the worst. They may not murder, rape and pillage in their own back yard (at least not as often) but they have no such qualms in places like Iraq or Libya or Syria, to recall recent examples. They aren't pulling the trigger themselves but they are turning a blind eye to the actions they have sanctioned. There are rare exceptions, as with anything. Some individuals can go through a political career and maintain a degree of humanity. It's doubtful you'll find them in the big seats though. Those are generally reserved for the worst dregs. And it's not just war.

I wouldn't be in favour or against worker owned co ops. If that's what other people want to do then it's none of my business. I'm in favour of owning my own labour.

AFC Wimbledon? Read about them years ago but haven't kept up.

Existential equity of the human being? There mere fact you exist is of fundamental significance and your existence is of the same value as any other. Circumstances and life choices can change the way others view you, but when those are stripped away the foundation must be equal and inalienable rights or everything built on top of that is already tarnished. This is more important to the "elite" than you may realise. Much of their superiority complex revolves around birthright and breeding. And on a wider level slavery was essentially a statement of intrinsic superiority and inferiority.

Be careful with the "rollback" of covid restrictions. Sure, they'll drop mask mandates and other high profile decrees that have most immediate and noticeable effect. But there's a shit ton of abuse written into four bills that slimed their way through parliament (in name only) while everyone was paying attention to the theatrical stuff. The privacy abuses in those bills are staggering, as are restrictions on the right to assemble and the groundwork being laid to gag the press. Keep an eye on what they don't roll back as opposed to what they do, that will be far more informative. And don't go thanking them for easing up on the fascist bastard routine, like I already see some doing. Also keep an eye on other western nations because their regulations can have knock-on effects, especially for activities like travel and overseas employment.

As for SARS-CoV-2 and Covid-19, these are not a scam. The scam is the extension of the pandemic and the almighty wealth transfer that has occurred (and continues) as engineered consequences. But that's an argument that has pages and pages already posted. It is the abuse of power and the corrupted intent we are talking about here, not the existence of the virus or disease.

Regarding your life and a slave's life, it's the abuse of liberty that counts. Any abuse of liberty eradicates the state of freedom. But of course there can be degrees of abuse. You could say you are almost free, but that's not free, right? Your authoritarian imposes fewer abuses upon you in comparison to the slave master, that's all. But your are right with your final point, I made the same mistake myself by referring to the ebb and flow of liberty whereas I should have termed it as the ebb and flow of abuse.

[Niall_Quinn]

he seems to think disagreeing with someone on a message board gives someone the right to shove their fist down the other person's throat, if what he's said to me, Letters and others is anything to go by

Tell you what, why don't you go back and copy/ paste the post that started this? And I'll stick by it - if you said that to my face I'd put my fist through your skull. You can say whatever you want about me but you won't say it about my family. And yes, digging so deep into the gutter to provoke others is most certainly the initiation of violence. Try it for yourself if you ever become a man again, go out and insult some geezer to his face and see what happens.

And, by the way, once you'd done your "keyboard warrior" routine I simply informed you of your error and made you an offer. You chose not to accept the offer (big surprise) and therefore your throat remains in good order. I requested your consent before kicking your sorry arse around the houses. Same with your girlfriend. He couldn't resist chiming in so he was made the same offer. At least he was man enough to explain why he declined the offer. You just cried and went through every tissue in your handbag.

[Niall_Quinn]

[Mac76]

Authoritarian state latest : https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/cov...095404229.html

"The prime minister is expected to relinquish a series of powers he acquired since March 2020 during a 4pm press conference on Tuesday.

It will be his first press briefing on the pandemic since he lifted almost all restrictions in July.

Johnson is set to scrap some of the emergency lockdown laws when revealing his Covid Winter plan, and dropping the powers allowing police to detain infectious people and close businesses.

Schools and colleges will not be shut in the coming months either.

The prime minister is expected to put his faith in vaccines in the fight against Covid.

Last week, he said: “These extraordinary times required necessary but intrusive measures. But I’m determined to get rid of any powers we no longer need.”"

[Niall_Quinn]

Authoritarian state reality (despite the desperate whimpering of whipped little girls who cower in terror and obedience).

"Today Nadhim Zahawi admitted that 12-year-olds will be able to override their parents' wishes on Covid jabs"

Pure evil. The worst abuse since medieval times. And they'll be injecting an experimental drug that DOES NOT have FDA approval, despite their lies. Legal action is being taken in the States now to expose the outright corruption that has been used to con people into believing this vaccine is tested and approved. But it's simple for anyone to figure this out for themselves. How so? Because the other vaccines should have immediately been withdrawn if the Pfizer brand really does have approval - that's the law. What they've actually done is to approve a Pfizer variant (which even the FDA admits is virtually identical to the existing version) and then proclaim it to be unavailable or not readily available. Therefore they are pushing the unapproved Pfizer vaccine on unsuspecting victims while pretending it is the approved version. As stark a demonstration of the criminal collaboration of the state with corporate interests as you will ever see (excluding war maybe), or fascism to use the proper term.

[Niall_Quinn]

It's a straight road now from lowering the age of consent to legalised pedophilia, which has been their end game all along.

[Niall_Quinn]

"Over-fives could be next in line for a Covid vaccine, an Independent SAGE member has said.

Professor Devi Sridhar, who is a global public health expert at Edinburgh University, told Good Morning Britain jabs for this age group were the 'next issue on the horizon'.

She said: 'The exciting thing on the horizon to mention, even for parents of younger kids,

'It looks like Pfizer is going for approval of the vaccine for five to 11-year-olds in the US in October, so this is going to be the next issue on the horizon — once we deal with the 12-17 year olds whether we do that for the under-12s.'"

In case anyone was wondering, obviously yes, this is the initiation of force and can legitimately be met with violence. And WILL be met with violence if necessary. Decisive violence. And I can assure you, I won't be the only one. This has gone so far over the line there's no going back, there's no repairing it. These profit vampires know very well there's more chance of a kid dying from their vaccine than covid. But they want those dollars and they couldn't care less how they get them.

[Niall_Quinn]

Mengele used Auschwitz as an opportunity to continue his anthropological studies and research into heredity, using inmates for human experimentation.[3] His medical procedures showed no consideration for the victims' health, safety, or physical and emotional suffering.[3][4] He was particularly interested in identical twins, people with heterochromia iridum (eyes of two different colors), dwarfs, and people with physical abnormalities.[3] A grant was provided by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation), at the request of von Verschuer, who received regular reports and shipments of specimens from Mengele. The grant was used to build a pathology laboratory attached to Crematorium II at Auschwitz II-Birkenau. [39] Dr. Miklós Nyiszli, a Hungarian Jewish pathologist who arrived in Auschwitz on 29 May 1944, performed dissections and prepared specimens for shipment in this laboratory.[40] The twin research was in part intended to prove the supremacy of heredity over environment and thus strengthen the Nazi premise of the genetic superiority of the Aryan race.[41] Nyiszli and others reported that the twin studies may also have been motivated by an intention to increase the reproduction rate of the German race by improving the chances of racially desirable people having twins.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_...xperimentation