Anonymous Threatens US Govt ... Operation Last Resort
- Thread starter ANOMOANON
- Start date
Some governments are far better than other governments though (I know you'll agree). Take a look at the US. You had so many fantastic laws (free speech is rare!) and some (imo) pretty dumb laws. Unfortunately for the citizens of the US the latter group seems to be overwriting the former. It's always hard to tell what makes some countries work better than others. Something I have noticed is that there are very different opinions in the US and in the so called "more democratic" countries (commonly found in Scandinavia). People seem to heavily believe in "greed is good" in the US while it's far more "help the community" in Scandinavia. You can argue what you wan't economically (this isn't an economic argument) but I've often felt like a lot of people confront you in the US as if it was them against the world.
There will always be those with more power and those with less, whether the power is in the form of an army, money or political influence. It's all about finding a way to reduce this problem. Communism (or extreme socialism) was one attempt at this, unfortunately it didn't work (although many Ukrainians/ Russians felt they had more freedoms and far less corruption under Soviet rule than the current dictatorships).
I think this is what people don't understand about me on this forum. I'm centre left for the UK (which has led to myself and others lazily calling me a socialist since the US is generally a huge swing to the right compared to the EU). Yet:
- I like small government
- I like low taxes and the opportunity for people who work hard to do well (but not disproportionately well)
- I don't like the idea of a nanny state
- I like the idea of education through life (too many pointless degrees! Not everyone needs one!)
- I hate the idea of government corruption.
Hell I've probably been on the wrong end of the stick with the government far more than most people on here have. My father used to be quite a well known (political) investigative journalist. We used to have people turning up at the door, cars following us, phones tapped, funds frozen, articles blocked from the press (and gags put on). And several governments are suspected to be involved of the years of abuse.
Yet I still believe in a government. The governments that we suspected (some with more proof than others) all were "super powers". They all thought that they were "policing the world". This is when I have an issue. The governments role should almost purely be to help those who need it the most and to protect people from the poor moral judgement/ stupidity of others.
I'm not entirely sure what I've written and it's pretty off-topic I imagine now. I may be slightly drunk ...
Errr...sorry bro, but if you think martyrdom is a cultural value you may be in the wrong country.
Can a government exist without threatening to use violence against peaceful people?
If yes, please provide an example of such a government.
If no, would you be willing to admit that advocacy of government is advocacy of violence?
Everything else is window dressing.
Not so much better than a takedown... It was an entertaining takedown, but it seems to have shown uncle sam a lot more power than before.
Usually it's a DDoS or something like a single Hack. This time they managed to pull of a Deuce, and in fact the whole domain ussc.gov is offline still, so it really worked well.
At least it wasn't an empty threat, but if I were an anonymous member, I'd be shaking in my boots now worried that I've tipped my hand to uncle sam, showing them that they have the power to really control a site, not just take it down.
While this was an impressive feat, it was still the equivalent of running out onto a huge battlefeild and firing off one accurate shot that made the opposing army angry.
Humans are naturally hierarchical and violent. Whatever solution we have to our problems, we will always encounter violence and abuse to some degree. It's human nature unfortunately and there are always a few bad eggs around. I would rather a system which is covered in checks and balances. There are plenty of problems with government but the people have to constantly push for an improved system. I would rather that than a country powered by those who have the most money (as many morally lacking people would most likely do whatever it takes to get those positions). Unfortunately it's a lot like this already, although again, more in some countries than others. I heard that the top 400 people in the US are worth more than the bottom 50%? The idea that some of those top 400 will have big piles of cash in their bank accounts and hundreds of fast cars in their garages kind of sickens me.
I know it's different for many of you but to me, the idea of an anarcho-capitalist society is more than just wishful thinking - it's lunacy.
So you feel giving them ultimate power over you is sane?
Not if the solution is education.
Yep, I agree... And without fail, bad eggs seek positions of power, which the government exists to give to them.
That's what the US forefathers tried. It wasn't strong enough and will always be too flawed to really work.
That's nice. The people are sadly too busy pushing for more Jersey Shore reruns instead, however. Their educations, which is a function taken over by the government, doesn't allow for the brains it takes to understand that they need to constantly push for an improved system.
See, this is likely your mental flaw that makes all the rest possible. You see "earning the most money" as something the bad eggs do... But you don't seem to realize that the bad eggs are smart enough to know that it takes hard work to earn money, and they therefore go into a life of politics instead, where life is relatively easy & the power attracts them far more.
Well it used to be that way, but all our rich are leaving the US now. Tina Turner left the other day, turned in her passport and everything. Pretty soon there won't be one single industrialist left here to employ anyone else.
I guess that's fair, because the idea that some people can resent people with money, without even knowing how hard they worked for it, sickens me.
Then you obviously have a lot to learn.
Sure, except for early indigenous tribal societies all over the world. Then there was Icelandia which did a pretty good job, kibbutz are pretty great example of voluntarism. Just look around. We're all REALLY good at SHARING and HELPING. Society takes that and makes it ugly, and corrupted.
Just because we've been conditioned to expect governance doesn't make it necessary.
No, they aren't. There is ample evidence to the contrary.
Avoid making broad sweeping statements you can't support with facts.
It really only appeals to critical thinkers and people who value peace.
Actually, there's decent amount of evidence to suggest we're quite violent. Why do you think us homo sapiens are inhabiting the earth, and not one of the other sub-species of humans? We murdered and butchered the others.
There is a decent amount of evidence to suggest we're quite peaceful too.
Simple rule for intelligent, productive discourse. Do not present opinion as fact.
*YAWN* More unsubtantiated claims.
Again, your theories and opinions are not facts. Don't present them as such. It's intellectually lazy and dishonest.
Ok, I'll retract a little. There's no 100% solid conclusive proof we murdered them all. However, there is proof we mated with the majority of sub-species, meaning we lived alongside them. It's also quite well proven we had better weapons.
Evidence suggests we had a hand in their extinction.
Anthropologists still can't agree on whether or not, and if so, for how long we coexisted with our predecessors. It is just as plausible to say they were wiped out by natural disaster, whereas we survived due to our ability to protect ourselves from the elements.
It's probably easier to prove that violence began with the introduction of government or religion.
Then it is not a fact.
I'd like to discuss facts. I am not particularly interested in your opinions, as I am sure, you are not interested in mine.
Well, you implied humans are inherently peaceful, so you're not dealing in facts either then. There's almost nothing from our entire history as a species that suggests we're inherently peaceful.
If you truly want to help the world, instead of concentrating on political ideology, you should be concentrating on technologies that are going to benefit humanity. Free, clean, and abundant energy, fresh water, food, shelter, medical supplies, education, etc. That's what's going to progress humanity towards world peace without rulers, not a change in consciousness.
As long as there's people struggling to make ends meet though, there's going to be strife.
You think humans could ever reach the point of no violence? Lovely wishful thinking there.
Money can mean power too.
Your country must be very different to mine. I know plenty of people from all walks of life that are able to string together political arguments. We are highly critical of our government. We continue to push.
You yourself state earlier "without fail, bad eggs seek positions of power" and so my point was that if you had no government, money would likely be the power. So more of the "bad eggs" would push towards the top. I'm not saying everyone at the top is evil, just that some are more ruthless than others.
I don't know, the recent US rich list still showed lots of money in a few pockets.
No I resent people who do not use their money. Tens of billions lying around doing nothing is a waste.
And obviously I think this is true for you.
Oh lukep, I have missed you!
Tribes could be pretty ugly to other tribes.
He says not providing any evidence of his own, nearing hypocrisy I would say. Here you go, here's one from a fairly decent uni: http://www.uclan.ac.uk/schools/psychology/staff/files/ArcherIJLP09.pdf
Please provide sources that come from well-established universities or journals in your rebuttal. Blog posts and newspaper articles are not acceptable.
You're right, I HATE peace! Just love the idea of mass murder .....
inb4 doesn't understand sarcasm.
I doubt anyone has hundreds of millions lying around doing nothing, let alone billions. Billionaires are worth that much because the companies they own are worth that much. The rest is either invested or loaned out to the government.