• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

March on Washington 07-04-2013

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
12 Shot at Mother's Day Parade in New Orleans...

Definition of "optimist": anybody who cannot see the potential for a similar event taking place in D.C. during the march - assuming there is such a march on July 4th. The "Supreme Being" (no, not Barack - the other One) must have truly loved idiots to have made so many of them! Ban idiots, not guns! (2¢) ;) Pax...
 
Last edited:

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
...snipped
I don't believe the man is a "patriot"; at least not in the way most conservatives would define the word. For instance, I don't think he has any intention of returning our system of government to an historical ideal - instead, he seeks to dissolve our government and all government.
What you're saying then, is that Kokesh is an idiot?

Adam is a Voluntaryist. In short, Voluntaryists believe that all human interaction should be voluntary, and that the initiation of force against another party is immoral. This is termed the Non-Aggression Prinicipal, or NAP.
In what comic book did this philosophy originate? Suppose nobody volunteers to raise crops, or perform any labor whatsoever... never mind, we already have them in our Welfare System.

Voluntaryists are not pacifists. The initiation of force is considered to be immoral, but the use of proportional force in response is not.
Agreed that the initiation of force is bad, and the initiators deserve to pay whatever the cost. However "proportional response" rarely ends in a win. A draw is the most likely outcome, and everybody loses in a draw. Land, lives, property, income and time is lost on both sides in order for one to force the other to accept some vague philosophical principle. Superior force wins, but only if there is also superior dedication to whatever the cause.

Voluntaryists are anarchists. Most would also term themselves Anarcho-Capitalists, or AnCaps, as they hold a Lockean-inspired view of private property.
Anarchical states bring with them as many (or more) problems for those who accept - or those who reject anarchy - as a legitimate path of self-governance. The world has an abundance of idiots - there are those who would dominate and those who would blindly accept domination (quite similar in that respect to our existing form of government - the "wolves" controlling the "sheeple")

So - when Adam Kokesh is talking about an armed march on DC, he's not concerned primarily with gun rights. He's concerned with what he sees to be a centuries old immoral institution, and a culture that sees it as legitimate. This is important for gun-rights advocates to understand, so I'll say it again. Adam Kokesh's motivations are not those of the gun rights movement.
If ANY of this is true, then there should be NO GUNS INVOLVED! Firearms are an unnecessary accessory to such an event, and create a subliminal atmosphere of threat of violence among government, and LAC's who do not understand that we currently DO have the right to indulge in such shenanigans. Nowhere in the BoR or Constitution does it say anyone has the right to always feel comfortable with the actions of others. Which takes me back to my first comment - "What you're saying then, is that Kokesh is an idiot!" (2¢) Pax...
 
Last edited:

joanie

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
306
Location
..
How does this not qualify??


It is planned as a peacefull march. The best that we can hope for is to show the public that the police there do not respect the rights of the people. I already knew that, anyone who will see that, has already seen that. All others won't see it no matter what you say or do, to them, those participating in this are domestic terrorists and should be disapeared under NDAA.

Have we turned the tide? Is the government backing down? Has our economy suddenly gotten better? No. No. Aaaaannnnddd no. So, please explain why you believe this march is unwarranted.

I never said it was unwarented, I fully endorse and support it, but then, I won't be going to jail. If Adam's goal is to show us how corrupt our public servants who like to call themselves government officals are, theres countless stories like Kelly Thomas (RIP) He could visit the town where this happened and talk to the people, confront those police, ect. If he wants to do this instead, I say fine, more power to him, I wish him luck and pray for his saftey. I agree whith his efforts, but make no mistake, this is not a real fight for freedom and rights. If it were, they would be ready to use those rifles. Also, I agree, now is not the time. Things are not bad enough "YET" to bring enough people into this fight. So we do this little dance with big government, military and police, they push alittle, we push back alittle, someone goes too far, could be police, or could be those who would challenge them, and we all go back to our corners and take another look at our situation.


This is the point of the entire event. The fact that "free" American citizens are not allowed to exercise their rights that are the supreme law of the land without fear of being locked up or shot by their government.

Again, those who know would know without this event, those who don't will see this as a criminal activity.


And what is the right way to do it. We have a police chief who believes she is above the law. We have a Supreme Court who is aware of the situation and has done nothing to curb her behavior.

We step back and let the government and police keep pushing things, we document everything, filming, recording, posting topics, keeping records. When those who think things are just fine get dragged down in this, when this visits enough people's doorsteps, we will be waiting for them in lockup so to speak, in this pit where the public, the people, the citizens are seen by police and government as low life scum. Then we talk, discuss things and all agree on a clear plan that involves alot more than a peacefull armed march. That or go back to being slaves.

If this is what Adam wants to do, great. I'll document the results and they will be a small footnote on AmericaChat, and other discussion boards, I'll put up some youtube videos calling this guy a very brave non violent hero. He will turn back following police orders, or he will be arrested, or they will let him complete the march. They will call this a victory, or a severe injustice. But in reality, it's just the dance.
 
Last edited:

Lyndsy Simon

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2011
Messages
209
Location
Charlottesville, VA
What you're saying then, is that Kokesh is an idiot?
No, I'm saying his political ideology differs greatly from how I'm seeing it implicitly assumed here.

In what comic book did this philosophy originate? Suppose nobody volunteers to raise crops, or perform any labor whatsoever... never mind, we already have them in our Welfare System.
You are showing a base misunderstanding of Voluntaryism. It's not "volunteerism".

You're also coming dangerously close to a personal attack. I've done my best to rationally and calmly add my understanding of whats going on here, based on my personal experience and my watching this man and his friends for about 3 years.

It originated with the writings of people like Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard and Milton Friedman. For an introduction, I highly suggest For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto by Rothbard. I'd be happy to loan you a copy on Kindle if you'd like.

Agreed that the initiation of force is bad, and the initiators deserve to pay whatever the cost. However "proportional response" rarely ends in a win. A draw is the most likely outcome, and everybody loses in a draw. Land, lives, property, income and time is lost on both sides in order for one to force the other to accept some vague philosophical principle. Superior force wins, but only if there is also superior dedication to whatever the cause.

Anarchical states bring with them as many (or more) problems for those who accept - or those who reject anarchy - as a legitimate path of self-governance. The world has an abundance of idiots - there are those who would dominate and those who would blindly accept domination (quite similar in that respect to our existing form of government - the "wolves" controlling the "sheeple")

Proportional meaning "fitting", not "contrained to the level of form provided by the other party". For example - it's not OK to shoot someone and drag them off your property because they trespass. You tell them to leave. Only when they refuse are you justified in physically removing them from the premises. If they resist that action with violence, then offering violence in return is an act of self defense.

If ANY of this is true, then there should be NO GUNS INVOLVED! Firearms are an unnecessary accessory to such an event, and create a subliminal atmosphere of threat of violence among government, and LAC's who do not understand that we currently DO have the right to indulge in such shenanigans. Nowhere in the BoR or Constitution does it say anyone has the right to always feel comfortable with the actions of others. Which takes me back to my first comment - "What you're saying then, is that Kokesh is an idiot!" (2¢) Pax...
We're talking about it at OCDO. They're talking about it on Arfcom and on THR. That's why guns are involved.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
How does this not qualify??


It is planned as a peaceful march. The best that we can hope for is to show the public that the police there do not respect the rights of the people. I already knew that, anyone who will see that, has already seen that. All others won't see it no matter what you say or do, to them, those participating in this are domestic terrorists and should be disappeared under NDAA.
SNIP

I agree with you for the most part. Enough that I will not quibble over the fine points.

And yes it's not just the part I quoted I snipped to save space.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
You are showing a base misunderstanding of Voluntaryism. It's not "volunteerism".

You're also coming dangerously close to a personal attack. I've done my best to rationally and calmly add my understanding of whats going on here, based on my personal experience and my watching this man and his friends for about 3 years.
You're splitting hairs on "voluntaryism", but assume that nobody voluntary-ly chooses to grow crops in marketable quantities, or labor for others for some kind of remuneration. What happens then?

As for "coming dangerously close to a personal attack"... are you paranoid? There is no doubt in anybody's mind when I launch a "personal attack", although such an action on my part is rare and well-deserved by the recipient. I too have done my best to rationally and calmly add to my understanding... of how anybody can accept such a seemingly uncivilized philosophy as that which you espouse. Pax...
 

sharkey

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
1,064
Location
Arizona
You're splitting hairs on "voluntaryism", but assume that nobody voluntary-ly chooses to grow crops in marketable quantities, or labor for others for some kind of remuneration. What happens then?

As for "coming dangerously close to a personal attack"... are you paranoid? There is no doubt in anybody's mind when I launch a "personal attack", although such an action on my part is rare and well-deserved by the recipient. I too have done my best to rationally and calmly add to my understanding... of how anybody can accept such a seemingly uncivilized philosophy as that which you espouse. Pax...

I disagree with you therefore you are an idiot. How uncivilized.

You're pushing socialism here. You assume that no one would voluntarily grow crops in a free market. Are we starving?
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
I disagree with you therefore you are an idiot. How uncivilized.

You're pushing socialism here. You assume that no one would voluntarily grow crops in a free market. Are we starving?

That Kokesh is an "idiot" is not presented a fact, but is my personal opinion... I'm entitled to that. Since neither you nor Simon are Kokesh, you really don't need to concern yourselves with what I think of his plan. It is a plan that, as presented, will strongly imply that there is at least a supportive relationship between his movement and the philosophies of those who desire to protect the Constitution in general and 2A specifically.

Socialism? Me? You have a strange idea of what constitutes socialism, Sharkey. What I said was "assume that nobody voluntary-ly chooses to grow crops in marketable quantities, or labor for others for some kind of remuneration." In the main, today's farms are not voluntarily run. They are corporate-owned, and the "farmers" are working for wages as employees of the corporation, not as independent owner-operators. There would necessarily be some independent farmers in an anarchical society, but they would most likely have very limited acreage (since everybody would be taking advantage of the land-grab), and grow primarily for their family's (and perhaps a few select friends - if there are still such things as trustworthy friends, under anarchy) sustenance. Have a day.
 
Last edited:

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
It is a sad day when law-abiding citizens cannot exercise their right to keep and bear arms legally in any way they see fit. If it is legal for them to march in VA, good on them. Now once in the "District of Columbia" things change quickly. We advocate for legal open carry. This march is a way to draw attention to the violation of rights in many places in our country. I wish the marchers well. I hope they are not abused. This said, violating the law is the last thing to be done in a protest, when all other choices are exhausted. Are we really at that point yet? That's the question? If 10,000 people did march, it would be hard for police to do anything to them without being placed under close scrutiny. If only a handful show up / march they will be mucked around by the police, as it is easy to abuse small groups.

It boils down to: are the laws in any place in our country in direct violation of the supreme law of the land (the constitution of the united states of america). If they are, then they cannot & should not stand. If our courts do not stike them down & our leaders do not change them via the legislature, then it is indeed up to us to.

If not for citizens standing up we may still have white only schools, women would not be allowed to vote, etc... our laws have often been in violation of the spirit of our constitution, which in my opinion is that we citizens of the republic are due the "chance" to seek better lives and to defend our lives with the best tool available, the firearm, should our lives be under threat from tyrants (criminals).
 
Last edited:

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
It is a sad day when law-abiding citizens cannot exercise their right to keep and bear arms legally in any way they see fit. If it is legal for them to march in VA, good on them. Now once in the "District of Columbia" things change quickly. We advocate for legal open carry. This march is a way to draw attention to the violation of rights in many places in our country. I wish the marchers well. I hope they are not abused. This said, violating the law is the last thing to be done in a protest, when all other choices are exhausted. Are we really at that point yet? That's the question? If 10,000 people did march, it would be hard for police to do anything to them without being placed under close scrutiny. If only a handful show up / march they will be mucked around by the police, as it is easy to abuse small groups.

It boils down to: are the laws in any place in our country in direct violation of the supreme law of the land (the constitution of the united states of america). If they are, then they cannot & should not stand. If our courts do not stike them down & our leaders do not change them via the legislature, then it is indeed up to us to.

If not for citizens standing up we may still have white only schools, women would not be allowed to vote, etc... our laws have often been in violation of the spirit of our constitution, which in my opinion is that we citizens of the republic are due the "chance" to seek better lives and to defend our lives with the best tool available, the firearm, should our lives be under threat from tyrants (criminals).

Fine, turn in all of your guns. The law is disarming citizens in the morning......

Now what?
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Socialism? Me? You have a strange idea of what constitutes socialism, Sharkey. What I said was "assume that nobody voluntary-ly chooses to grow crops in marketable quantities, or labor for others for some kind of remuneration." In the main, today's farms are not voluntarily run. They are corporate-owned, and the "farmers" are working for wages as employees of the corporation, not as independent owner-operators. There would necessarily be some independent farmers in an anarchical society, but they would most likely have very limited acreage (since everybody would be taking advantage of the land-grab), and grow primarily for their family's (and perhaps a few select friends - if there are still such things as trustworthy friends, under anarchy) sustenance. Have a day.

Nope. Anarchy does not = lack of rules just lack of rulers.

In the anarchist west, there were plenty of examples of people "volunteering" to engage in their choosen occupations, including farming. In a truly free market people who can't farm efficiently end up selling their land to those who do. And "marketable" quantities will be there because of demand not because of government or corporation. There was more corn grown in the '20's by private farms then is grown now, after, subsidizing and corporate take overs.
 

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
Fine, turn in all of your guns. The law is disarming citizens in the morning......

Now what?

Not sure you got my point? Which was: when the "law" is clearly in violation of the constitution it is the duty of citizens to defend the constitution. The oath our leaders, legislators, judges, police and military all are sworn to mentions defending/supporting the constitution too....but I guess those are just words quickly forgotten once in their desired positions?
 
Last edited:

Tucker6900

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
1,279
Location
Iowa, USA
Not sure you got my point? Which was: when the "law" is clearly in violation of the constitution it is the duty of citizens to defend the constitution. The oath our leaders, legislators, judges, police and military all are sworn to mentions defending/supporting the constitution too....but I guess those are just words quickly forgotten once in their desired positions?

+1 on all statements. When the government causes harm to the people, it is the duty of the people to abolish the offending government, and reinstate a Constitutional Republic.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
Nope. Anarchy does not = lack of rules just lack of rulers.
How does one have "rules" without some entity who establishes those rules. That entity is the de facto "ruler" inasmuch as he/she or they make the rules. Even tribal societies have rules, laws and social leadership - leadership that is either accepted by birthright, appointment or force of arms.

In the anarchist west, there were plenty of examples of people "volunteering" to engage in their choosen occupations, including farming. In a truly free market people who can't farm efficiently end up selling their land to those who do. And "marketable" quantities will be there because of demand not because of government or corporation. There was more corn grown in the '20's by private farms then is grown now, after, subsidizing and corporate take overs.
Apparently, neither you nor I have a proper understanding of the term "voluntaryism"... at least according to Lyndsy Simon:
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Lyndsy Simon You are showing a base misunderstanding of Voluntaryism. It's not "volunteerism".

Now that we have split the RCH, and complicated the English language a bit more than is necessary in order to explain someone's idea of the utopian society, let's look at the standard English dictionary definition of the word "anarchy":

  1. A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
  2. Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
Anarchy is synonymous with "chaos" and "misrule". The so-called Anarcho-capitalists, believe that private businesses would fill the void of government and provide the services that people need - including those traditionally thought of as essential government functions, like building roads and providing police and fire protection. Why would one need "police" in a truly free society? Private enterprises engaged in what are essentially and historically government functions will become corrupt as quickly and deeply as any "government". A corporate culture is no less corruptible than is a governmental culture.

Pollyanna would be proud of those who believe in utopia, since it would be like living in the "Magical Kingdom" of Disneyland 24/7. Unfortunately, human societies are replete with human beings, and human beings have a very long history of corrupting the seemingly incorruptible. If there is a control function of any kind, there is really no "individual freedom" to do as one may please. (2¢) Pax...
 
Last edited:

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
When will Palmer v. DC be decided?

This is a federal civil rights case filed against DC because of their total prohibition on bearing arms, Palmer v. DC. The case is long overdue. If the case is decided in favor of liberty and freedom, then open carrying would not be illegal, in the same sense that it is not now illegal in Chicago.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
How does one have "rules" without some entity who establishes those rules. That entity is the de facto "ruler" inasmuch as he/she or they make the rules. Even tribal societies have rules, laws and social leadership - leadership that is either accepted by birthright, appointment or force of arms.

Social leadership doesn't necessarily equate to "ruler".

Rules can also be enforced by social ostracism.

Apparently, neither you nor I have a proper understanding of the term "voluntaryism"... at least according to Lyndsy Simon:
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Lyndsy Simon You are showing a base misunderstanding of Voluntaryism. It's not "volunteerism".

socialism has nothing to do with being social.....

volunteerism has nothing to do with mandatory voluneering.......that easy.

Now that we have split the RCH, and complicated the English language a bit more than is necessary in order to explain someone's idea of the utopian society, let's look at the standard English dictionary definition of the word "anarchy":

  1. A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
  2. Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
Anarchy is synonymous with "chaos" and "misrule". The so-called Anarcho-capitalists, believe that private businesses would fill the void of government and provide the services that people need - including those traditionally thought of as essential government functions, like building roads and providing police and fire protection. Why would one need "police" in a truly free society? Private enterprises engaged in what are essentially and historically government functions will become corrupt as quickly and deeply as any "government". A corporate culture is no less corruptible than is a governmental culture.

Oligarchy_rule by a group
Monarchy one ruler
Anarchy no ruler--its basic Greek meaning is No ruler...

Look at when definitions are made most dictionaries rightly put the proper definition first. Webster's first definiton "Absence of government",

Pollyanna would be proud of those who believe in utopia, since it would be like living in the "Magical Kingdom" of Disneyland 24/7. Unfortunately, human societies are replete with human beings, and human beings have a very long history of corrupting the seemingly incorruptible. If there is a control function of any kind, there is really no "individual freedom" to do as one may please. (2¢) Pax...

There is nothing Utopian or Pollyanna about it, Anarchist realize it won't be a "perfect" "utopian" society it would just be better than having the government having the monopoly of rules and force.
 
Last edited:

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
People should research his past. Some here will still support him or become bigger fans. Most rational people will be shocked and either be glad that they are already distant or distance themselves.

I knew the bridge was a stupid and illegal idea. Once I learned Kokesh was a part of it, I felt better about my initial reaction.
 
Top