The Mental Militia Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 150 151 [152]   Go Down

Author Topic: New member intro thread  (Read 388617 times)

slidemansailor

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4189
  • A nation of sheep begets a government of wolves
    • The Bitterroot Bugle
Re: New member intro thread
« Reply #2265 on: March 25, 2019, 07:50:55 pm »

Points for Appleseed.
Double points for ham.

Shooters and comms are crucial to community survival.  Sadly, many shooters forget the crucial role of comms in getting the riflemen to the right place to be useful.
Logged
If you don't work for liberty,  you don't get it.

http://BitterrootBugle.com/

Joe Kelley

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 71
Re: New member intro thread
« Reply #2266 on: June 11, 2019, 06:17:41 pm »

Hi, my name is Joe Kelley, and I was once a member of The Cult of Might Makes Right.

Logged

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4912
  • TMM
Re: New member intro thread
« Reply #2267 on: June 11, 2019, 07:52:55 pm »

Hi, my name is Joe Kelley, and I was once a member of The Cult of Might Makes Right.

Hi Joe!
I believe we "met" at Redoubt News, yes?
Haven't heard of The Cult of Might Makes Right -- is there a website for them? Or is that just a way of life? ;)
Anyway, welcome.
This place has been here since 2003, but it's fairly quiet these days. As it is for me, so it is for many folks these days. The easy times of chatting in forums is not so easy now, with the world going to hell all around us and with so much info to digest from across the globe. Sheesh! The big crowds left when Claire Wolfe moved on and made her own place. (She is an author and one of our heroes.)  I'm guessing you may have already read a bit about her in the History page at The Mental Militia dot Net, yes?
After you have posted five times to existing threads of your choice, you can then start threads and title them. I hope you enjoy your visits here. And btw, thank you for the comment you left at TMM, to which I'll try to post a reply soon.

Salute!
Elias Alias
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

Joe Kelley

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 71
Re: New member intro thread
« Reply #2268 on: June 11, 2019, 09:36:11 pm »

Elias Alias,

Thanks for taking the time to help me learn the lay of the land here at The Mental Militia Forums. I started my own forum in 2005 which started out, continued to be, and is a Ghost Town. My viewpoint (as I communicate it) has awarded me censure from every group I have ever connected to for the purpose of discovering fact from fiction, and those groups include the Fully Informed Jury Association, United We Stand, NRA, Libertarian Party, Free State Project, Mises Institute, John Birch Society, and most recently National Liberty Alliance.

There is an exception to the rule involving Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership, who has (as far as I know) no cause to censure me up to date.

We will see how this goes here, and as far as I can tell (like all the other connections according to their stated goals) we share the same goals, and hopefully we share competitive, cooperative, means to reach those goals. I think the means to the end is what constitutes the desire for censorship. The means to the end is what constitutes membership in the Cult of Might Makes Right.

I am particularly interested in reading your view on my post about the Bundy case, on the other site.

You may want to know that my effort to post that comment on the other site required 2 attempts, the first was partially documented, the second inspired me to begin documenting those attempts to post information more thoroughly. Of course, there are many possible causes that accurately account for failures to communicate, and I am more than willing to work at identifying those causes accurately. The point which I think is worth conveying is that censorship will be facilitated in many ways by those who have the power to reach that goal according to their sense of propriety: no moral compunction whatsoever.




Logged

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4912
  • TMM
Re: New member intro thread
« Reply #2269 on: June 12, 2019, 02:56:21 am »

Elias Alias,

Thanks for taking the time to help me learn the lay of the land here at The Mental Militia Forums. I started my own forum in 2005 which started out, continued to be, and is a Ghost Town. My viewpoint (as I communicate it) has awarded me censure from every group I have ever connected to for the purpose of discovering fact from fiction, and those groups include the Fully Informed Jury Association, United We Stand, NRA, Libertarian Party, Free State Project, Mises Institute, John Birch Society, and most recently National Liberty Alliance.

On the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA), one of the two original founders of FIJA is an officer here in TMM's forums and also at our national website. He and I are very close friends and have been for over 15 years. He is a brilliant self-made visionary who created a network for dispersion of very important truths to segments of American society across the country.  Name here is Basil Fishbone.
Re: Free State people, I met Jason Sorens in 2003 at Missoula, Montana, at the same conference where I met Claire Wolfe the first time. I would not lend myself to that project, but love their idea as practical application in terms the newly-wakeful can relate to, although it's obvious to me that there can never be anything such as a free "state" is said state has a government. 
I appreciate the good work of Von Mises Institute and have my picture made with Tom Woods and subscribe to Lew Rockwell's email list.
Re: John Birch, I've met Alex Newman several times, like the guy, approve of McManus being in James Jaeger's Constitutional documentary film series, have met Bill Jasper and downloaded some of his stuff to preserve it. JBS is good folks in my book. But like I am with all the other groups, I don't try to tell them what I think -- I just learn from them and muse to myself afterward as I write my own perceptions. ;)
RE: NRA and Libertarian Party -- Nah! Got no time for either of those groups -- more statists who are still locked in lala-land, quasi-sleep states which support existence of man-made governments.
NLA? Nah. More statism, just re-defined in context with hidden history. Very good for folks on that level, but that's not me. I am a total Voluntaryist / Anarchist / Artist with a bent toward Agnosticism, and ain't no danged man-made government got its brand on my ass. I don't need their governments, their gods, anything they have unless it's something I can voluntarily agree to, which ain't much.

Quote
There is an exception to the rule involving Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership, who has (as far as I know) no cause to censure me up to date.

JPFO? Well, now they are run by someone who walks under a bit of a cloud. But before the founder of JPFO died, (Aaron Zelman), he used to call me at the end of his work-day to shoot the shit over the phone. We were becoming good friends for several years. His film, "Innocents Betrayed" involved the keen assistance of our hero here locally at TMM's forums, Claire Wolfe, author of "The Freedom Outlaw's Handbook", in which you'll find The Mental Militia immortalized on her dedications page.

https://www.amazon.com/Freedom-Outlaws-Handbook-Things-Revolution/dp/1581605781/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?keywords=Claire+Wolfe%2C+Freedom+Outlaw%27s+Handbook&qid=1560325101&s=books&sr=1-1-fkmr0

Quote
We will see how this goes here, and as far as I can tell (like all the other connections according to their stated goals) we share the same goals, and hopefully we share competitive, cooperative, means to reach those goals. I think the means to the end is what constitutes the desire for censorship. The means to the end is what constitutes membership in the Cult of Might Makes Right.


I doubt if I share anyone's "goals" with this forum. It's just a place to talk. I spent quite a few years sharing goals with activists, but that nonsense got old to me all the while I was getting old myself, so that's not where this place is at now. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, the human voice, and the goal is civil exchange of seemingly conflicting views, or something like that, as you'll read on the link below in this post, my "mission statement" of sorts.

Quote
I am particularly interested in reading your view on my post about the Bundy case, on the other site.

I will be glad to do that, but I must confess that I cannot possibly read everything put before me every day. Over the past ten years, I've gone broke trying to do that, lol. This liberty shit don't pay doodley!  Now my hands must be busy for hours each day as I work my jewelry trade and try to build a business out of the one thing I'm good at, which is jewelry work. You can see about that here --  https://thementalmilitia.net/2016/12/23/jewelry-before-the-revolution/
I cannot read and write and work on jewelry all at the same time, and since the liberty movement will not pay my bills, I'm happily, and with no apology, preoccupied with hands-on jewelry work.  ;)
That said, I do want to read that piece, because I enjoyed your replies under the Finicum series article at Redoubt News. You make good sentences and you've seen through a lot of illusions extensively enough to have individualized your own mind, which makes you in my eyes an "individual", and that is what I respect about awakened people, the fact that they have individualized themselves. I do not need ot agree with them, and it does not matter to them if I do or not, for they are filled with their own enlightened self-confidence. So long as they don't try to shove their individuality down my throat, which one character who was here a while back did, and whom I booted off these boards for it, I'm happy to expect everyone to be his own guiding light in this earth-walk. You are an individual, I can tell. ;)



Quote
You may want to know that my effort to post that comment on the other site required 2 attempts, the first was partially documented, the second inspired me to begin documenting those attempts to post information more thoroughly. Of course, there are many possible causes that accurately account for failures to communicate, and I am more than willing to work at identifying those causes accurately. The point which I think is worth conveying is that censorship will be facilitated in many ways by those who have the power to reach that goal according to their sense of propriety: no moral compunction whatsoever.

I save often as I go. The years taught me that. ;)
I can assure you that no one at TMM censored your first attempt to post. Cyber goblins, possibly, but certainly no human interference. I am the guy who clears all comments at that site. I've appreciated seeing your epistles at Redoubt News and have no reason at all to try to hold you back either here or at TMM's national site.
That said, here is something I wrote to help set the tone for interactivity among wakeful souls here at our forums. But be aware please that you will probably have to click through the Goo-Gods' filter system, which is designed to keep traffic here down to a minimum. We are legitimately sponsored on the web, but not by the issuer of certs which the Goo-Gods like, so they will try to scare you off when you click this link. (If they don't please let me know, 'k? Thanks.) Just click on through their scary warning popups and you'll be fine.

https://www.thementalmilitia.com/MissionStatement.html

I will read your screed as soon as I can. Thank you mucho for posting here and over there too. Will leave you with this one thought -- yes, the true Constitution is the Articles of Confederation.  It's just that I don't need either one of them.
;)
Salute!
Elias
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

Joe Kelley

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 71
Re: New member intro thread
« Reply #2270 on: June 12, 2019, 08:50:34 am »

Elias Alias,

Your viewpoint as far as I know it based upon what I've read up to now is similar to say Karl Hess's viewpoint. I mean that as a compliment, and to be more specific the viewpoint can only see the works of The Cult of Might Makes Right when that shared viewpoint accurately accounts for (or attempts to) that which is called government.

Perhaps it is wrong to categorize individuals, such as making a claim that this one and this other one belong in the group called Anarchists, and then inside that group are those over there who are Free Market Anarchists.

Josiah Warren is commonly claimed to be the First American Anarchist, but he rejected labels in print, and those printed statements that rejected such categorization were probably printed on his own printing press he invented and made himself when facing censorship.

It is from the work of Josiah Warren and Lysander Spooner that my individual viewpoint is founded, or based, on specific principles, but I add to that work a helpful principle known as The Golden Rule.

I think I may have passed the hurdles to get access to an individual authorized Forum Topic of my own, on this forum of yours. Oh, and I have also borrowed from Game Theory, particularly The Prisoner's Dilemma, in the process of forming my individual viewpoint on specific topics such as The State.

We will see if you or anyone else can agree with the viewpoint I intend to offer, and if so then you may then become familiar with what I call true government. You may also see the free market, adaptable, defensive, voluntary, value in it. You may even volunteer to be a member. If you do then you may be called a cult member by the members of The Cult of Might Makes Right.

You would be, if you choose to volunteer, a member of The Cult of Do No Harm, or The Cult Which Follows (Actually) The Golden Rule. My guess is that you already do everything (within reason) required to be a member of this fictitious cult, but you prefer to remain anonymous, or at a distance from any other member in any other cult anywhere, according to your power to command your own conscience.

Actual government (not counterfeit) actually has been put in place to follow the golden rule, to do no harm, which in my opinion requires effective defense. Without effective defense, posterity, particularly the weakest among us such as children, are food left to spoil or be eaten by members of The Cult of Might Makes Right. In other words, without actual government, or without voluntary mutual defense, those who could prevent it are instead enablers who enable mankind to be led into man-made hell on earth, to be led down that path by those who are best able to do so.

All things good, including government, are counterfeited by people who can get away with that type of operation, and the word counterfeit means opposite. It might be a good idea to at last look at the data that exemplifies good government. Counterfeit government is an up-side-down Free Market, whereby the worst of the worst gain the most power the quickest, it destroys everything as it moves to the goal. Bad government works like entropy. Actual government, or true government, works in the other direction, like ectropy. Talk about sensorship, the word ectropy (and the idea that there can be good government), does not appear in print. Good government affords equal footing access to all, so that all can add their special talent to the market of talent, and in so doing the highest quality and lowest cost cooperators who compete cooperatively produce the vital adaptability required for survival of any complex living species. The best at improving and adapting gain the most power the soonest, rather than the opposite direction, when good government is defended effectively by the volunteers. That works naturally, organically, and at grass roots, locally, in individuals, because people, as a rule, will choose better for worse when their choice to defend their power to choose is actually, truly, defended in fact.

I'll leave this introductory Forum Topic with a relevant quote:

"It was a principle of the Common Law, as it is of the law of nature, and of common sense, that no man can be taxed without his personal consent. The Common Law knew nothing of that system, which now prevails in England, of assuming a manís own consent to be taxed, because some pretended representative, whom he never authorized to act for him, has taken it upon himself to consent that he may be taxed. That is one of the many frauds on the Common Law, and the English constitution, which have been introduced since Magna Carta. Having finally established itself in England, it has been stupidly and servilely copied and submitted to in the United States.

"If the trial by jury were reŽstablished, the Common Law principle of taxation would be reŽstablished with it; for it is not to be supposed that juries would enforce a tax upon an individual which he had never agreed to pay. Taxation without consent is as plainly robbery, when enforced against one man, as when enforced against millions; and it is not to be imagined that juries could be blind to so self-evident a principle. Taking a manís money without his consent, is also as much robbery, when it is done by millions of men, acting in concert, and calling themselves a government, as when it is done by a single individual, acting on his own responsibility, and calling himself a highwayman. Neither the numbers engaged in the act, nor the different characters they assume as a cover for the act, alter the nature of the act itself.

"If the government can take a manís money without his consent, there is no limit to the additional tyranny it may practise upon him; for, with his money, it can hire soldiers to stand over him, keep him in subjection, plunder him at discretion, and kill him if he resists. And governments always will do this, as they everywhere and always have done it, except where the Common Law principle has been established. It is therefore a first principle, a very sine qua non of political freedom, that a man can be taxed only by his personal consent. And the establishment of this principle, with trial by jury, insures freedom of course; because:

"1. No man would pay his money unless he had first contracted for such a government as he was willing to support; and,

"2. Unless the government then kept itself within the terms of its contract, juries would not enforce the payment of the tax. Besides, the agreement to be taxed would probably be entered into but for a year at a time. If, in that year, the government proved itself either inefficient or tyrannical, to any serious degree, the contract would not be renewed.

"The dissatisfied parties, if sufficiently numerous for a new organization, would form themselves into a separate association for mutual protection. If not sufficiently numerous for that purpose, those who were conscientious would forego all governmental protection, rather than contribute to the support of a government which they deemed unjust.

"All legitimate government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily agreed upon by the parties to it, for the protection of their rights against wrong-doers. In its voluntary character it is precisely similar to an association for mutual protection against fire or shipwreck. Before a man will join an association for these latter purposes, and pay the premium for being insured, he will, if he be a man of sense, look at the articles of the association; see what the company promises to do; what it is likely to do; and what are the rates of insurance. If he be satisfied on all these points, he will become a member, pay his premium for a year, and then hold the company to its contract. If the conduct of the company prove unsatisfactory, he will let his policy expire at the end of the year for which he has paid; will decline to pay any further premiums, and either seek insurance elsewhere, or take his own risk without any insurance. And as men act in the insurance of their ships and dwellings, they would act in the insurance of their properties, liberties and lives, in the political association, or government.

"The political insurance company, or government, have no more right, in nature or reason, to assume a manís consent to be protected by them, and to be taxed for that protection, when he has given no actual consent, than a fire or marine insurance company have to assume a manís consent to be protected by them, and to pay the premium, when his actual consent has never been given. To take a manís property without his consent is robbery; and to assume his consent, where no actual consent is given, makes the taking none the less robbery. If it did, the highwayman has the same right to assume a manís consent to part with his purse, that any other man, or body of men, can have. And his assumption would afford as much moral justification for his robbery as does a like assumption, on the part of the government, for taking a manís property without his consent. The governmentís pretence of protecting him, as an equivalent for the taxation, affords no justification. It is for himself to decide whether he desires such protection as the government offers him. If he do not desire it, or do not bargain for it, the government has no more right than any other insurance company to impose it upon him, or make him pay for it.

"Trial by the country, and no taxation without consent, were the two pillars of English liberty, (when England had any liberty,) and the first principles of the Common Law. They mutually sustain each other; and neither can stand without the other. Without both, no people have any guaranty for their freedom; with both, no people can be otherwise than free."
Lysander Spooner, Essay on The Trial by Jury
 







Logged
Pages: 1 ... 150 151 [152]   Go Up