The Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man - Page 8 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Any other minor ideologies.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15182292
annatar1914 wrote:@The Resister , you said about Bernie Sanders that;



Bernie can say that he's a Socialist, but he isn't. Never seen him put forwards a Socialist bill in Congress, ever.



:roll:

I can predict every Libertarian rebuttal ever made to a Socialist;


''The Socialist will say that that isn't real Socialism, that real Socialism has never been tried, etc...''


Like I said, I am not looking for Utopia. Socialism is the socio-economic system where the working classes own the means of economic production in society, directly or held in trust by their political representatives. Some things might not be of more benefit to certain persons, but no economic system is. But I believe that it is the best for the common working people, the majority of people in a society. People might not get all they want-which is the case anyway-but they'll at least get pretty much what they need, to have a better existence.


Dishonesty be damned! I don't care what you think you know about Libertarians because you don't know squat about socialism and Stossel predicted what you would say. I'm an outsider, NOT a Libertarian. I've identified as such on Libertarian forums, rejecting their "Non- Aggression Principle" long before I knew this board existed. You don't know what you don't know. Anybody that is objective and watched the videos in my links realizes that you're blowing smoke and I'm not representative of any existing organization. If accusations are all you have, I'm done with the childish and idiotic dumbassery by which you address me. Move forward or leave me alone. If you want to remain relevant here, write something new.
#15182293
Pants-of-dog wrote:The only reason why you can own land is because the government took the land of someone else without their consent.

The fact that you then pay taxes to support this system shows that your respect for property rights is inconsistent at best.



If you mean the Muscogee, then please note that the vast majority of those were forcibly removed from their land in what is called The Trail of Tears.

The Trail of Tears was what they called the ethnic cleansing of the land east of the Mississippi.

The lands were not signed over in some legal and consensual way.

And the Muscogee are still alive today, so the original landowners are still there and still think their land was taken without consent.

But you support the government that took the land without consent. This contradicts the charter you claim to support.


1) You lie. My property was acquired after the Creeks ceded land to the government. Apparently the Creeks agreed to the transaction

2) I don't pay taxes because I agree with the government; fact is I have NOTHING good to say to them for charging me for living on my own property while never providing any services that I don't pay for above and beyond the property taxes (which are in the thousands of dollars - about the same as my electric bill)

3) Again my land was legitimately acquired when the Creeks signed the land over to the government. You're lying to make your position look stronger. It isn't.

I cannot be held to answer for what the law was over two hundred years ago. You sit behind your computer and laugh because free people are subjected to an illegal "income tax," and without weighing the evidence (finding morons on Google that refuse to address the facts doesn't count) you think that people being forced to give up their wages is okay, but you want Americans to turn over their property over your limited knowledge of what went on two hundred years ago.

Maybe I should clue you in. Back when this place was just getting started, whites intermarried with the Indians. So, it's not a race thing here. It might be in your mind, but some Indians fought on behalf of the British; some sided with the colonists. The British lost. Now, presupposing you want to make this a legal issue, the Indians should have sat it out and then kept petitioning for their property OR waited it out and then took on the winner of the Brits vs. Americans. But, they didn't. They got involved in the war and they ceded land by written agreement. That may not be true of the Muscogee, but that's not the case where I am. All I can do is work within the parameters of the law; demand my guaranteed Rights be acknowledged and enforced OR consider other options for the future. I can't change history; just move forward from this point, forward.
#15182296
The Resister wrote:I want to ask you a serious question. It's not meant to be facetious or condescending. It is a legal / psychological question? Have you ever been evaluated by a psychologist or psychiatrist?

I've told you more than half a dozen times: unalienable Rights are a journey, not a destination. What is the mental block that keeps you from understanding that?

Second to that, I've told you many times, repeatedly, that I didn't write the rules. The way something is, simply is the way it is. Dude, all I can do is to work within the parameters of the system to get the outcome most favorable to what I believe in. Regardless of what the courts have decided, the founders and framers held private property Rights in high esteem. I will work to make those Rights as unalienable as possible. If you don't like that answer - I'm sorry for you.

How many times do you want the same answer? Nothing is perfect and certainly not you. I have an unalienable Right to life. The next guy has a Right to Life. If one of us encroaches on the Rights of the other and a loss of life occurs, how do you resolve the issue? Having the Right to Life doesn't mean you can't be killed. Where in the Hell do you really want to go with this childish interrogation? You are so insecure in your beliefs that you can't comprehend simple English and you insist on ascribing things to me that I haven't written. So, are you still beating your wife? Do you see how idiotic that garden variety of question is? It's in the same family of your troll bait. Grow up.


@The Resister ;

I suppose I have a somewhat similar contrarian spirit myself, come to think of it. I'm not a very good fellow though. Back of my mind I think my Socialism is for justice, but I know that there is a Socialism of Envy and revolutionary destruction too, to be sure. Our Atheistic ''friends''. But then there's a mirror image to Karl Marx in people like Ayn Rand, right?

So anyway, sometimes, to continue with such questioning as I have is counter-productive also, it can make people lash out.

Politics as a substitute for life... All the more sad because politics has consumed modern life. And everybody has a megaphone, shouting. Trying to prove one isn't a door stop or piano key, willing to smash everything just to retain some freedom out there.

I don't care much for your politics, but surely it isn't the whole of a man-else one would be rather withered up, right? My politics isn't the whole of me either, I've come near to rejecting modern politics entirely, and lately I just feel like the man who says; ''a plague on all your houses'', unjustly. It's not for me to try to change what you have come up with, in the radical existential freedom I think both you and I agree we all possess. I don't like and positively detest being defined to a degree as well. Sorry I forgot that. Especially since the practical real world result of my beliefs would just as soon thrive more in a more free environment...
#15182297
The Resister wrote:petitioning for their property

The tribes challenged the Removal Act.

In 1832, the Supreme Court ruled in their favour.

Not that it did them any good.

In 1838, thousands of federal soldiers and Georgia volunteers entered their territory and forcibly relocated them.

unalienable Rights are a journey, not a destination.

No, they are not.

They are a rhetorical device.


:lol:
#15182340
The Resister wrote:1) My property was acquired after the Creeks ceded land to the government. Apparently the Creeks agreed to the transaction


You obviously do not know what the Trail of Tears is.

Here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears


    The Trail of Tears was part of a series of forced displacements of approximately 60,000 Native Americans between 1830 and 1850 by the United States government[1] known as the Indian removal. Members of the Cherokee, Muscogee (Creek), Seminole, Chickasaw, and Choctaw nations (including thousands of their black slaves[2]) were forcibly removed from their ancestral homelands in the Southeastern United States to areas to the west of the Mississippi River that had been designated 'Indian Territory'.[1] The forced relocations were carried out by government authorities after the passage of the Indian Removal Act in 1830.[3] The Cherokee removal in 1838 (the last forced removal east of the Mississippi) was brought on by the discovery of gold near Dahlonega, Georgia in 1828, resulting in the Georgia Gold Rush.[4]

    The relocated peoples suffered from exposure, disease, and starvation while en route to their newly designated reserve. Thousands died before reaching their destinations or shortly after from disease.[5][6][7][8]

So, if the government came and took you off your land at gunpoint, that would be the same as what happened to the Muscogee. And you seem fine with that since you got land out of it.

2) I don't pay taxes because I agree with the government; fact is I have NOTHING good to say to them for charging me for living on my own property while never providing any services that I don't pay for above and beyond the property taxes (which are in the thousands of dollars - about the same as my electric bill)


No, they provide things for you like roads, police, utilities, and a whole bunch of other things that you cannot and do not pay for yourself.

Including owning land.

3) Again my land was legitimately acquired when the Creeks signed the land over to the government. You're lying to make your position look stronger. It isn't.


No. The Muscogee are rightfully angry that they were forced off their land at gunpoint. And anyone who respected property rights would do the same.

Maybe I should clue you in. Back when this place was just getting started, whites intermarried with the Indians. So, it's not a race thing here.


Unless your land was gained through intermarriage (and we know it was not) this is irrelevant.

Tell me, do you think property rights only apply to white people?
#15182341
ingliz wrote:The tribes challenged the Removal Act.

In 1832, the Supreme Court ruled in their favour.

Not that it did them any good.

In 1838, thousands of federal soldiers and Georgia volunteers entered their territory and forcibly relocated them.


No, they are not.

They are a rhetorical device.


:lol:

Image
#15182363
Potemkin wrote:Image


@Potemkin ;

All this is true, he's even wrote as much himself. He's also not going to directly admit it upon questioning.

This is why I think Fascism does not take a Statist disguise in America, but is near Anarchist in form, ''Libertarianism''. However, I think that in the past you and I have discussed that Fascism universally is the End of the State in any meaningful form, is it's privatization as power slips into bodies run by charismatic leadership in parallel to and feeding off of the State until it withers away...
#15182389
annatar1914 wrote:@The Resister ;

I suppose I have a somewhat similar contrarian spirit myself, come to think of it. I'm not a very good fellow though. Back of my mind I think my Socialism is for justice, but I know that there is a Socialism of Envy and revolutionary destruction too, to be sure. Our Atheistic ''friends''. But then there's a mirror image to Karl Marx in people like Ayn Rand, right?

So anyway, sometimes, to continue with such questioning as I have is counter-productive also, it can make people lash out.

Politics as a substitute for life... All the more sad because politics has consumed modern life. And everybody has a megaphone, shouting. Trying to prove one isn't a door stop or piano key, willing to smash everything just to retain some freedom out there.

I don't care much for your politics, but surely it isn't the whole of a man-else one would be rather withered up, right? My politics isn't the whole of me either, I've come near to rejecting modern politics entirely, and lately I just feel like the man who says; ''a plague on all your houses'', unjustly. It's not for me to try to change what you have come up with, in the radical existential freedom I think both you and I agree we all possess. I don't like and positively detest being defined to a degree as well. Sorry I forgot that. Especially since the practical real world result of my beliefs would just as soon thrive more in a more free environment...


For once I don't feel that I have to be defensive. My experience is that there are individualists and those who think they need to be part of a group or organization in order to succeed. It's hard for people to identify with a guy that ran away from home at 14, bought his first mobile home and land at 18 and their first home at 28. The odds of finishing high school, much going to college and excelling were against me.

Today, people mooch off of me, having that we have a right to free housing, free medical care, etc. They're basic rights. At my expense? It's just one of those things where people have to agree to disagree. I signed that Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man so that the government has to respond or forfeit. If the laws mean anything, the government must uphold their end of the contract or let us figure out whether or not we want it representing us.
#15182391
Pants-of-dog wrote:You obviously do not know what the Trail of Tears is.

Here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears


    The Trail of Tears was part of a series of forced displacements of approximately 60,000 Native Americans between 1830 and 1850 by the United States government[1] known as the Indian removal. Members of the Cherokee, Muscogee (Creek), Seminole, Chickasaw, and Choctaw nations (including thousands of their black slaves[2]) were forcibly removed from their ancestral homelands in the Southeastern United States to areas to the west of the Mississippi River that had been designated 'Indian Territory'.[1] The forced relocations were carried out by government authorities after the passage of the Indian Removal Act in 1830.[3] The Cherokee removal in 1838 (the last forced removal east of the Mississippi) was brought on by the discovery of gold near Dahlonega, Georgia in 1828, resulting in the Georgia Gold Rush.[4]

    The relocated peoples suffered from exposure, disease, and starvation while en route to their newly designated reserve. Thousands died before reaching their destinations or shortly after from disease.[5][6][7][8]

So, if the government came and took you off your land at gunpoint, that would be the same as what happened to the Muscogee. And you seem fine with that since you got land out of it.



No, they provide things for you like roads, police, utilities, and a whole bunch of other things that you cannot and do not pay for yourself.

Including owning land.



No. The Muscogee are rightfully angry that they were forced off their land at gunpoint. And anyone who respected property rights would do the same.



Unless your land was gained through intermarriage (and we know it was not) this is irrelevant.

Tell me, do you think property rights only apply to white people?


I'm in Cherokee, North Carolina several times a month. I have family from there all the way up through Sevierville, Tennessee. So, no, I'm almost positive that you have more insights than the Chief of the Cherokee tribe (and I've spoken with him several times over the years). I'm almost 100 percent sure that some smug troll hiding behind his keyboard on a daily basis knows more about it than the people I've listened to most of my life.

I own the property I live on. You'd be as happy as a pig in slop if the government kicked my door in, killed me, and took my house then put it on the auction block. You feel wronged by me. The means would justify the end and you'd be happy to see me go. That way you could "win." Screw the truth. To Hell with any perspective except yours. I wonder. My plan is to buy a place in that area soon. If I buy a house and land there from a Cherokee Indian, will I own it in your eyes?

As to your silly question: If you have a pulse and a pen, you can sign the papers to buy property, homes, and businesses in the United States. The pathological liars that come on here, pretending to speak for me make me want to vomit. Unalienable Rights, given by a Creator, apply to every person who sets foot on U.S. soil.

"...does the U.S. Constitution apply to undocumented immigrants?

“Yes, without question,” said Cristina Rodriguez, a professor at Yale Law School. “Most of the provisions of the Constitution apply on the basis of personhood and jurisdiction in the United States.”

Many parts of the Constitution use the term “people” or “person” rather than “citizen.” Rodriguez said those laws apply to everyone physically on U.S. soil, whether or not they are a citizen
."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/w ... rants-have

Anyone who comes here and tells you I even suggested differently is a liar and an idiot that refuses to read the freaking thread. Damnable stupidity won't even merit me responding to this again. Asked and answered in every form I can think of. I'm sick of the dumbassery. When Thomas Jefferson penned the words to the Declaration of Independence, there was no such thing as an American citizen. To say God gave only one segment of society unalienable Rights is reserved for morons. Unalienable Rights, as differentiated from the privileges of citizenship, is not understood by my critics. To lie about me to cover up their ignorance is not worthy of any future discussion.
Last edited by The Resister on 25 Jul 2021 00:38, edited 1 time in total.
#15182393
annatar1914 wrote:@Potemkin ;

All this is true, he's even wrote as much himself. He's also not going to directly admit it upon questioning.

This is why I think Fascism does not take a Statist disguise in America, but is near Anarchist in form, ''Libertarianism''. However, I think that in the past you and I have discussed that Fascism universally is the End of the State in any meaningful form, is it's privatization as power slips into bodies run by charismatic leadership in parallel to and feeding off of the State until it withers away...


One thing that pisses me off to no end is cowards that post lies on the Internet.
#15182395
@The Resister But, again, there are no moral barriers to slavery.


Speak for yourself. There are one or two of us who disagree.

Today, people mooch off of me, having that we have a right to free housing, free medical care, etc.


I know. Soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are the worst kind of leeches.

They're basic rights. At my expense?


I agree. Those fucking cops, and ambulance drivers and firemen sucking up your personal resources are intolerable (or should I say UNtolerable) drains on your no doubt vast resources.



I signed that Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man so that the government has to respond or forfeit.


Actually what the government will do is ignore you until your militia buddies point a gun at them, then they will make goo out of you.


If the laws mean anything, the government must uphold their end of the contract or let us figure out whether or not we want it representing us.


Wait. Are you mad about voter suppression?

Oh. I almost forgot.

There is no contract.

This garbage rag of yours is an exercise in puffery, written by someone who may have graduated from High School even though they flunked history.
#15182400
The Resister wrote:I'm in Cherokee, North Carolina several times a month. I have family from there all the way up through Sevierville, Tennessee. So, no, I'm almost positive that you have more insights than the Chief of the Cherokee tribe (and I've spoken with him several times over the years). I'm almost 100 percent sure that some smug troll hiding behind his keyboard on a daily basis knows more about it than the people I've listened to most of my life.


Then show me where I am wromg.

I own the property I live on.


….because your government kicked in the doors of Muscogee people, killed them, and took their house and land and then put it on the auction block.

Which is how some white guy bought it and how you eventually were able to buy it.

Again, these are historical facts. Prove me wrong.

As to your silly question: If you have a pulse and a pen, you can sign the papers to buy property, homes, and businesses in the United States.


So you are saying that the law gives anyone property rights.

The law does. Not god or unaliens.

You'd be as happy as a pig in slop if the government kicked my door in, killed me, and took my house then put it on the auction block. You feel wronged by me. The means would justify the end and you'd be happy to see me go. That way you could "win." Screw the truth. To Hell with any perspective except yours. I wonder. My plan is to buy a place in that area soon. If I buy a house and land there from a Cherokee Indian, will I own it in your eyes?

The pathological liars that come on here, pretending to speak for me make me want to vomit. Unalienable Rights, given by a Creator, apply to every person who sets foot on U.S. soil.

"...does the U.S. Constitution apply to undocumented immigrants?

“Yes, without question,” said Cristina Rodriguez, a professor at Yale Law School. “Most of the provisions of the Constitution apply on the basis of personhood and jurisdiction in the United States.”

Many parts of the Constitution use the term “people” or “person” rather than “citizen.” Rodriguez said those laws apply to everyone physically on U.S. soil, whether or not they are a citizen
."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/w ... rants-have

Anyone who comes here and tells you I even suggested differently is a liar and an idiot that refuses to read the freaking thread. Damnable stupidity won't even merit me responding to this again. Asked and answered in every form I can think of. I'm sick of the dumbassery. When Thomas Jefferson penned the words to the Declaration of Independence, there was no such thing as an American citizen. To say God gave only one segment of society unalienable Rights is reserved for morons. Unalienable Rights, as differentiated from the privileges of citizenship, is not understood by my critics. To lie about me to cover up their ignorance is not worthy of any future discussion.


This whole part is irrelevant.
#15182417
The Resister wrote:One thing that pisses me off to no end is cowards that post lies on the Internet.


@The Resister , it may come as a surprise to you that I have a pretty low opinion of mankind in general, I do not believe in any ''Enlightenment'' era myths about their natural goodness and all that. But I do believe that God loves Mankind and transforms them to conform more to His Image and likeness, and that there are no evil scum who do not have some light and goodness within them, nor good honest folk who do not have dark corners in their souls.

Perhaps, just maybe, you should be a little more patient and understanding and diplomatic with people who disagree with you online. Especially as a practical matter of ''winning friends and influencing people''. I mean, it would be nice to have more agreement, right? And perhaps a little tweeking and modification of thoughts and ideas where you find it necessary?

Otherwise, you run the slight risk, very slightly perhaps, of coming off as an angry old crank, someone merely venting their spleen and spite at the whole world behind a veneer of political and philosophical and theological bric-a-brac. I say that because I know for a fact that some on PoFo think EXACTLY that way...

About ME. Rightly or wrongly. Usually I post on a single thread I made myself with my thoughts and observations, people are free to chime in, some do. Most don't.

Consider how that might apply to you, if it does, just a consideration.
#15182430
annatar1914 wrote:@The Resister , it may come as a surprise to you that I have a pretty low opinion of mankind in general, I do not believe in any ''Enlightenment'' era myths about their natural goodness and all that. But I do believe that God loves Mankind and transforms them to conform more to His Image and likeness, and that there are no evil scum who do not have some light and goodness within them, nor good honest folk who do not have dark corners in their souls.

Perhaps, just maybe, you should be a little more patient and understanding and diplomatic with people who disagree with you online. Especially as a practical matter of ''winning friends and influencing people''. I mean, it would be nice to have more agreement, right? And perhaps a little tweeking and modification of thoughts and ideas where you find it necessary?

Otherwise, you run the slight risk, very slightly perhaps, of coming off as an angry old crank, someone merely venting their spleen and spite at the whole world behind a veneer of political and philosophical and theological bric-a-brac. I say that because I know for a fact that some on PoFo think EXACTLY that way...

About ME. Rightly or wrongly. Usually I post on a single thread I made myself with my thoughts and observations, people are free to chime in, some do. Most don't.

Consider how that might apply to you, if it does, just a consideration.


I've found it difficult to post here because you have daily posters that don't read the thread and make the most outrageous statements that I've ever heard. Despite all I've typed, the trolls infer that I'm a racist, liberal, conservative, fascist, Neo-confederate, anarchist, etc., etc. all in one. What I'm am here is fed up with a few of the nutjobs that come here more for amusement than to have a serious conversation. Had it not been for the B.S. lies, I'd probably made a hasty retreat.

With my experience, I too have a low opinion of mankind. OTOH, while all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, there are a few (albeit precious few) that see a hope for tomorrow. Tytler's Cycles of History demonstrate that what I believe in will eventually be on the radar and we will see the end of this screwed up cycle.

It is unfortunate that people are lumped into conservative versus liberal; right versus left; Democrat versus Republican versus Libertarian. As this thread has shown, most Americans want to lump the other guy into some kind of category as if we all belong in some freaking gang, unable to think for ourselves. The people who claim to be the most open minded are the worst bigots in the bunch. That was what necessitated The Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man. the people that did contribute to it represented a good cross section of America. Oddly, the lone neo-confederate, who was the most vocal during the drafting stages, disappeared without a word when The Charter was completed.

We cannot right all the wrongs from history. What we can do is to start today and figure out what we feel IS the path to be followed. America sits on a powder keg with the Democrats on one side and Republicans on the other. IMO, NEITHER side is worthy of leading and the divisiveness will have to come to a head at some point. Between the pandemic, foreign relations, immigration, the federal deficit, and this unending divisive atmosphere, this country will devolve into civil chaos. I'm reluctant to say we would go into a civil war. The country lacks soldiers and leaders. What we will end up with is a tyrannical government declaring Martial Law in order to restore order. At that point, my efforts to get people behind The Charter will be moot - for a while. And then, they will look for a different answer. If the best we can do is Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, Nancy Pelosi, Marco Rubio, Adam Schiff, Liz Cheney, OTC, Mitch McConnell, etc., etc. and that is the cream of the crop, then we're screwed. And if Barry Dunham, OTC, Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters, etc. are not socialist enough for you, then bear in mind that all those guys on the right - like the Tea Party crowd and Trumpers are NOT constitutionalists and would never be able to lead this country.

I'm for ditching the status quo, seeing what the Constitution means, if anything, and building something for the future while I still have some fight in me.
#15182432
The Resister wrote:We cannot right all the wrongs from history. What we can do is to start today and figure out what we feel IS the path to be followed.


Okay.

How far back do we go? When do unalienable (sic) rights start to matter?

Please give a specific date. Thanks.
#15182433
Drlee wrote:Speak for yourself. There are one or two of us who disagree.



I know. Soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are the worst kind of leeches.



I agree. Those fucking cops, and ambulance drivers and firemen sucking up your personal resources are intolerable (or should I say UNtolerable) drains on your no doubt vast resources.





Actually what the government will do is ignore you until your militia buddies point a gun at them, then they will make goo out of you.




Wait. Are you mad about voter suppression?

Oh. I almost forgot.

There is no contract.

This garbage rag of yours is an exercise in puffery, written by someone who may have graduated from High School even though they flunked history.


Dr. of Demagoguery Lee I see that you have to insult me and ask inane questions that have been asked and answered more than a dozen times. Insults are hurled by people who are insecure in their own positions. So, while I'm fed up with the stupidity of people that refuse to read this thread and live for the accolades they get from people that live their lives to post on this board, you can rest assured that you don't know what you don't know.

You don't have to insult me in order to see if I will give you the intel you want (whereupon you will then accuse me of bragging). Know this: I have more post secondary education than you have total education. That you can be well assured of.

Your attempts to belittle veterans, police, emergency responders, in an effort to lie about me is gutless and despicable. If those people are that bad, leave. Those people are not the political propaganda prostitutes that you like. They just do a job. There are hundreds of taxes that pay their salaries, but a tax on wages is not necessary in order to pay them. If you had checked the site The Charter is on, you would see that they are advocating eliminating costly and wasteful government agencies that are bloated, ineffective, and jeopardizing our Rights to justify their existence.

Finally, I don't have to point a gun at anyone in order to demand that they honor a contract. If they want to exercise a control over me that isn't within their purview, all it takes is two letters: NO.
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

protests following 'colossal' vote fraud in Mosco[…]

Sure, his name could be that of a porn star's as […]

"Whether we like it or not"

@Truth To Power Then provide a quote of a cli[…]

Evil imperial British Gene

:O