You can't just blindly choose a PDA and expect them to not be corrupt. Some research must be done.

he is probably saying that because it is already in place and he's talking about a temporary period where you wane off of government. tbh, i don't actually think it would need a government though. in the Spanish Revolution the people took power pretty much right away without any government in place at any time.

collectivism has trouble arising in a competitive environment. that's like a football team that is trying to cooperate with other teams. they would lose every game because they are on a completely different frequency. these other teams are trying to compete with them and they are trying to help these other teams out. it simply wouldn't work.

i don't think there should be a limit on freedom of speech by a government entity either, but rather people should be held responsible and suffer the repercussions for any injuries someone obtains by running from a building that someone said was on fire when it wasn't if they were doing what they did to purposely create a scare tactic and knew there was no fire. they wouldn't be held responsible by a government entity, but rather by their peers and any punishment would be carried out in a fair trial of some sort.

any shift like this would take a long time.

but wait, you don't believe in laws seriously, that is misguided. there are plenty of shady tactics businesses can take that will harm people in order to get over on individuals. they have no regard for that, but rather a regard only for making money. or at least many do. of course not all are like this, but for even one to arise and gain as many like minded individuals as possible, it may be a task, but it is possible for them to screw the public in more ways than one.

when i say misinformation i mean misinformation that is meant specifically to sway opinion and coerce people into a position that is favorable for the group and not necessarily so for the person the misinformation is being imposed upon. i am all for religion when it is used in a harmless manner, even though it is completely misguided and illogical. i am also all for stopping religious zealots like Fred Phelps whose spread of misinformation is not just illogical, but harmful.

sorry lol, i meant the Telecommunications Act of 1996

and that's a big part of the problem. do you not see this? i mean seriously, idk what else to say. we need good, true, unbiased news, not sensationalist garbage like Glenn Beck parading as news. the fact that he is atop the ratings with his show is a serious problem. that garbage is truly harmful. he is effectively convincing people of things that are blatantly untrue.

my new theme song



erikboyd60@hotmail.com

"True poetry can communicate before it is understood"

-T.S. Eliot

battle record:

7-0-0

ACTUALLY YES !! . Keynesian economics rose to counter attack the Laissez-faire policies of the WW2 and pre WW2 society .

I'm sorry to counter that I_Guy . Marxist-Leninism tried that and it didn't work . The centralization of all means of production under the state brings only totalitarianism. Trough this a new coordinator class arises which was usually called nomenklatura in the Soviet Union and in her satellite states . Eliminating the labor theory of value and putting all means of production under the state resolves nothing . The current state is the means by which the bourgeois class enforces its rule over society. In Bakunin's words, "the political state has no other mission but to protect the exploitation of the people by the economically privileged classes." Throughout history, just as in our time, government is either the brutal, violent, arbitrary rule of the few over the many or it is an organized instrument to ensure that domination and privilege will be in the hands of those who . . . have cornered all the means of life." Under capitalism, as Malatesta succulently put, the state is "the bourgeoisie's servant and gendarme." The reason why the state is marked by centralized power is due to its role as the protector of (minority) class rule. As such, a state cannot be anything but a defender of minority power as its centralized and hierarchical structure is designed for that purpose. If the working class really were running society, as Marxists claim they would be in the "dictatorship of the proletariat," then it would not be a state. As Bakunin put it: "Where all rule, there are no more ruled, and there is no State."

A transition phase is dangerous and is not required . An anarchist revolution is a mass revolution . It's not the political power taken by a minority or by a party . An anarchist revolution is a SOCIAL REVOLUTION not a political one . In anarchist theory, "social revolution" means far more than just revolution. For anarchists, a true revolution is far more than just a change in the political makeup, structure or form of a society. It must transform all aspects of a society -- political, economic, social, interpersonal relationships, sexual and so on -- and the individuals who comprise it. Indeed, these two transformations go hand in hand, complementing each other and supporting each other -- individuals, while transforming society, transform themselves in the process. As Alexander Berkman put it, "there are revolutions and revolutions. Some revolutions change only the governmental form by putting a new set of rulers in place of the old. These are political revolutions, and as such they are often meet with little resistance. But a revolution that aims to abolish the entire system of wage slavery must also do away with the power of one class to oppress another. That is, it is not any more a mere change of rulers, of government, not a political revolution, but one that seeks to alter the whole character of society. That would be a social revolution."

All I'm saying is imagine if all the governments of the world came to a point where they realized the necessity for something like the Venus Project. Imagine if they agreed to work with the people to begin a transition to slowly build toward the goals and along the way melt the government as the goals become accomplished. You can imagine how effective the government would be in wide scale education and dissemination of information. Just imagine if we are at ends, and the government agrees to deconstruct itself from within (instead of without). Imagine how effective that would be.

That's all I'm saying. And the Venus Project says that could happen if the world's governments realized how dire our situation is becoming, if only they were educated, rational, and courageous enough. But we simply aren't there yet. The social conscious is not there yet. Therefore people rather hope for revolution and overthrow because that is much more possible at this point in time. And that is what you advocate, with which I can agree on a certain level. I'm certain both methods would work, but they seem as if they would work at different points in time. It seems that revolution and overthrow is more practical here and now, as opposed to cooperative meltdown and collaborative reconstruction like in the Venus Project.

That cannot happen EVER. It's not in the nature of the state . Social democrats tried that . The late German SDP tried that but ultimately they became reformist and eventually they were transformed into a bourgeoisie party . You cannot convince the state to eliminate itself the state is an entity of itself . The state is made in that way . A hierarchical , centralized institution tends to corrupt to a degree in which rational people transform into idle drones. It's the IRON LAW OF OLIGARCHY the state is power and such power cannot be yielded by any human .

Only popular initiative can transform a society . A state defends her own interests . The interest of a state is not to melt down is to control because that's a state that's how a state is built. Look at these Marxists countries they used the same exact tactic as you propose . North Korea is still on the way to "communism" . A state cannot be entrusted whit the task of bringing communism to us . Marxists tried that and they failed MISERABLY in fact committing genocides in the name of it . Communism will come by mass popular initiative . Exactly what you say they do in Marxist countries . They prepare people for the glorious dream of communism . But communism will not come . Because the state will never let communism in. The state is power and power does not abolish itself .

Only popular initiatives made the state more democratic only a popular initiative will abolish it . I understand what you say but we must consider what a state is and how a state acts.

Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism . the concentration of wealth and the accumulation of capital leads to imperialism .

Sometimes I lose sight of the ground up model.