Iowa FTW

[TheoK]

I'm still waiting. What need of a government does an independent farmer have?

[bodie]

^He needs one to organise shooting parties to kill indigenous badgers who are suspected of infecting his cattle with TB.   

[TheoK]

 

[Adam]

One independent farmer might not need a government for HIMSELF

Society needs government thouhg

[TheoK]

One independent farmer might not need a government for HIMSELF

Society needs government thouhg

Why? If you don't need a government as an individual you don't need a government as a collective either.

The whole concept of a government is totally perverted.

[Adam]

One independent farmer might not need a government for HIMSELF

Society needs government thouhg

Why? If you don't need a government as an individual you don't need a government as a collective either.

How does that make sense?

[TheoK]

One independent farmer might not need a government for HIMSELF

Society needs government thouhg

Why? If you don't need a government as an individual you don't need a government as a collective either.

How does that make sense?

It makes perfect sense. If he can survive on that farm for his whole life and all others can do that too, why should they have a government then? What should it do?

[bodie]

If other countries have governments then that farmer will need one too.  In case of invasion from one of those countries.  One farmer can't defeat a well organised and well trained army.

[TheoK]

If other countries have governments then that farmer will need one too.  In case of invasion from one of those countries.  One farmer can't defeat a well organised and well trained army.

A better solution would be to abandon governments all over the Earth 

[Adam]

One independent farmer might not need a government for HIMSELF

Society needs government thouhg

Why? If you don't need a government as an individual you don't need a government as a collective either.

How does that make sense?

It makes perfect sense. If he can survive on that farm for his whole life and all others can do that too, why should they have a government then? What should it do?

The world does not work like that. Get real

[TheoK]

One independent farmer might not need a government for HIMSELF

Society needs government thouhg

Why? If you don't need a government as an individual you don't need a government as a collective either.

How does that make sense?

It makes perfect sense. If he can survive on that farm for his whole life and all others can do that too, why should they have a government then? What should it do?

The world does not work like that. Get real

And why doesn't it work like that? You are totally brainwashed by the state. What problems could the farmer have that he couldn't peacefully solve with his neighbours?

Bodie actually has more of a point than she might realize. She says that the government must protect the farmer from the military of other governments. But this shows how twisted it is. If no governments existed, no one needed to be protected from them.

[Adam]

so before big bad government came along, everything was peaceful and perfect?

I am not brainwashed by the state. I'm being fucking realistic. Just becuase someone disagrees with you dosen't mean they're brainwashed or stupid.

[TheoK]

so before big bad government came along, everything was peaceful and perfect?

No, but the state didn't do anything better. What did the first states do better for its subjects? Nil!

I am not brainwashed by the state. I'm being fucking realistic. Just becuase someone disagrees with you dosen't mean they're brainwashed or stupid.

Stultus es, Adame! Cerebrum parvum habes! 

[conlang returns]

so before big bad government came along, everything was peaceful and perfect?

I am not brainwashed by the state. I'm being fucking realistic. Just becuase someone disagrees with you dosen't mean they're brainwashed or stupid.

Here is an article I posted on the green party forum.

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/07/19-2

Full article below

Humans Not Predisposed to War, New Study Finds
Researchers show war is more recent of an invention than previously thought
- Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer


(Photo via Flickr / jf1234 / Creative Commons License)Countering the prevailing notion that humankind is naturally predisposed to war, new research suggests that primitive humans existed mostly peacefully, with war developing much later than previously thought.

The study's author, Patrik Soderberg, who worked with a team from Abo Academy University in Finland and published their research in the journal Science, said their research questioned "the idea that human nature, by default, is developed in the presence of making war and that war is a driving force in human evolution."

The findings, Soderberg said, challenge "the idea that war was ever-present in our ancestral past."

The study, "paints another picture where the quarrels and aggression were primarily about interpersonal motives instead of groups fighting against each other," said Soderberg.

The research pulls from observations of modern day people and tribes who are still isolated from contemporary society—living like hunter-gatherers did thousands of years ago—as the best living examples of how humans interacted in primitive times.

"About 12,000 years ago, we assume all humans were living in this kind of society, and that these kind of societies made up about for about 90% of our evolutionary path," Soderberg said.

The study found that of all the recorded deaths in these groups, most were considered individual "homicides," while only a few were caused by ongoing feuds. And, as Soderberg writes, "only the minority could be labeled as war."

"Over half the events were perpetrated by lone individuals and in 85% of the cases, the victims were members of the same society."

The researchers said that studying today's hunter-gatherer communities was not a perfect method for understanding ancient societies, "but said the similarities were significant and did provide an insight into our past," BBC News adds.

“It has been tempting to use these mobile foraging societies as rough analogies of the past and to ask how old warfare is and whether it is part of human nature. Our study shows that war is obviously not very common,” said study co-author Douglas Fry.

_____________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

You should also look up the Zimbardo and Milgram experiments.  Essential knowledge for anyone struggling with the issue of authority. 

[TheoK]