The Clamoring Over a Ruler of the Devolved

Well the title says it all: everyone looking to vote is pathetic, and less admirable than a furry little creature that can exist its whole lifetime in the wild. You can’t, voter. You’re pathetic. You require a leader, a ruler, someone to make you feel all warm and cuddly, if not an animal to nurse you, you little adorable thing.

…You’ve made it binary, in order to assuage your tiny mind. 0-1.

Sweet sweet lies, in the ears?

That’s why you watched the “debate” last night, right? I didn’t, but here’s the tweets I sent out around that time.

Oh, wait. Did I just hear that everyone is glued to the TV to determine which of two worthless fucks lies to them best?


Presidential debate = binary thinking. Imagine if every time you searched Google, you got only 2 links.

Word on the street is that Romney lied the best in this round; Obama, not having his teleprompter…no hip hop entourage, for the neo-“people of color” deal, etc. Etc.

My two biggest lafs, saw some places?

Poor Obama. He was prepped and ready to debate a conservative Republican and he instead found himself in the Democratic primaries.


That wasn’t a debate so much as Mitt Romney just took Obama for a cross country drive strapped to the roof of his car.

I don’t really give a shit that Romney proved himself more aggressive, more alpha, more quick of wit than GWB (and let’s face it: John McCain was never ever going to be President, which shows you how stupid religious Republicans are in terms of practicalities). I didn’t watch the thing because it’s kinda like watching football highlights: give me a few: got it.

So I’ll stick my neck out. I have a number of friends in various social niches who are commies. I manage to love them anyway. I watched, after the debate. Where before, they were all 1 Million Strong for Obama!!!!…then crickets began assaulting my ears, the lovable dupes. I hate that. I love that. Yea, I’m smarter….

Apparently it’s just assumed their lies are bulletproof compared to the other lies and it’s all just a competition over lies. I’m just a Sportscaster, here. But in any game, one does have to size up performance. OK, but when you have a virtual Savior? And then that Savior gets Crucified? Well, that was fucking fun (4sure always). Who doesn’t love a crucified Savior? Hell. It has been fueling Western Civilization for 2 millennia and the meme-for-morons shows no sign of letting up!


Did you see Chris “Hardball” Matthews pop a cork? Oh…not over the fact that Barak “The Messiah” Obama got himselk rolled like a cheap whore. I watched Matthews a few times back in the day. This is funny. His complaint? ….Obama does’t watch Matthews on cable, MSNBC. Had Obama watched, he’s have not been a whore in the debates, or whatever. Laf.

Chris Matthews Fror President 2016!!!!

Obviously, I could go on and on for fun & laughs at the expense of those wanting to be ruled…but it’s rather like tossing back a few cool ones after a game and getting into how everyone is pretty much duped or a moron, or…

…a trainee. Welcome trainees.

I love trainees. One mind at a time.


Since Covid killed my Cabo San Lucas vacation-rental business in 2021, this is my day job. I can't do it without you. Memberships are $10 monthly, $20 quarterly, or $65 annually. Two premium coffees per month. Every membership helps finance this work I do, and if you like what I do, please chip in. No grandiose pitches.


  1. SteamboatOperator on October 4, 2012 at 20:00

    Richard, If I were to tell you that it is in our nature, as a species, to seek the embrace of one form of slavery or another, to demand to be ruled, to feel comfort in bondage, what would you say? To your answer – why or why not?

    • Richard Nikoley on October 4, 2012 at 21:58


      I’d say. It’s in our nature to be fooled. Easily. That some seek freedom falsifies your premise.

      Humans are not slave seekers. They are survival seekers. They are easily fooled and there are individuals remarkably good at being foolers, for an unearned livelihood (or earned, depending on how your judgment turns–fool and his money, and shit, y’know).

  2. the evolution of j3nn on October 4, 2012 at 20:22

    Rulers are a tragedy of civilization. I think the desire to have rulers, to feel that we need them in this day in age, is for the less evolved, for the selfish, for the sociopaths. The enslaved believe these so-called leaders are what holds society together while completely ignoring the raping and pillaging and plundering they do in the name of humanity. If you vote for these despicable creatures to rule over us, you are responsible for their vile acts. Stop feeding the beast that wants to eat you. There is no such thing as a benevolent ruler.

    • SteamboatOperator on October 4, 2012 at 20:49

      @j3nn – No such thing as a benevolent ruler? Jesus Christ our, YOUR Lord and Savior says hi.

      • Napolean on October 4, 2012 at 21:58

        Because nothing says benevolence like “follow these 10 rules or BURN FOR ALL ETERNITY”

      • SteamboatOperator on October 4, 2012 at 23:06

        But HE loves you.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 5, 2012 at 00:11

        “But HE loves you.”

      • Napolean on October 4, 2012 at 23:57

        I’m sure some wife beaters love their wives too, but that doesn’t mean they deserve their wives undying devotion.

      • Napolean on October 5, 2012 at 01:12

        Did SteamboatOperator successfully troll me or is that just hilariously relevant?

      • Sean on October 5, 2012 at 03:39

        Carlin is good but I think that I Bertrand Russel made better points a long time ago(if less humorously) in Why I Am Not A Christian:

        Then you come to moral questions. There is one very serious defect to my mind in Christ’s moral character, and that is that He believed in hell. I do not myself feel that any person who is really profoundly humane can believe in everlasting punishment. Christ certainly as depicted in the Gospels did believe in everlasting punishment, and one does find repeatedly a vindictive fury against those people who would not listen to His preaching — an attitude which is not uncommon with preachers, but which does somewhat detract from superlative excellence. You do not, for instance find that attitude in Socrates. You find him quite bland and urbane toward the people who would not listen to him; and it is, to my mind, far more worthy of a sage to take that line than to take the line of indignation. You probably all remember the sorts of things that Socrates was saying when he was dying, and the sort of things that he generally did say to people who did not agree with him.

        Especially interesting for me was the argument against the often-made claim of Christ as a great moral philosopher. Russell helped me to realize the failings of that argument long before I’d ever heard of Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins. Turn the other cheek, but if you don’t believe I’m the son of the Invisible Man in the Sky you will suffer an eternity of hellfire and damnation.

      • Sean on October 5, 2012 at 04:10

        “but I think that I Bertrand Russel made better points”

        Yes that was a typo. I don’t consider myself to be the reincarnation of Bertrand Russell.

      • Shameer Mulji on October 7, 2012 at 16:08

        How the hell would you know, you never met him? Just because some book says so? Riiiggghhht.

      • Marnee on October 5, 2012 at 21:04

        But Jesus isn’t real.

  3. Morghan on October 5, 2012 at 00:48

    I plan to vote. Not for Rombama, so I’m “throwing away” my vote they tell me. Really, if everyone who is sick of this “check R or D” BS would go vote for an other, it might have an actual effect on things.

    • John on October 5, 2012 at 04:37

      @Morghan – I agree entirely. And for those of us in states in which the mechanics of the Electoral College have already dictated whom our vote will be applied to, this applies doubly so.

      This first debate generally solidified my opinion that neither major party is worthy of my vote this election cycle. If no one even attempt to serve them notice, nothing will change. Might as well start with those of us in the solidly Red and Blue states that are already perennially ignored each election cycle.

    • Natalie on October 5, 2012 at 12:38

      Wouldn’t make any difference. Elected rulers don’t rule much anyway, the real power in any empire belongs to the faceless bureaucrats.

  4. Gordon Shannon on October 5, 2012 at 04:49

    “Baa baa!!!” say all the sheep. Or is it “phone phone!!”?

  5. Christ You're Dumb on October 5, 2012 at 05:34

    The name says it all…

    • Richard Nikoley on October 5, 2012 at 08:47

      I don’t think you followed the post very well. It’s not Christ that was so dumb, or even his promoters, but his followers.

      But if that includes you, then the comment says it all, I guess.

  6. rob on October 5, 2012 at 05:53

    I was disappointed that neither candidate announced a War On Insulin.

    I dream of a day when a man is judged not by the size of his waistband, but by the lack of carbohydrates in his diet.

  7. jandy on October 5, 2012 at 07:54


    If everyone in this country were even half as smart as you- we wouldn’t need these BS “Leaders”, and don’t get me wrong, both of them are full of it. No, make that ALL of them are full of it- and we let them do it to us….

    But, I will admit, I live one in one of the bluest, blue pill cities in the country, and Watching the S.O.B. Messiah- in chief get p*wned by Romney, made my day, week, and possibly year.

    Gotta have some form of cheap entertainment. Now I have to go defrost my grass fed beef of the week:) before I join hubby at the NRA range for some practice.


    • Richard Nikoley on October 5, 2012 at 08:19

      Exactly, Jandy. Sometimes the raw sport of it all is worth a look. After all, “the most important election in history” only comes along once every four years. …Hey, perhaps they ought to combine the presidential election and the Olympics, with some new hybrid events.

      • jandy on October 5, 2012 at 08:37

        Dams straight,,,now you know what I would love to see….give both candidates a glock or Sig, set up a target, and see who gets the most marks in the circle, wins the election. O prob wouldnt even know which hand to use…

        P.S. Dont let the perfect hair and white shirt fool you. Even with all his BS…Itwould be another blow-out,,,,literally~~

        MY husband looks like the perfect white bread, midwestern nice guy ( well, he is) until he gets in front of a target….

        BTW, a shout out- I bought your book for him. Hes a lot like you, ex Navy captain ( 27 years total) he actually used to live in CA as well, was stationed on Treasure Island) and current self employed successful entrepreneur. His name is Richard, too :) He eats primal because I cook it for him, but I really want him to read it because I like your no BS style and I know he would, too. Admittedly, he looks more like your “before” pics, but I’m working on it. I dont push too hard-Don’t want to be the “paleo police”.

        Thanks again, and keep up the good work, Captain:)

      • Richard Nikoley on October 5, 2012 at 08:41

        Here Jandy, show him this:

        Just practicing my one arm shooting one Friday afternoon.

  8. LadySadie1 on October 5, 2012 at 08:32

    Voting for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil and against freedom.

    • Richard Nikoley on October 5, 2012 at 08:35

      My standard response when I hear that: thanks for pointing out that it’s all evil.

      • LadySadie1 on October 5, 2012 at 08:41

        Thanks for letting me get away with stating the obvious.

  9. the 3volution of j3nn on October 5, 2012 at 08:55

    @Richard – FYI, Napolean is my husband in case you noticed we’re both of the same origin. ;)

  10. josef on October 5, 2012 at 10:35

    Richard, Chris Mathews needs you guide!

    I noticed that instead of the debate you watched football highlights. Good choice!

    Did you play ball?

    What’s your favorite team?

  11. Joshua on October 5, 2012 at 10:57

    I acknowledge that each individual vote is mathematically meaningless, but that won’t stop me from casting mine. I’ve always been a windmill tilter.

    I haven’t decided whether to write my name in or leave it blank or vote for Johnson yet though.

    The “you’re wasting your vote” people baffle me. They don’t understand the long game – the only way to effect change is to punish those (by not voting for them) who are failing to deliver on their promises. If you keep on voting for turds who take your vote for granted, you’re just going to keep on getting turds to vote for.

    Anarchy is an attractive notion, but since it’s never going to happen I try to advocate MORE freedom whenever possible.

    • LadySadie1 on October 5, 2012 at 11:49

      Joshua – while you are trying to decide who to cast your vote for on the national stage, please keep in mind that depending where you live, the local races are very important.

      U.S. and state level politicians “may be” (pfft) already bought-and-paid-for, but often county and city ‘leaders’ still have the ability to think for themselves and vote for what is actually in the best interest of their constituents. Several counties and municipalities in various parts of the country have taken strong stands against such issues as NDAA and Agenda 21. It may not seem like much, but if you actually understand the “long game” you know that affecting change on the local level is much more effective use of your time as a voter than utilizing a write-in vote on the ballot for POTUS.

      • Joshua on October 5, 2012 at 17:11

        I usually write in my name for local offices as well, or if I’m feeling especially charitable to the pandering politicians, I will vote against incumbents.

        I suspect my most important vote this year will be against the marriage amendment in Minnesota.

    • Richard Nikoley on October 5, 2012 at 13:24

      Anarchy begins first and foremost in the mind. Second, at home.

      It’s the easiest thing in the world. Most people are halfway there. They just make meaningless distinctions.

      • Joshua on October 5, 2012 at 17:12

        Most people are an anarchist for “me”, but rarely for “thee”.

      • marie on October 5, 2012 at 21:55

        Joshua, have you considered that maybe a fear of ‘thee’ is one of the necessary things states/governments use on us in order for them to exist at all?
        This video traces out the train of thought to an interesting conclusion, imo :

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 06:07

        Thanks. You also had one of his videos in comments somewhere a few months back, it might have been this one. I like his delivery especially on this slavery video and most radio broadcasts/videos.
        But check this out, specifically on Voting (facial expressions a bit distracting half way through, he is intense here!)
        “voting encourages participation in a coercive and destructive system, it gives sanction to evil”

      • Richard Nikoley on October 6, 2012 at 00:28

        Goog call Marie

        I linked up Stephan’s video a couple of year’s back. May be time to do it again.

      • ladysadie1 on October 6, 2012 at 08:48

        Thanks Marie.

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 10:29

        And thank you ladysadie, for highlighting the difference about voting/participating at the Local level. It’s not quite the communal discussion of humans’ natural band/tribe, but it’s still at a size to be effective. Now if towns could just do it without committee meetings…. :)

      • dr. gabriella kadar on October 6, 2012 at 18:22

        Yes Marie, human beings can be ‘fear trained’. So can dogs and horses. It’s why I like cats and donkeys: they cannot be fear trained. Their brains just don’t work like that.

        Take it too far and horses become man killers.

        Dogs and humans vary.

        So, okay, the strongest motivating factor in human life is fear. Unlike all those popular songs it’s not love.

  12. SteamboatOperator on October 5, 2012 at 23:29

    Prove it. He’s available to all, you just have to open your mind.

  13. SteamboatOperator on October 6, 2012 at 01:58

    Forgot to enable scripts – can’t troll effectively. My bad.

  14. Ben on October 6, 2012 at 03:08

    Okay, I wasn’t going to vote, but now I will. Just to piss you off. Or make you sad.

  15. mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 10:26

    Stalin was different than Gorbachev. Churchill was different than Chamberlain. Nagin was different than Giuliani. It may not matter who YOU vote for. But it does often matter who is in charge.
    It’s sort of hip and cool to be above it all. But that’s only because things work basically the way you need them to: running water, a banking system, roads to drive on, and the uncensored internet for Rich to tell the dissenters to fuck off.
    I’m going to vote. Not because I want to be ruled. But that’s my say; its my right. I don’t care if numerically it makes very little difference. I feel better for it, not lessened by it.

    • marie on October 6, 2012 at 11:09

      mr Dave, it’s neither hip nor cool……morality rarely is that and if you don’t know it’s a fundamentally moral issue, try looking into it, you might be pleasantly surprised.
      It’s been argued that not only are you lessened by voting, but you damage everyone else too, by legitimizing the use of force over people. This is what any government is at it’s basis, it is the legitimized initiator of force, no matter how many benefits it provides. The smarter governments provide more benefits to better improve the productivity of the slave-force.
      Giving examples of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ slave-drivers is just that. Why not do away with masters entirely? A dangerous thought, if it takes hold on a large scale. So of course a tremendous amount of effort goes into making sure people believe that we Can’t do without government. But then, we used to believe in the “divine right” of kings once -the thinking evolves.
      As for things working as we need them, just because a government does provide these things in most places now doesn’t mean that Only a government can provide them, that’s never been the case.
      I posted this again above but I don’t think you can have seen it as you just joined the discussion – if you care to look, it does a decent job of laying-out this type of reasoning :

      • dr. gabriella kadar on October 6, 2012 at 18:24

        There are people who do well with freedom. Then there are an awful lot of people who are better off being slaves. It’s a sad situation.

  16. mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 13:26


    I can only live in the world I live in. I’ve seen lots of what else is out there. Seen the midde east, asia and Europe. When the wall came down, I saw both east and west berlin. I know people who fled Vietnam and heard a little bit about life there. I’ll take my chance and happily so with American Democracy.

    Madison was on to something:
    “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”

    what am I to conclude from that video? Its philisophical claptrap. Its thought provoking, but I can’t really find an application for it. I would just the same listen to “imagine”. Its slightly more pleasant.

    • marie on October 6, 2012 at 14:50

      mr Dave,
      I’m so grateful that Madison didn’t chose to “live in the world (he lived ) in” as it was at the time! Because the majority of the people in Europe were thought to be such dumb brutes that superior totalitarian regimes were Needed to control and guide them (‘why, look at how dirty, stupid, diseased and mean-spirited they are, they gleefully stone their own kind in the village square every Sunday for all kinds of offenses!’)
      Even more, I am especially grateful that Madison firmly embraced the “philosophical claptrap” of his time, enlightenment.
      Yes, he certainly was on to something – and what he was onto was already unimaginable at that time, did you expect it to be ageless? It represented an evolution in thinking up to then, so what now, no more evolution in thinking?
      But you aren’t really noticing any of this, are you? Because where I tried to engage in your arguments with your vocabulary earlier, you return with broad dismissals of an argument that you couldn’t fault. If you can fault it, then you can do any name-calling you like.
      For example, you’ve used the words of a man from 200 years ago who embraced New thinking about the capabilities of men (that Common men could be intelligent enough to ‘govern themselves’) in order to dismiss any New thinking about,,,,the capabilities of men.
      Now That is some of the most idiotic claptrap I’ve ever heard.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 6, 2012 at 15:54

        You go girl.

        When I read that he was “onto something” it made me laugh. Ok then, onto what?

        Hey, Mr Dave simply wants a little respect for displaying his “I Voted” lepell sticker on 11/8. I’ll be ridiculing that later.

      • mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 19:06

        a need for some government. question is size and scope.

  17. ladysadie1 on October 6, 2012 at 13:31

    mr Dave:

    “American Democracy”… Nope. This is supposed to be a republic. There is a difference. “Democracy” = two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner. No, thank you!

    • mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 15:11


      true it is a constitutional republic. But its still American democracy in that it varies from how democracy works elsewhere. At any rate, you are free to vote or not. I won’t call you names if you don’t. I get the anarchist / libertarian bent and even agree on many points. But to me some this sounds like because you can’t get the exact political out comes you want, you take your ball and go home. I don’t mean you specifically but that seems like the sentiment. Of course what do I know. I’m duped in all my thinking by the system, and the slavemasters. Perhaps enlightenments awaits, I’ll take in some more freedomain radio, and see what happens.

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 15:35

        mr Dave, “I won’t call you names if you don’t”. Because you’ve already done enough of that?
        According to you, people who don’t want to vote are doing so because :
        ” it’s sort of hip and cool to be above it all” – fashionably snooty
        ” …can’t get the exact outcomes (they) want, take(their) ball and go home” – petulant
        or maybe because they listen to “philosophical claptrap”.
        No, you haven’t been name-calling from the start, heaping scorn, dismissing without engaging in any argument.

      • Jscott on October 6, 2012 at 17:10

        You had me at petulance. This has been quite enjoyable to watch. Carry on.

      • ladysadie1 on October 6, 2012 at 17:12

        Are you sure you aren’t being baited?

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 17:41

        your enjoyment just made it worthwhile :)

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 18:20

        That’s fine Sadie, when I’m in the mood I just try despite appearances and sometimes the best happens and I actually get a real argument to sink my teeth into. At worst, there’s plenty others reading….someone else often pops in :)

      • mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 18:55

        the thread starts with any one who votes being called pathetic. I vote. where do we go from there? Yes, I disagree the premise of the post. Maybe pathetic is a term of affection for you. seems like anything goes around here. maybe it would have been better to tell you to fuck off. there is no argument. Its an opinion. you can have yours its ok with me. I just think its silly. and Rich thinks I’m pathetic.

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 19:31

        mr Dave, but the thread started with you and when I responded obviously ‘pathetic’ wasn’t a term of affection or in the picture at all. Yes, it IS anything goes around here….argue as you will, in each thread, with each person. In other words, there’s no rule here that says you Have to be a dick :)
        But if you Do want to call names, hey, Great, more spice….then Justify them! Engage in a damn argument. What got to me was that you’ve just been blowing everything off (by some round-about name calling). If you’re not prepared to engage in any argument, then why where you talking?
        Here’s a reality, here or anywhere : if you can dismantle an argument or an idea, you can call it silly with impunity. But if all you’ve got is sarcasm and ‘opinions’ that you don’t substantiate, don’t be surprised if you just get back some of what you’re dishing.

      • mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 20:30

        I started with the point, that who is charge can matter if we face world war or other crisis domestic or abroad. It matters to me in other ways, but that was my starting point. Go back and read my first post.

        That’s the basis of my argument. Are you telling me it doesn’t matter who is in charge? perhaps we are having different arguments. We can look at political leadership and see failure and success. I vote for who I think will be successsful. We live in country with a system of government. elections have ramifications. you are telling me to check out beacuse it it gives one human power over another. Are you saying we should overthrow the whole kit and kaboodle. explain to me the pratical application of your thinking…

      • marie on October 7, 2012 at 00:20

        O.k. mr Dave, that’s interesting.
        This is long, as explanations tend to be, I apologize in advance. Be careful what you ask for, eh? :)
        First off, yup, it matters who’s in charge….in some smaller countries with more immediate forms of government and certainly in countries now in transition from totalitarian regimes.
        But it doesn’t matter here, it hasn’t for some time. Not only that, but you seem to believe you can Affect who is in charge by voting.
        The argument all along has been that this belief is an illusion.
        Parties for some time now have been a collection of big financial interest groups against each other, think (big) dogs squabbling over meaty bones.
        We legitimize their interests by voting either way, we legitimize the very existence of government by doing that. I mean, do you really think the Patriot act would Not have been passed if Bush was not in office, or this or that capital gains tax cut (actually started under Clinton) or the trillions in bail-outs would Not have happened if Obama had been in power at the time, or….anything major?
        The other cross-talk is in the notion that anyone would ‘overthrow the whole kit and caboodle’. No, not at all. Very impractical, because,
        *It takes the growth of a whole culture, the spread of ideas, in order for real freedom to work.*
        It’s not happening tomorrow, exactly because the culture for it isn’t there.
        __If some minority group came along and tried to Impose anarchy now (violating, btw, every principle of natural ethics in that one act), then the system would of course react, Violently, throwing back at us the worst that it was has in store, the war-lords and the kleptocrats.
        __So it takes a change in thinking, mind to mind, a slow process or one rapidly triggered by other cultural forces, until the concept expands to a majority of people.
        Not the other way around, not some ‘system’ imposed by a few (which has been a lot of our history…except around the american revolution where we did come ‘close’ to freedom and natural human rights, influenced by the enlightenment in Europe).
        And if the culture doesn’t change in that direction, it doesn’t. Evolution is at work, either way.

        Of course democracy is the best of all systems humanity ever devised, at least on a Large scale, up to now. I don’t think anyone can argue that point. However, it has run its course, with governments getting ever bigger (to continue existing, power grows) and further away from the interests of the people they were originally set-up to represent.
        Now we can consider going beyond ‘systems’.
        __So developing political ideas even further along the same path is not destructive, not overthrowing ‘the whole kit and caboodle’ that you asked, it’s…well, evolution.
        __It’s recognizing the fundamental natural rights that underscore human interactions and living an individual life by those principles. One person, one family, one community at a time…
        There’s fear, as Lady Sadie and Dr. Kadar also note. Which kind of fears drive each person probably vary to some degree. What are yours?

      • mr Dave on October 7, 2012 at 07:53

        Thanks for the thougtful response.

        “We legitimize their interests by voting either way, we legitimize the very existence of government by doing that. I mean, do you really think the Patriot act would Not have been passed if Bush was not in office, or this or that capital gains tax cut (actually started under Clinton) or the trillions in bail-outs would Not have happened if Obama had been in power at the time, or….anything major?”

        A few things to unpack there: I’m okay with existance of government. So I don’t feel the need to not legitimize that. Your second point is the parties often do the same things. I agree sometimes they do,, but sometimes they don’t. If you look at the last 3.5 years, the liberal grassroots have gotten a lot of what they wanted. The crowd got mobilized, raised money and gave us democratic majorities and Barack Obama in the white house. In 2010 the opposition got mobilized at the grass roots level and things swung back. We’ll see what happens in nov. If Romney wins the conservative grassroots will get some of what they want. This will tug in the country in a different direction. in my opinion better. Mobilized grass roots do influence policy but no one gets everything they want. That might be the best part of the whole system. I understand numerically my one vote doesn’t sway things one way or the other. . But I still want it counted, and I hope others that think like I do take the time to cast their vote.

        Evolution of ideas happens now in the system. This is no longer Bill Clinton’s democrat party. The Blue Dogs are dead. The parties evolve or devolve to meet the times. I don’t think sitting out influences things. Mitt will have a very differnt congress than Bush did, if Mitt wins. Rand Paul has a place at the table now. I see a more libertarian republican party today than 10 years ago. Things evolve.

        I’ll tell you what I believe. I think with the proper mix of regulation, tax reform, and budget cuts we can spur a few more points of GDP growth, change the trajectory of the deficit and decrease unemployment.

        My fear is we accept the current state of affairs as normal. It doesn’t have to be this way.

      • marie on October 7, 2012 at 11:04

        Thanks for responding mr Dave.
        I see where you’re coming from. However, for every example of a difference between parties that you could give, one could give an example of a similarity, especially in foreign policy/wars (which you had brought up earlier) and long-term economics. Thing is, in discussing mechanics, we are only scratching the surface – your question was mostly about how anarchy could possibly work in practice, so that’s what I mostly addressed.
        What we haven’t discussed is the Fundamental problem of having any government : basically it’s a system based on force with a tremendous loss of life/wars/atrocities Built-into the system and it’s furthermore unsustainable on a large scale requiring ever greater force.
        So : unethical, deadly And impractical.
        Yah…those are bold statements – for me, it was the practicality that always stumped me, as in :
        “but surely, if ‘we’ just fight/work hard enough, ‘we’ can make it better”.
        You seem to have that feeling too, if I read correctly. So, I’d like to expand on them – later this evening if I may, working on a deadline today.

      • marie on October 7, 2012 at 11:18

        And thanks again for engaging. I always feel that in conversation, ‘we’ get a chance to refine each other’s thinking and maybe learn something new. No one is born with any of these ideas after all :)

      • mr Dave on October 7, 2012 at 12:47

        It’s been fun. Thank you. the practical application is key. Many Ideas sound good, and liberating. But my question is how does it work? I see a few fundamental problems with having NO government.

        We are almost back to where we started. I think Madison still applies. He’d also be happy about the free exchange of ideas. Be well!

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 08:11

        “Are you telling me it doesn’t matter who is in charge?”

        No. I’m telling you it matters that _someone_ is in charge.

        Nobody should be _in charge_. Nobody should be president, chancellor, prime minister, king, prince, dictator, his majesty, etc.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 08:16

        “Are you saying we should overthrow the whole kit and kaboodle. explain to me the pratical application of your thinking…”

        I don’t should anyone. I tell you what I do, you can regard it however you like. The idea of “overthrow” is as misguided as government itself generally and just leads to a different form of government, or the same or worse, or marginally better.

        “Practical application” for whom? I hold principles and form my ideas based on them. That’s as practical—for me—as I can possibly get. I don’t, like you, decide on what’s practical for me on whim, then seek to impose my “practicalities” on everyone else.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 08:19

        “I’m okay with existance of government.”

        Lets’ be clear. You are OK with one group of people dominating another group of people under the threat of force which involves guns, prisons, fines, seizures and compulsions and coercions of all sorts.

        ….I guess, because you think it’s “practical.”

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 08:43

        “But my question is how does it work? I see a few fundamental problems with having NO government.”

        Work for whom?

        You see fundamental problems—for unspecified whoms—at not having an agent of force commanding dominance and such. I don’t.

        You seem to come from this weird perspective that “anarchy” is just another “system” imposed on people, just as some call atheism a “religion.”

        It’s no system at all. It’s the absence of a central system. What happens in anarchy?

        EVERYTHING happens. So the smart people, as social beings, gravitate to social interaction that works best for them in a give & take, trade, mutual protection scenario.

        Planet Earth is itself an anarchy. Point me to the world government.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 10:44

        this is thoughtful. I still think it has limitations and holes. but to me it’s the most poignant thing you’ve said.

        this is what I was asking.


        You seem to come from this weird perspective that “anarchy” is just another “system” imposed on people, just as some call atheism a “religion.”

        It’s no system at all. It’s the absence of a central system. What happens in anarchy?

        EVERYTHING happens. So the smart people, as social beings, gravitate to social interaction that works best for them in a give & take, trade, mutual protection scenario.

        Planet Earth is itself an anarchy. Point me to the world government.

      • Cow on October 8, 2012 at 12:38

        No such thing as peaceful anarchy. Anywhere is grouping of humans, they is gonna be greed, envy, ego, corruption and sinister motivation. For good or bad intents, some gonna try to TAKE control, whether it tribal chief, mob kingpin, collusive business consortium, or some fat dude on Survivor. Sure, maybe you no like them to do this, so you figth back! But you has to have other willing to fight back with you! But then uprising become a movement itself! OMG! Now we need rebel to rebel against rebel alliance! You gonna spend history defending anarchy. Helps them Obi Wan Kenobi, you they only hope.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 19:25

        Well what do you expect from a cow. And you can’t fight back, you just kill it and eat it.

      • Cow on October 9, 2012 at 11:07

        You species edible too, Richard. No underestimates cows, we has been amassing great armament.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 11:36

        Somewhere I saw this hilarious cartoon image of a cow grilling up ground beef to the horror of other cow onlookers.

        “Tastes like chicken.” The caption.


      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 11:39

        “we has been amassing great armament.”

        Beyond massive flatulence? Do elaborate.

      • Cow on October 9, 2012 at 12:43

        Cliche that cows is flatulent is outrage of species hate crime and defammations! We only farts when human enslave us and force feed us soys and shit, Richard!

        As for weapon, if you can see in last picture I had 30 pound iron mace, but I has decide to switch to machete, because human very tall. So I gonna chops off you legs and then smashes you head in. That plan for now. I like Medieval weapons, because the killing more personal, but I maybe decide to just fuck it and go with drone strikes.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 14:00

        “but I maybe decide to just fuck it and go with drone strikes.”

        Have you designed an interface device designed for hooves instead of opposable thumbs and fingers?

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 15:10

        Mr Dave

        I’ve been saying that in various ways for years.

        But, I know, I’m just a short order cook and I have to pump out the same thing over and over.

        But I love it.

        One mind at a time.

      • Cow on October 9, 2012 at 16:29

        Oh Jesus God! Fucking hell. If I has to hear human go on about they fucking opposable thumb one more time is make me want to blow my fucking brains off. Guess what Richard, is possible to have full life and operate deadly armaments without thumb.

        PS. You pelts suck! How ’bout that, okay!

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 18:10


        What is lob abouts youz. Youz rising up even thoughs totoally outmatched by opposable thumbs.

        Weez cans dos Chritmas cards almosts every years, though, so please send me your pasture grid coordinates.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 22, 2012 at 16:30

        “this is thoughtful. I still think it has limitations and holes. but to me it’s the most poignant thing you’ve said.”

        Thanks mr Dave. For some reason, 5 of your comments got caught in the spam filter. Must have been a burp in the system.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 6, 2012 at 15:57

        Mr. Dave

        That’s cool. Take some in.

        fWIW, it’s nothing like taking a ball and going home. It is: I have one life to lead and I’ll be damned if I’m going to waste it picking out evil, with the caveat that its just a little less.

        This is what the Internet gives us, now. The ability to influence minds. One at a time,

      • mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 19:01

        As do I. I make the most of it. If i saw it as a choice between evils, I wouldn’t vote. But I don’t. I look where they want to pull the country, and decide. I don’t expect everything I want to come true. I hit the lever and move on with my life.

        I get it brother: free the animal.

    • dr. gabriella kadar on October 6, 2012 at 18:27

      LOL! Great.

  18. ladysadie1 on October 6, 2012 at 15:30

    mr Dave – I spent over a decade as a delegate for (my party) I think that the the definition of insanity applies here. “Keep doing the same thing over and over and see how that works out” … While I choose NOT to participate in elections, I still believe in making a difference on a local level. Even anarchy starts with more than one person.

    • Richard Nikoley on October 6, 2012 at 16:01

      Saddie is an anarchist in her mind. This is where it starts. She’s an anarchist at home. She raises three girls and doesn’t need the state or a ruler. And she’s an anarchist in her view of politics on that its local and people ought to find ways to cooperate.

      Not pure, because tentacles of state force are everywhere, trying to make you a whore, but she is absolutely doing the best she can and if the shit ever hit the fan seriously, she and her girls would do better than most.

    • mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 19:16

      I think its interesting that you were a delegate. I don’t think I’m that commited to either side. did you lose your faith in the party? when I think of anarchy I think of Somlia. very little governmemt there.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 7, 2012 at 09:08

        I would certainly appreciate it if people would actually do some research on Somalia.

        “According to the CIA and the Central Bank of Somalia, despite experiencing civil unrest, Somalia has maintained a healthy informal economy, based mainly on livestock, remittance/money transfer companies and telecommunications.[1][2] Due to a dearth of formal government statistics and the recent civil war, it is difficult to gauge the size or growth of the economy. For 1994, the CIA estimated the GDP at $3.3 billion.[3] In 2001, it was estimated to be $4.1 billion.[4] By 2009, the CIA estimated that the GDP had grown to $5.731 billion, with a projected real growth rate of 2.6%.[1] According to a 2007 British Chambers of Commerce report, the private sector also grew, particularly in the service sector. Unlike the pre-civil war period when most services and the industrial sector were government-run, there has been substantial, albeit unmeasured, private investment in commercial activities; this has been largely financed by the Somali diaspora, and includes trade and marketing, money transfer services, transportation, communications, fishery equipment, airlines, telecommunications, education, health, construction and hotels.[5] Libertarian economist Peter T. Leeson attributes this increased economic activity to the Somali customary law (referred to as Xeer), which he suggests provides a stable environment to conduct business in.[6]”

        You can check the references at the bottom. I have, and others.

      • mr Dave on October 7, 2012 at 12:12



        Somalia, from 1991 to 2006, is cited as a real-world example of a stateless society and legal system


        The international aid group Médecins Sans Frontières stated that the level of daily violence during this period was “catastrophic”.[18] A statistic from 2000 indicated that only 21% of the population had access to safe drinking water at that time, and Somalia had one of the highest child mortality rates in the world with 10% of children dying at birth and 25% of those surviving birth dying before age five.[3] Additionally, “adult literacy is estimated to have declined from the already low level of 24% in 1989 to 17.1% in 2001.”[19] A more recent 2003 study reported that the literacy rate was 19%.[16] The impact on human development in Somalia of governmental collapse and ensuing civil war was profound, leading to the breakdown of political institutions, the destruction of social and economic infrastructure and massive internal and external migrations.[19]

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 08:28


        Yes, really.

        You see, I know why you put up Somalia even if you don’t. Same reason everyone puts it up. Why? Because 100% of everyone who puts that up is completely ignorant of the fact that since 1991, Somalia has improved immensely in almost every area, if not every one.

        And the pure assumption based on a label by all of yooz COMPLETELY IGNORANT is that it must surely be worse off. It’s not, as a simple matter of fact.

        Somalia was no paradise in 1991 with government and it’s no paradise now. But it is far, far better off. Way higher GDP, way higher economic development, higher longevity, lower infant mortality, and on and on.

        In other words, using Somalia as a reason for why anarchic social structures can’t work and allow for human, social, economic development is…..fucking stupid and ignorant.


      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 09:18

        Somlia: Jihad, tigers and pirates, oh my.

        would you rather live there? I know that is hardly point like the article says. But it is to me. what this data shows is that Somlia had a fucked up government, and when that fell, there was more economic freedom, hence higher GDP. The place was still a swamp of human suffering, even worse in some ways. Plus aid was being pumped in so that distorts the numbers anyway.

        If Somilia is your shining example of Anarchy in action, I would say what else you got?

      • Joshua on October 8, 2012 at 09:25


      • Joshua on October 8, 2012 at 09:35

        Here’s my legitimate reply.

        So… you put forth one of the worse situations in the world today & say that the implementation of Richard’s political philosophy has only made things a little bit better.

        That’s like Richard putting forth Zimbabwe’s decade of economic contraction through 2008 as an example and saying see – government sucks.

        By the way, according to the CIA, anarchic Somalia has a 20% higher GDP per capita than highly governed Zimbabwe.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 09:44


        You aren’t listening.

        There is only one point to make. When you take a dogshit country and remove an oppressive government, the dogshit doesn’t turn into sweet smelling roses, nor does it get more putrid.

        It’s just gets a bit better naturally over time.

        They didn’t go through an Enightenment as our culture did.

        My main interest on all of this is how it might change their culture.

        Google falsification in the Popperian sense and realize that that’s what this is about. I have falsified your implied ignorant claim that without central rule, all goes to chaos.

        No, most if not everything has improved.

        “It can’t work.” We have to have domination and rule.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 09:47


        Do they have rodez in Summalliaz?

        Oh, shit, I think they do. Ohz noz.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 10:02

        “By the way, according to the CIA, anarchic Somalia has a 20% higher GDP per capita than highly governed Zimbabwe.”

        Waddya wanna bet that Mugabe wants his honkeys back.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 10:07

        Joshua you are correct Somalia is bad example but not for the reasons you think.

        I did put forth somalia. then I researched it more and decided it sucks to live there. Now based on what you said I looked into a it little more. I don’t think its is a good case in point for either argument. It’s either been governed by some local warlords or this:

        The Transitional Federal Government (TFG) (Somali: Dowladda Federaalka Kumeelgaarka) was the internationally recognised government of the Republic of Somalia until 20 August 2012, when its tenure officially ended, and a new presidential election was due.[1] It was established as one of the Transitional Federal Institutions (TFIs) of government as defined in the Transitional Federal Charter (TFC) adopted in November 2004 by the Transitional Federal Parliament (TFP).

        The Transitional Federal Government officially comprised the executive branch of government, with the TFP serving as the legislative branch. The government was headed by the President of Somalia, to whom the cabinet reported through the Prime Minister. However, it was also used as a general term to refer to all three branches collectively.

        Backed by the United Nations, the African Union as well as the United States, the TFG battled Al Shabaab insurgents to assume full control of the southern part of the country. By August 2011, the government and its AMISOM allies managed to secure control over all of Mogadishu.[2]

        In June 2011, following the Kampala Accord, the mandates of the President, the Parliament Speaker and Deputies were extended until August 2012.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 10:25

        You haven’t falsified anything. We both operated under a false premise that Somilia was an example of Anarchy… it may of been close in some ways. But there were governing entities in some way all along. Fuck, man. that Popper shit was clever though.

        I wish I new about that earlier in life. It would have been fun to lay that on someone late into a night of drinking. “I falsified your premise in the Poprerain sense, mother fucker. Bartender another round!” what fucking hoot that would have been. College girls probably would have dug that.

      • Joshua on October 8, 2012 at 10:32

        It’s kind of silly to talk about Somalia as a country in general. Somaliland in northern Somalia has its own currency. Puntland is nearly as independent as Somaliland.

        I think it’s a little disingenuous to say we can’t use Somalia as an example of anarchy because it’s not a perfect example. There are zero perfect examples of ANY kind of government in the world. No pure dictators, no pure democracies, no pure anarchies, no pure communisms, etc. . All we have to go on is what level of organization a given population lives under – I argue that less top-down organization leads to greater prosperity. Is there an inflection point where that becomes untrue? Perhaps, but I argue that we’re nowhere near that point in the US.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 10:47

        “It’s kind of silly to talk about Somalia as a country in general. Somaliland in northern Somalia has its own currency. Puntland is nearly as independent as Somaliland.

        “I think it’s a little disingenuous to say we can’t use Somalia as an example of anarchy because it’s not a perfect example.”

        The more “government,” the better.

        Saddie is onto this in some respect. Go local. More local. There is nothing wrong with community. We’re built for that. Erecting (no typo) a PRESIDENT in DC? Fucking ludicrous in every respect. Pathetic.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 10:50

        “I argue that less top-down organization leads to greater prosperity.” I would firmly agree. and yes the US is moving the wrong direction in that regard.

      • ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 10:59

        Richard, I giggle a little every time I see how you type my name because you always give me “double D’s”…

        Local is the key, but maybe we should refer to it as neo-tribalism or by some other clever name?

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 11:13

        “but maybe we should refer to it as neo-tribalism or by some other clever name?”

        Im not a fan of neologisms. While I pretty much don’t use the word Capitalism, anymore because it has been so twisted and now means favor atr the hands of government in exchange for what you can do for them, anarchy is pretty hard to twist and easy to correct.

      • marie on October 8, 2012 at 11:30

        Sadie, I’m not happy with the word either, it carries some bizarre baggage, but anything else would be (willfully and not) misinterpreted too.

      • ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 11:46

        Marie, that makes sense. I am a little undecided how I feel about being referred to as an anarchist. Richard is the only one that has ever called me that. :)

        The FTA method of training one mind at a time?

      • mark on October 9, 2012 at 09:56

        repeat “I am an anarchist” 10 times – you will believe..

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 10:22

        She is. And a damn good one, too.

        Anarchy, first and by far foremost, begins in the mind.

      • ladysadie1 on October 9, 2012 at 11:31

        Richard and Mark, you are going to have The Thought Police at my door talking like that! :)

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 11:43

        When they show up, edumacate them.

        BTW, I’ve been spouting this line for almost 20 years online. No thought police yet.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 15:03

        So mr Dave, where are the quotes of the reporters telling us how all the people embraced this UN face saving slight of hand?

        How about the quotes that we’re fine, leave us alone.

        Neither. I suppose that’s somewhat objective, for someone not wanting to TRY to make a case. Because, I foreclosed that and now you are not making a case, but in save face mode,

        Somalia is a case for anarchism. Primitive, yes, but worthy of attention. But only for smart and objective people.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 15:06

        You haven’t falsified anything”

        Please don’t be dishonest, especially if you want me to buy you drinks.

        Somalia is a hybrid case. Suck it up.

      • ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 13:04

        mr Dave

        I was blackballed when the party leadership took exception with my desire to focus on economics/fiscal issues rather than being a “good little girl” and standing on principle as it was dictated to me by the party leadership. On the state level that was related to platform planks that had to do with an irrational desire by the party to dictate people’s lifestyle choices. On the local level, it had to do with my participation in a non-partisan effort to legalize the sale of alcoholic beverages. A 35% increase in county tax revenue and a substantial decrease in DUI arrests still didn’t put me back in the party’s good graces. Turns out that legislating the “moral high ground” is more important to some people than taking personal responsibility and setting a good example.

        Oh well. As it turns out, each POTUS simply continues and escalates the bad policies of the one before him so I have very little interest in politics on the national level. I am still active locally but not in as direct a way as I used to be.

      • mr Dave on October 7, 2012 at 16:50

        That’s a bummer. I can where you are coming from. I think who potus is does matter to a degree. Its about trajectory for me. I happen to think this current guy is a fucking moron. So if he loses I’ll feel a little better about things.

      • ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 17:45

        mr Dave

        I disagree regarding POTUS and refer you to my fall back position “lesser of two evils…” Since I just made supper (a delicious Paleo lasagna, FYI and feel free to ask about it) I have the tinfoil handy, I am forced to slip my conspiracy-not-theory hat on:

        The authorization for the war in Afghanistan was signed September 10th. The Patriot Act was already written… I helped put that Corporatist POS into office, fuck me.

        As for O, you are incorrect. He’s not a moron at all. Seems to me that the guy who did the following is anything but stupid.

        a) He got his healthcare reform package (which was based on Romney’s plan in Mass.) rammed through CONgress then proceeded to hand out waivers to every large corporation that contributed to his campaign
        b) He recently gave a very moving (barf) speech about how “we” (the US) deplore human trafficking, slavery, etc. **while the ink on his signature wasn’t even dry from releasing countries that kidnap children and force them to be soldiers from sanctions (for the third year in a row).** Asshole
        c) He has all but shut down the coal industry and blocked building new coal burning plants *except for GE – they are exempt from all new regulations and are not subject to the moratorium on building (because they are big supporters of O)

        If you want to vote to make yourself feel better, that’s wonderful. I am better off making sure that my City Council and County Commissioners don’t sign our lives and property rights away by accepting money from a “Regional Planning Commission” (those are unelected UN appointed douchebags) or educating them about NDAA and other issues like that. Oh, yeah, and I raise hell with the School Board too when the urge strikes.

      • mr Dave on October 7, 2012 at 20:31

        my vote takes about 10 minutes of my time. I understand the limitations and all that. Perhaps not a moron, but I don’t think he was the one we were waiting for. Give em hell at the schoold board.

      • ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 20:46

        “the one we were waiting for” Yikes, I hope that is some sort of horrible typo.

        mr Dave, I have some urgent news for you: YOU are the one you are waiting for and pulling a lever (to be old-school about it) isn’t going to cut it.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 08:51

        “we are the ones we are waiting for.” it was part of Obama’s spiel in 08. Irony…

        You seem to being saying if you vote you can’t exercise free choice in how you live, take responsibility for your life, etc. I’m for that. I don’t see that at odds with voting. Sitting out doesn’t change anything, you sitting out doesn’t mean any more than a crack whore sitting out cause she doesn’t know what day it is, or a hill billy who doesn’t have a TV. You are just more informed. and a little more smug about it.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 08:56

        “Sitting out doesn’t change anything”

        What do you mean, “change anything.” Let me take a guess. You mean change anything BY FORCE.

        You see, you are enamored of forcing other people to do or not do things you find not to your liking. You want to have plenty of force, but you want it your way.

        I’m not interested. I’d rather just deal with the unlikely possibility that some rogue is going to come and try to impose on me and mine. I’m happy to take my chances. I’m well armed, and I tend to associate with other well armed people. But mostly, I associate with other people who have no desire to dominate other people under the guise of some “system.”

      • ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 09:09

        “I’m well armed, and I tend to associate with other well armed people.”

        Talk like this frightens the sheep, Richard.

      • marie on October 8, 2012 at 09:10

        mr Dave, you gotta be kidding me!
        Here’s your analogy for you : You voting is exactly like that crack whore…. begging her pimp/supplier for more.
        And it’s gotta be some damn pure drugs you’re getting to be so oblivious to reality, that he’s not your protector, that pimp is massively taking advantage of you and abusing you and others.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 09:34

        you’ve made some judgements about what voting means, and what my values are, by the act of me voting. I think people should be left alone to a great extent. I’m a limited government guy.

        By chosing to live in this country you are benefiting or suffering from the rule of law. You can act like you’re above it all, but it doesn’t change what is. Its good that you are well armed- second amendment protected under the constitution. I’m for it too.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 09:47

        I’d rather get spanked by an anarchist dominatrix wearing a guy fawkes mask. But I can’t find one. So I think I’ll just vote.

      • ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 09:57

        “I’d rather get spanked by an anarchist dominatrix wearing a guy fawkes mask. ”

        Arrangements could be made.

      • mr Dave on October 8, 2012 at 11:02

        ladysadie1- thats funny. ;}

      • marie on October 8, 2012 at 11:25

        Here ya go mr Dave, in lieu of …
        Not dominatrices, but at least medieval :)

      • ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 11:54

        Hahahaha Marie! Richard sent me that “spanking” not too long ago – :D

      • marie on October 8, 2012 at 12:47

        Yah, and I must post this at least once a month on this site, spanking seems to come up Way too often here, hmmm, I wonder why ;)

      • Richard Nikoley on October 8, 2012 at 19:27

        “Yah, and I must post this at least once a month on this site, spanking seems to come up Way too often here, hmmm, I wonder why.”

        No mystery to me, Marie and Sadie..

      • ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 19:31

        Damn, Richard, you have my number.

      • marie on October 8, 2012 at 20:34

        Hahaha Richard! Glad to be of Service.

      • Richard Nikoley on October 9, 2012 at 14:53

        “I think people should be left alone”

        Mr Dave. That is a lie and you are a liar.

        You vote. You absolutely do not want people to be left alone and moreover, you wish to impose your values on them by force, if you can wriggle it enough to get into the biggest mob.

        You are pathetic.

  19. ladysadie1 on October 6, 2012 at 16:21

    Thank You, Richard. Balancing pragmatism and anarchy while using the system against itself is a bit difficult.

    The “state” is irrelevant in my world. I wish the same for everyone else.

  20. Cow on October 6, 2012 at 16:53

    Do no be concern over elections business. Is no of matter. Age of Cow coming soon!

    Yes, I to be very cool Overlord, and I think you enjoy my Overlord stylings. First course of actions, my evironmental pestilence reduction program. Yes, by reducing human population by 70% will make much better for everybody!*

    (*Offer restricted to those still alive.)

    • Richard Nikoley on October 6, 2012 at 16:55

      You cows. Always looking out for yourselves.

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 17:26

        But Richard, if people clamor to suck at the teat of a state, at least with Cow teats we’d be getting quality nourishment!
        Thank you Cow, you’ve solved everything! – see, I’m ‘sucking up’ already, can I take that offer now? ;)

      • Richard Nikoley on October 6, 2012 at 17:32

        Cow have many way.

      • marie on October 6, 2012 at 18:10

        Indeed, Richard. I see the way. Holy Cow has Bovine right to rule.

      • Cow on October 6, 2012 at 21:37

        As Age of Cow Overloard, I has only one rule! Is perfect for ADHDTV4G humans and they tiny little attention spans!

        Age of Cow Commandments:
        1. Judge not, cuz that my job motherfuckers.

  21. ladysadie1 on October 6, 2012 at 18:24

    “In time we hate that which we often fear.”
    –Antony and Cleopatra (Act 1, Scene 3)
    Figure out what you fear and how it informs that which you hate. This is why you vote or choose not to….

    • Zerojosh on October 8, 2012 at 10:56

      Pretty sure Yoda said that first.

  22. mr Dave on October 6, 2012 at 19:32

    Ladiesadie, marie, Rich,

    what are you after? To live free? can we do that without the rule of law? what’s your vision? should we plow up washington dc, plant organics, and let some grass fed cattle roam?

    • Richard Nikoley on October 7, 2012 at 09:11

      “should we”

      Who’s “we?”

      • mr Dave on October 7, 2012 at 12:52

        maybe you and the cow.

    • ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 13:08

      mr Dave

      “plow up dc…” Don’t be silly, I have a hard enough time managing my garden.

    • Paul C on October 8, 2012 at 13:17

      By the rule of law I think you mean the law enforcement departments that will perhaps eventually punish a thief that steals your undefended property. Most likely your property will still be gone, but at least you will receive justice. Is that what you mean?

  23. ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 15:16

    Lew Rockwell wrote about not voting here:
    It is short and to the point, with some great quotes.

    • marie on October 7, 2012 at 19:16

      Hi Sadie. I like those quotes, but they only work as summaries to people who already have thought this through, kinda like preaching to the choir.
      That’s the trouble with everything Short that I’ve been able to find out there, it never addresses the Usual objections people tend to bring up – even though they are a fairly uniform set of objections, given our education system. Of course there’s great essays, not to mention books and videos/presentations out there, but nothing short and to the point that does that particular job -not that I’ve found.
      I seem to have to synthesize it new every time in every discussion, and I’m no writer ! :)
      Do you happen to know of anything concise that does that job, that is, addresses the usual ‘fears’ like :
      a) too many bad people for this to work (so many, apparently, that the rest can’t spontaneously band together to protect against them or hire protection…that this would mean that the Majority of people are thugs is not realized)
      b) societies with goods need big protection from external threats (I like this one, as if people can’t voluntarily organize into militias, because no revolution ever happened anywhere in the world; nor can they apparently hire a professional army)
      c)good economies come from pooling resources for infrastructure and services so need administration of those pooled resources (longer argument that one)
      and more along this vein,
      d)and a big one, if citizens aren’t vigilant, the government will devolve into a dictatorship (because it’s not realized that citizens have no influence as it is on the large scale, and that a system that Centralizes power on a large scale is actually what is causing them to not have any influence on the large scale).
      Help? All of these flow from each other and from the common belief (just a belief, since there’s no evidence for it) that people Need large-scale, centralized government and that at least modern western governments do more good than bad (!! despite war dead and large scale thefts/bailouts). Know any well written short list/short argument on the common fears? – so I don’t have to resort to another flow chart, to keep track for myself, to Richard’s overwhelming amusement :)

      • ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 20:33


        I don’t think that there is a short and sweet explanation. You can use social media (yes, I know it’s evil too) to point out XYZ issue or to share news report or film that appeals to you. I am not a very good resource for that type of information because I live in a somewhat insulated rural area. I can’t imagine trying to explain to someone that is a life-long city dweller who has been indoctrinated in via the public school system.

        We bumpkins in fly-over country know that self reliance is important. You may not realize it, depending on your location, but (except for US and State Highways, of course) on the gravel roads, many farmers perform the maintenance and road clearing tasks during the winter and as needed when weather conditions dictate. After big storms, citizens pick up downed limbs and debris ourselves and haul them off. We aren’t nearly as reliant on Big Gov as others. We can go several days without electricity and no amount of government can change that.

        Regarding the banks – My bank is local and is one of the oldest in Kansas. The Board of Directors is quite well educated and will not participate in any of the bailouts. My mortgage loan application consisted of reviewing my checking account to see if I paid my rent on time. It took about 10 minutes and another 30 minutes of gossiping about this and that. My home costs much less than a typical (new) pick-up truck and I have FAR more land than I need to have ample fresh produce and to make myself crazy with all the canning, freezing and dehydrating throughout the growing season. “Money Masters” is one of the best films on that topic and “This secret of Oz” (about 2 hours long) is also excellent if you are interested in learning more about our screwed up financial system.

        As for militias, yes, but a militia against a big war machine equipped with drones and extremely high tech weapons and surveillance systems plus foreign troops who have no allegiance to the country? (already doing drills on U.S. soil) I have my doubts whether an organic militia would be effective against that type of force – *if it was allowed to form in the first place. Don’t forget -the purposeful outsourcing of our military as mercenaries in other countries is also problematic for many reasons, but not the least of which is the fact that the ones among us most able to organize others isn’t here right now.

        Don’t worry about the masses, they are already lost. It’s quite difficult to wake people up when they are willing lobotomized/hypnotized by tv and whatever sports team that they have chosen as their tribe. Let the fools busy themselves with learning how to dance to Gangnam Style. Make sure you have a good network and acquire useful skills in case something catastrophic happens.

        As far as voting, I don’t think that any amount of voting or not voting makes a difference at all. Refusing to participate in this evil may make us feel better, but at this point nothing short of active resistance will be effective. I don’t mean to imply violence, I mean carefully targeting and educating local officials. Issues like UN infiltration and usurpation of municipal governments (listen to Rosa Korie: (long version) or here: (short interview)).

      • ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 21:05

        Marie, you may want to look at what Keoni says here too:

      • marie on October 8, 2012 at 08:19

        ladiesadie thanks for the replies and the links!
        As for concentrating only on local environment and self-sufficient living, yes, I agree both are important and at the local level individuals have a real impact. However, I can’t ignore the masses and here’s a neat recent example why :
        I have a foot in two worlds, since one side of my family is “urban international” and the other still runs an ancestral farm, up on a very remote (but fertile!) mountain-side in Greece. So apart from research, invention and teaching, I can build/repair terraces for vegetable planting, prune cherry trees, pick olives, rotate the chickens and the goats across plots, lay gravel for roads etc….people don’t just clear the roads themselves there, they build and maintain them (natch! :) )…and the sanitation and….well, everything.
        You’d like it, three small villages hours away from any towns, craggy mountain range, gorges, springs, goats hanging on the slopes, grape vines…..and oh by the way, there’s no electricity at the farms themselves (though yes in the village-proper).
        So you’d think this self-sufficient place would be just fine in the current economic disaster. Except….no. Because the insatiable government beast wants more money, has enacted new, inventive taxes to get that money out of the people, including a new property tax (which gets paid through the electricity bill….and they cut off electricity if it’s not paid, which affects the phones too). So ‘self-sufficient’ farmers are going bankrupt.
        This is just one recent, personal example, but here are so many ways government can reach into even the most remote and apparently self-sufficient areas.
        A government, even, or maybe especially, a democratic one (we’re talking about one of the most fiercely democratic places on earth) has a long reach, and therefore so do those masses that I’d like not to worry about but can’t, since they Enable the government.
        I like the idea of self-sufficiency and certainly think that people should make it a conscious practice, but true self-sufficiency is very difficult and rare. Unfortunately the international financial system being what it is, when economies suffer the thieves at the top still exact their profits and through governments they have a very long reach into every corner of a country in order to do that.
        So I’m conscious of the Illusion of independence that often seems to come along with some level of self-sufficiency and remoteness.
        Which brings me full-circle to the notion that helping spread new ideas, by word and by example, one mind at a time, is to my benefit and my kids’/family’s benefit.

      • ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 08:42

        Yes, Marie, I would like it there. I also know about the insatiable government beast. What a pity!

      • marie on October 8, 2012 at 08:54

        Yah, it’s painful. Sadie, thank you for sharing your experiences and being so encouraging :)

  24. Cow on October 7, 2012 at 17:41

    Dear Humans: Please relax, enjoy you life. Yes, you species go total FUBAR and is no coming back from this, but you is lucky shits! By lottery of random chance, you hit you species evolutionary sweet spot and can lives out you life in relative comforts! Good for you!

    No toil and tribulate over how to save future of mankinds. Is not happening. Let go human! Live! Then, and most importantly, die! Think how much fun alien archeologists to have in trying to make sense of you self-defeating, circus-for-brain, assclown species! Okay, better?

    • ladysadie1 on October 7, 2012 at 17:50

      Dear Cow, I think you were caught in a photo today near here tearing up a bale of prairie hay:

      I wouldn’t dare to disagree with anything you have said!

    • dr. gabriella kadar on October 8, 2012 at 08:30

      No, most definitely Yvonne and Cow are closely related.

      She liberated herself in May, 2011.

      All during the late summer of 2011 updates on Yvonne’s whereabouts and the keystone kops style attempts by the ‘humans’ to capture her provided the best news story of the year for me. This included heat seeking helicopters, groups of sharpshooting hunters, the placing of ‘the George Clooney’ of bulls nearby the forest where Yvonne was last seen, although by then she’d moved on, placing her son nearby in hopes that his calling would elicit a maternal response…….etc. Absolutely hilarious.

      One marksman stated that she could run and jump like a deer.

      In September Yvonne joined up with the dairy herd belonging to a woman farmer. Yvonne really did not appreciate being shot with tranqs. Took several doses to subdue her sufficiently to pack her into a trailor to transport to her new home.

      Yvonne now lives with her natural family (sister, niece and son) at the animal sanctuary.

      She’s one awesome creature.

      I was reminded of this by Cow’s comment: “you self-defeating, circus-for-brain, assclown species!”

      Ain’t it the truth. :(

  25. rob on October 8, 2012 at 05:03

    If either of them wants my vote he is going to have to promise me two chicks at the same time.

  26. ladysadie1 on October 8, 2012 at 14:36

    “You are free to choose but you are not free from the consequence of your choice” Darn facebook folks going and getting all smart on me!

  27. […] Posts RSS ← The Clamoring Over a Ruler of the Devolved […]

  28. […] this month I wrote this post: The Clamoring Over a Ruler of the Devolved. It stands at 162 comments so far, but here's one by me (edited a […]

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.