A crime is: “an offense against the State ⋯” (Colins Dictionary of Law”) - (The State is an artificial / arbitrary ideology temporally created for administering order. Here, the public phantasm - the “State”, becomes the god that CREATES and GIVES law. Under such perception and execution, the inanimate State takes on the ability to be offended); and, “A crime is an offense against a public law.” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary) NOT! the law of nature. Socialism exists by defining and enforcing crimes.

Insisting coordinated displays of sophistry is NOT a dignified mature behavior, — it is a despotic statism / authoritarianism.

It all depends on how you define the terms. By example: socialism is an uncouth, vulgar and out of control monster antithetical to freedom. Performing in a refined, decent, dignified manner of control would be an exercise in nature's law through individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty.

Sillik, Happy April 1st, the theocratic socialists' high and holy day. Of course it is uncoordinated from your perspective (you are all about coordinating the police state as the omnipotent god). In a unity of free people, there is no law to enforce (can one enforce gravity, math, murder or theft? — NO!) Tyranny may be enforced by a well run State — immensely advanced in sophistries. 

Socialism is: any of various economic, religious and political theories, philosophies or movements outside nature’s law advocating collective or governmental / religious — ownership and administration of property (real / chattel / sensorial beings, etc.) along with the means of production and distribution of goods. Communism, as an administrative form of socialism holds all religious, private and commercial properties and activities in its / the collective's own name. Fascism extends the State's / Collective's ownership administration through legal persons (corporations, LLCs, etc.).

Waffler, this is the only land that I know of that is to be based on "the law of nature and of nature's God". Here, you take any of my mentioning "We The People" WAY out of context. We The People are not to be the body politic or persons to be represented but rather, the individual sovereigns that hire persons to represent our united / equal inalienable rights and liberty at nature's law.

Sillik, so if I take your circular word salad at face value as written — there is mob mentality or nothing but my sovereign self. WOW, socialism is then a nothing that does not even show up on the scale of existence.  I say hmmm.  Are you including socialism in mob mentality?

(-; Sillik — interesting. Your group think is a void in nothingness (completely lacking in any material reality). Groupthink is a mental onanism that can tangibly in fact, have no associates. Whereas, individual sovereignty allows for no other like minded associates. It is interesting to me at least that you can't possibly notice this contradiction. ;-)

Sillik, I smile great big while shaking my lowered head. Even when you are proven wrong, your theocratic word salad doesn't change.

The individual heir(s) to the Eternal King have rejected their Father by choosing: carnal god law givers foreign to our Patriarch's law of nature, to be chattel instead of individual sovereigns, to be slaves instead of standing in our birth right's inalienable right(s) and to be helots / serfs / vassals instead of noblemen at liberty. The quote is accurate.

Sillik, your here circular word salad is a lie. I am NOT an "all" or part of your desired theocratic enslavement. NO known State is considering my best interest ! ! !  What is best (?) for you is, NOT best for me (we, as are part of that theocratic all you speak of — I'm NOT part).

Sillik, your here lie is an oxymoron.

Sillik, your theocratic rhetoric, couched in circular word salad has no basis in fact, secularism or nature's law. Sillik your redefinition of words, concepts and doctrines does not change fact or law. FYI, at nature's law (Declaration of Independence) we the people (individually or in concert) are not the government ! ! !  Each person, as an individual is a sovereign that hires persons to represent his/her inalienable rights and liberty in a body politic of servants. At nature's law, corporeal man can NOT create law, he/she can only organize rules, as according to "order" (by example; driving on the right or the left side of the road). Sillik, your reference to proceedings and procedures in a theocratic expose of/within a philosophy such as "legal positivism" or "legal realism" is only appropriate for the theocratic patrons of that specific religion (call it government, socialism or otherwise). To make a difference, contribution and a positive contribution to the individual family of man (individually and in concert) is to promote individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty at nature's law. Socialism is diametrically opposed and destructive to that means.

Sillik, hahahaha — lololol — WHAT ? ? ? your circular word salad, attempting to redefine words is only an example of one of your gods: "A lie told often enough becomes the truth" (Lenin) FYI, no matter how you falsely attempt to redefine words, concepts, and otherwise methods of communication — fascism, communism, wokeism are any and all, each and every nothing more than administrative methods of socialism. Socialism (ab initio / telos, from the beginning through fruition) is a collective economic system theocratically enlarged to enslave all chattel specie.

Sillik, as Archer so accurately described the relationship of individual sovereign(s) and his/her hired actor(s) to represent individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty (NOT, the person themselves), you have resorted to circular off topic word salad to express your ignorance of the concept(s). Archer, you and/or me are not personally represented, no matter what the patrons of socialism or other patrons of the statist theocracy infesting this land say. Being personally represented is a false mysticism's dogmatics of democracy, socialism, etc.

If I may interject into this dialogue. Sillik, a civilized state may only be discussed accurately if that "state" is a subject matter focus on an individual. The "state", as a multiplicity, is an intangible philosophy. Refined behavior as a highest priority can only commence and end with the individual in an analogy at nature's law. Civilization can NOT examine it's behavior. (PERIOD) Civilization is an inanimate philosophy without a brain to examine or otherwise think. Civilization is an intangible apparition with no ability to produce (intelligently, at any level {higher, lower, etc.} or to overcome any opposition). Kindness, concern, fairness, gentleness, empathy, sympathy, optimism, equal regard are all traits of religion. Such theocratic reasoning form a measured perception, from an abstract exercise — may or may not be examples of nature's law expressions. Sillik, your circular word salad once again is nonsensical in its lack of definition and truth. 

We hold this truth to be self evident !  Those that promote government (an abstract phenomena / always antithetical to nature's law) to be a form of carnal god, making the noble being mere subjects of statist objectives are doubly minded / mentally ill malefactors.

The current statist theocracy infesting this land is actively dwarfing and making docile instruments of its men (chattel) through its: seminaries (government schools), corporate missionaries (MSM), its high priests / priestesses (executive, legislative, judicial - carnal god’s patrons), its controlled chemicals — “And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” (Romans 18:23) “Sorceries” here translated from the Greek feminine noun φαρμακεία pharmakeía (pronounced far-mak-i’-ah): meaning pharmacy(s), efforts to eradicate all competing religions (especially Christianity), etc.

Bobble, the benefits you reference are all theocratic in source and nature — NOT secularly constitutional. Even roads are produced and maintained from a theocratic socialism's perspective (NOT inalienable rights or liberty at nature's fiscal or otherwise law — all benefits are not equal).

There are four (4) Terms that are misused, confused and otherwise incorrectly abused - by an extremely terse term explanation.

DEMOCRACY:

Democracy is: “That form of government in which the sovereign power is exercised by the people in a body,” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary) Democracy can not perceive or identify a single person or individual (inclusive of the rights, liberty or law thereof) - its domain or realm is solely limited to recognizing an inorganic whole’s ostensively supposed will. By democracy’s definition and practice, there is no individual sovereignty, personal rights, liberty, nature’s law or anything outside a mobs will. Attributed to Benjamin Franklin is a quote that describes democracy well: “Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for supper. Freedom is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.”

DEMOCRATIC PROCESS:

Democratic process describes a procedurally measured system that maintains “A series of actions, motions, or occurrences; a method, mode, or operation, whereby a result or effect to produced.” (West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, ed. 2.) A “democratic process” may be useful in a democracy, a republic or a republican form government (it is NOT exclusive to democracy). A “democratic process” also simply indicates, one (1) man, one (1) vote (no reference to outcome, form of government {democracy, monarchy, republican, de facto, de jure, etc.}) or, choice between liberty or slavery.

REPUBLIC:

A Republic is primarily separated into ostensibly differing references. By example:
1) A “republic” is “A commonwealth; that form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens.”
2) “In another sense, it signifies the state, independently of its form of government.” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary)
A democracy perceives a/the “body” - people or otherwise are an inconsequential annoyance only required for voting; while, a republic administers the affairs of each citizen.
3) A republic can also be the term that describes the specific boarder (boundaries) of a particular jurisdiction, not denoting any system of body politic application.

REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT:

A republican form of government (see Article IV Section 4 U.S. Constitution) is an egalitarian based system where individual sentient sovereigns exercise personal inalienable rights and liberty at “the laws of nature and of nature’s God” (Declaration of Independence). A resulting consortium, as a body politic (hired, elected or otherwise) has no rights but duties only AND, does (do) NOT represent any individual (personally or in concert) but rather, is to administer a limited “legislative”, “executive” and “judicial” charge of inalienable rights and liberty at the laws of nature and of nature’s God.

David, what else would you add to your desired social theocracy?

The "A" from Reston was watching far to much msnbc and cnn. The scale of right / left referenced by jim was freedom vs socialism; freedom on the right, socialism (tyranny, slavery, etc. on the left). Socialism's right / left dichotomy is illustrated in the administration of socialism (socialism's left is communism; socialism's right is fascism). 

Robert, capitalism CANNOT exist where socialism and a monetary debt system exist.

What originally was intended was a representation of individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty at nature's law ("the laws of nature and of nature's God (Declaration of Independence)) No word in English, Latin, Greek or otherwise described such scenario so, the familiar term "government" was used. The current statist theocracy infesting this land is NOT a representative republic but rather, a government of men usurping law by way of philosophies of men — such as "legal positivism". Nietzsche's "Everything the State says is a lie, and everything it has it has stolen.” is extremely accurate when understood in an atmosphere of truth and a knowledge of law vs. philosophy / religion.

Explains well the tyranny and enslavement of socialism.