“A government that can at pleasure accuse, shoot, and hang men, as traitors, for the one general offence of refusing to surrender themselves and their property unreservedly to its arbitrary will, can practice any and all special and particular oppressions it pleases. The result -- and a natural one -- has been that we have had governments, State and national, devoted to nearly every grade and species of crime that governments have ever practised upon their victims; and these crimes have culminated in a war that has cost a million of lives; a war carried on, upon one side, for chattel slavery, and on the other for political slavery; upon neither for liberty, justice, or truth. And these crimes have been committed, and this war waged, by men, and the descendants of men, who, less than a hundred years ago, said that all men were equal, and could owe neither service to individuals, nor allegiance to governments, except with their own consent.”

🤪🥳

Sillik, your religious diatribe conflicts with law, science, the real sane world and your earlier statements. To “OWE” another anything (an individual / a collective / etc.) is because of an express agreement has occurred with a specified sum obligated to pay by a certain date. Even if the agreement is tacit, implied by or inferred from actions or statements, please cite the source for your insanity definition. It appears that your definition must be coming from your personal dictionary for mentally ill dupes. AND, how about that definition of freedom of yours? Since you’ve stated that there is no freedom in your socialist religion, I guess you have double downed on that - because there is no freedom, there isn’t even a freedom to be insane. (hahaha / lololol / 🤪 🤪 🤪; insanity {anything contrary to your godly state}, being outside freedom seems to be a criminal act within your religion’s canons). Reality does NOT support your ecclesiastical diatribe, that being: confinement is a responsibility and, slavery is a challenging contentment.

I really can't understand why Fred is constantly harping about 'insanity' and 'childishness' while offering himself as the sole example of sanity and maturity.  His fallacious arguments do not reflect his claims, in fact, quite the opposite.  His conceit is only exceeded by his desire to hear himself talk.

And Mr Archer my emphasis is the accentuated positive, the terms sanity and growth are my language.  I'm not conceited, just clearly have no like minded confidantes.  I speak not with conceit, but with a very fortunate INDEPENDENCE. 

Good grief, Fred.  "I'm not conceited, just clearly have no like minded confidantes." You have absolutely no self-awareness.  Your ideas are not unique, they are in fact as old as time, particularly among those who claim to know better than everyone else how they should run their lives.  There is no shortage of such utopian, authoritarian, egocentric rhetoric throughout recorded history.  We can just be thankful you were not born into power for you would make even Stalin blush.

No, Mr Archer, it is you who have no self-awareness of the great fraud you and the rest of the convention have manufactured.  You're nothing but a bunch violent brutes who try to hustle anything they can  away from each other. The convention is nothing but a bunch of frauds, phonies, and fruitcakes.  Humans, on the other hand, have ideas, productiveness, and creativity, are humble and kind. 

Fred, your favorite religion 'socialism' absolutely requires violence — just witness the socialist riots happening around the country and the world.  Socialism is the great FRAUD rendering the individual into a subordinate cog in the machinery of the State. 

Social engineering is inhuman, whereas liberty is the most humane of all.  It is the socialists who lay claim to the labors and property of others, not the true liberal.  All socialist solutions require the confiscation and regulation of property and labor to the ruling class for distribution to the masses.  In communist Russia, only the bureaucrats had butter while the masses starved.  The failures of such systems are so massive, the only defense is that it hasn't been done right yet. ;-) It can't, and it never will.  The ultimate aim of socialism and its variants is to make the people powerless to resist it.  Servitude is their creed, and power is their god.

Mr Archer, Socialists do not riot, they organize, they rationalize, they fully explain their reasonable objectives and fair motivations.  Social engineering is the pinnacle of human activity. To plan out our lives with precision is what makes the human a beautiful adaptation to the natural environment.  Socialism solutions stem from the fair distribution of resources. 

Sillik. Your empty religion is full of substantiveless / mean nothing word salads. For example: please define: "fair distribution of resources" in depth through nature's law and science methodology.

Socialism, Mr Archer, explores deep into the very facets of our relations.  We find we don't need violence, but the complexity of life sometimes takes across the border into  violence.  We are limited as humans, we fall into the traps. There's absolutely no need for violence ever, but our limited abilities often lead us astray, take us beyond our experiences and intuitive threshold. We must continue however to learn to become less and less violent. We are not perfect, but must continual persistent nonviolent behavior.    

Mike, Norwalk, "freedom just another word, for nothing left to lose," as the poet Miss Joplin sang or as the lonely desperado made us so aware "oh freedom, oh freedom, that just some people talkin, your prison is walking in this world all alone." 

Sillik, 🤪 hahaha / lolololol — your religion's dogma has nothing to support freedom thus, you have to put it down and say it doesn't exist. My heart goes out to you. It is so sad that you have no substance and truth in your deranged word salad(s). I feel sorry for you.

The priority is responsibility,  Mike, Norwalk, we receive freedom as a result of responsible behavioral earnings, we are not necessarily responsible because of some anointed freedom.   No one grants us freedom, or more precisely privileges, we earn them. 

Sillik, it is so, SO very sad that you are SO extremely void of any substance. You are so void of substance that you can NOT even recognize the freedom within. By example: your personal dictionary for mentally ill dupes, that has to redefine everyday terms to fit your sick religion's dogma can NOT even come close to real meanings. I have given legal, regular and other dictionaries definition of freedom and all say that at nature's law, freedom is inalienable and NOT a given or earned privilege. Are you the god, or is there another that gives earned privileges?

Mike, Norwalk, not to sure what you're stating in your respective post, but would just like to assert that I try to practice the very substantive exercise of logical reasoning. 

Fred, I hate to break it you, you have not shown any example of logical reasoning, in fact, your posts are littered with logical fallacies, demonstrating a most disordered mind.

You make yourself very clear that your version of socialism is no different than fascism (and every other form of authoritarianism):

"Social engineering is the pinnacle of human activity. To plan out our lives with precision is what makes the human a beautiful adaptation to the natural environment."

And THAT, my dear friend, is what the socialist 'revolution' is all about — and that absolutely requires violence against any who resist social engineering in all its insidious forms.  The freeman will defend himself and his nation against this appropriation of power. 

We know who you are, Fred, and what you are about.  You have been cursed with a lie, and you must lie to yourself in order to never confront the con.  We will not let such rhetoric and associated mandates from on high take root, claiming to help us 'for our own good.'  Let there be no mistake, you declare war on those that do not want your 'plan.' 

You are channeling Hitler, my dear sir!  I can provide you with ample proof that your words are identical, mixed in with the lies of Marx as well.

You have been duped!

No Mr Archer, I have clear goal oriented visions of appropriate behavior in our relations. For instance I'm not interested in the sexual performance of a prospective wife, but her emotional investments in the relations as a wife. What is her ideas of being a good wife? I interested in a young lady's ideas of being a good mother. What are her theories of both roles. I have my ideas own ideas of the role of an appropriate husband role.  Did Hitler or even you yourself offer contributions of these very precious roles? 

Mr Archer, you can plan out the husband and father roles appropriately(social engineering) in your life, its essential. 

Yes, hence Hitler's term for his empire was the "Fatherland."  You would have fit in well, except that I suppose you would have been jealous of Hitler and believed you could do it better.

Mr Archer,  I abhor murder and mayhem, violence in general. These strategies were Mr Hitlers's business card as I understand the narrative of WWII.  I pride myself on my nonviolent developmental nature, so your jealously assertion meets with no logic whatsoever,  Mr Archer. I believe very strongly that Mr Hitler assumed his chancellor ship with a deal struck with the zionist jews to eliminate the non zionist jews, this sadistic motivation is hardly a cause for me to hold any jealously toward this fellow.  I claim no sadistic motivations. I sincerely wish no misfortune for anyone. 

Sillik, it is a lie that you abhor murder, mayhem and violence in general. Socialism is a powerfully religious vehicle to those very ends. The Hitlers, Stalins, Maos, Pol Pots, etc. simply place their own personal degeneracy to the socialist's religious vehicle. At its core, socialism is the controlling enslavement that allows religious ideologies such as yours to rationalize reinvention of depravities, poverty, pain and otherwise enslavement of the masses. 

"Did ...you yourself offer contributions of these very precious roles?"  Yes, I believe so, I've been happily married for over 30 years blessed with a wonderful wife and children.  How about you?  Personally, I can't imagine anyone being able to live with as narcissistic a personality as yours, but there's no accounting for other people's tastes...

Mr Archer, this "narcissistic" fellow as you claim I am, have never received any of the most remote interest by any female that I am aware, now would a true egocentric narcissistic male admit anything of that nature.   The only female that has stuck my interest was Marilyn Monroe. She had qualities, from my understanding, of a genuine kind, sweet character. I have no romantic interest in males, this is quite impossible. I believe nature has build a natural inclination of heterogeneity that directs to not what we popularly call the opposite sex, but what is better referred to as the complimentary gender, Marilyn Monroe. 

Well, Mr Archer, I am a one woman only gentleman.  I believe a husband should be loyal, devoted, and committed to his wife. I believe a father should have the priority of bringing in the world youngsters that are more developed them himself, young that are better than himself and I seek a wife that shares this priority, that we achieve together young human beings better than ourselves. 

LOL Fred, may I counter your defense that you "have never received any of the most remote interest by any female" because of your self-righteous, argumentative and condescending attitude, sense of superiority, deep need for admiration, passive-aggressive and judgmental nature, not to mention obnoxiousness.  This makes you positively repellent.  Marilyn Monroe?!  In your fevered dreams!  You are so delusional.  Wake up, man, this is textbook narcissism...

Mr Archer, wouldn't say that females are quite challenging and confrontational. I have no need to dominant, but I must contend from my observations that the female insists "its my way or the highway."  It is my contention that we live under a matriarchal condition, and the male officials  like president are make-up ploys like make-up on the face of the female. Our whole population arrangement is a farcical make-up job run by the females, what do you reply?