TRUCKING #58 VANEROO BOOGALOO

[Speaker to Animals]

What the beaker culture? That's pointless to speculate about because the last time that was done an uber feminist decided they were matriarchal and nature worshipping.

If you mean post Aryan they were likely egalitarian tribalists. The commons would have been in either case tribal.

That's neolithic.

In it's rawest form, humanity were stone aged hunter-gatherers. The first governments formed from that as a basis.

There was no such thing as a commons. Commons are created by government and obviously one can imagine a government that does not support them. The lolbergs do all the time.

[TheReal_ND]

Depends on which lolberg you listen to. I was just listening to Christopher Cantwell on TDS last night, break down some of the divide in libertarian circles.

[jbird4049]

A government's job is to rule and monopolize the sovereignty (right to make war). Everything else is our limitation upon it, or lack thereof.

At it's crudest, government is the strongest warrior that can impose his will upon a group of people who before lived in a state of anarchy (war of all against all).

Democracy is the people as a single entity exercising the sovereignty. Monarchy is sovereignty resting in one person with a lot of strings attached. Communism is the sovereignty of the council (bureaucracy).

To understand any government, you need to look at how it frames sovereignty and what limitations are imposed upon it. It's similar to the principle of understanding any economic system: look for who decides what is produced and who gets the surplus of that production.

I still get irritated when the government oversteps, but at this point, I think its just how things are gonna be. Civil liberties weren't even a talking point in the 2016 election. In spite of Julian Assange, Glenn Greenwald, Obama's 2008 speeches about wiretaps and guantanamo (which he subsequently reversed as soon as he got in office), Dan's numerous podcasts etc, most people in this country forgot about this stuff, or are willing to accept that this is the new American reality. Its not just America. European countries like the UK are arguably more invasive in this regard, and privacy and free speech is even less regarded there. I don't think making laws limiting the government's power will fix this problem, because governments simply ignore the laws when it suits them or find some smart lawyers to re-interpret the laws in a self-serving way. This is exactly what happened in 2001 in the US. I was reading this book awhile back called Cruel Britannia, and it was about how the British government covertly tortured people throughout the twentieth century, during WW2, the troubles, and the Mau Mau rebellion for a few examples. I think our government probably did the same even before the War on Terror, either directly or via proxy from some sympathetic Latin American, Asian, or Middle Eastern regime. I could be mis-remembering this, but a survey a few years back showed that a little over half of Americans were fine with enhanced interrogation techniques. If our government and people are fine with torture in certain circumstances, then there is little reason to think that any of this other stuff will be stopped. It bums me out, because this stuff is important to me, but I think its a losing battle. Even if the people wanted it, this stuff would probably still go forward.

We used torture and mass murder it in the American-Philippine War.

[Zlaxer]

yet this whole Global Jihad thing didn't really take off, until America sent troops to Saudi Arabia in order to invade Iraq.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tours